|
|
| Line 13: |
Line 13: |
| ::Ripsnorter has a gun. But very well, I shall add a note that it's not 100% certain this is the correct ID. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 18:59, 14 January 2007 (UTC) | | ::Ripsnorter has a gun. But very well, I shall add a note that it's not 100% certain this is the correct ID. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 18:59, 14 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
| |
|
| == Continuity note == | | ==Continuity note== |
|
| |
|
| Walky, why in <big>seven unholy fucks</big> are you editing the '''continuity note''' so that it no longer actually tells you the '''continuity''', but only the '''continuity family'''?
| | This discussion has been moved to [[ Transformers Wiki talk: Community Portal]]. --[[User: Steve- o| Steve- o]] 00: 49, 15 January 2007 (UTC)<div id="wikia-credits"><br /><br /><small>From [http://transformers.wikia.com Teletraan I: The Transformers Wiki], a [http://www.wikia.com Wikia] wiki.</small></div> |
| | |
| And you better have a <u>great</u> answer for this. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 20:38, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
| |
| : Because, unlike you, the rest of us don't decide new and exciting ways to change the formatting of the pages every other week and then create scores of pages the wrong way, and then get all pissy when they get edited back to fit our Style Guide.
| |
| : And, uh, I should note, before your deceptively-stated comment trainwrecks down a crazy path, that the '''continuity note''' has ALWAYS been what franchise and what continuity family it's from! You're just fabricating semantics. If you want, I can start calling them '''continuity family notes''' if that makes you happy. I thought that was a mouthful, but apparently abbreviating it gets you all confused.
| |
| : I am beginning to think I am going to have to get rid of you so we don't spend half our time on this wiki explaining the wiki to you, because, best I can tell, you want attention. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 20:43, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| ::Shenanigans on that. ''From the style guide:''
| |
| <div style="margin-left;2em;border:1px solid #666666;background-color:#cccccc;">
| |
| Many articles deal with characters, ideas or entities that exist in many different continuities (usually within a single continuity family, but not always). Such <span style="color:red;">articles should begin with a one-sentence, italicized clarifying statement that indicates the applicability of the article.</span> For character pages, the statement should be <span style="color:red;">very similar</span> in form to the following: "[CHARACTER] is a [FACTION/SUBGROUP/SPECIES] from [CONTINUITY (FAMILY) OF ORIGIN]." For example:<br/>
| |
| :''Sunstreaker is an [[Autobot]] in the [[Generation 1]] [[continuity family]].
| |
| </div>
| |
| ::Thats great for Sunstreaker-- but LOUSY for Emirate Xaaron, among hundreds of others. emirate Xaaron is '''not''' a resident of the big, wide g1 continuity family. He's a member of '''one specific subeset''' of it, and his note shoudl ^&*()_ SAY that.
| |
| ::I hold that parts of the SG highlighted in red allows— nay '''demands''' the single-continuity specification where applicable. Because otherwise you're distorting the material by describing it in wildly inaccurate terms. Spanner did not appear in the 'toon, Manga, or any revival thereof. He's Marvel only.
| |
| ::And if the style guide doesn't allow for this- we need to ''change the style guide'' because that's ''ten kinds of stupid'' (including two ''rare'' kinds of stupid usually only found in anaerobic environments.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 21:03, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| ::Also, don't you fucking treat me like I'm X-Bob. You're better than that. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 21:05, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
| |
| :::*sigh* Emirate Xaaron is indeed a character in the Generation 1 continuity family. That's like saying I don't live in Ohio because I live in Columbus. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 21:11, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
| |
| :::: Plus, there's more than 1 continuity covered by the Marvel comics. (US, and UK, possibly Earthforce too), and Xaaron appears in 2 of them. --[[User:FortMax|FortMax]] 21:16, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| :::And addressing a letter to David Willis, Ohio isn't very helpful, is it? (Well, maybe it is, I don't think many people live there...)
| |
| :::The point is- '''indicates the applicability of the article''', in the case of single-continuity characters- that's very relevant to the applicability. It belongs there. Just because for '''most''' specimens you can't narrow them down further than kingdom-phylum, it doesn't mean you omit the genus when you '''can''' pin it down.
| |
| :::Single-continuity belongs there.-[[User:Derik|Derik]] 21:20, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| :::::While I see Walky's point, I think Derik is actually right. The continuity notes for Masterforce characters, for example, contain the phrase "the Masterforce portion of the Generation 1 continuity family." I have no problem with using similar phrasing for characters who are exclusive to Marvel UK continuity. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 21:21, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
| |
| ::::::Masterforce is a *franchise*. It's not analogous to the Marvel Comics continuities. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 21:29, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| ::::::Both speak the the '''applicability''' of the article.
| |
| ::::::Franchise designations for single-franchise characters are good-- and they're not explicitly mentioned in the style guide. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 21:34, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
| |
| :::::::I don't think your reasoning is consistent. You say it is misleading to claim that Xaaron is a character in the Generation 1 continuity family. What about a character who's in two or more continuities, like Nightbird? Should the top of her page say "Nightbird is a ninja robot built to benefit mankind in the animated continuity and the Dreamwave Comics continuity and the Wreckers comics continuity in the Generation 1 continuity family"? She's not in any of the potentially infinite number of other continuities, so saying she's just a character in the Generation 1 continuity family is equally as wrong as saying Xaaron is. Limiting it to the franchise and continuity family was to keep things from being unwieldy. There's no point in stretching the introductory note any more than we have to. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 21:44, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
| |
| ::::::::Dunno. Maybe designate the smallest container for the character below the franchise level, if possible. Or maybe just designate where it seems reasonable. Most of the BW characters are sub-designated as 'beast era,' because the various franchises are so interconnected. Nightbird is in the 'toon, BW's version of the 'toon timeline and a fictive character in Dreamwave. She's too complicated to pin down into a single smaller containing module.
| |
| ::::::::I'm willing to admit that my approach may not be the ''right'' one, stipulated that saying '''just''' the continuity family, always, is '''more''' wrong, so some third paradigm is needed.
| |
| ::::::::<nowiki>*goes to get a haircut so he no longer looks like a dirty hippie*</nowiki> -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 21:56, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
| |
| :::::::::Saying just the continuity family is never WRONG. You may argue that it is not specific enough, but it is never ever in error. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 21:58, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
| |
| ::::::::::Yeah. While I do agree with Derik that speficying the "Marvel UK portion" in the continuity note for articles about characters that are exclusive to it would be perfectly fine, it certainly isn't absolutely necessary. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 22:09, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| Am I the only one who thinks this debate is pointless? Can't people just, y'know, ''read'' the article and see what specific continuity/continuities the guy's in? It's right in the section titles. [[User:Interrobang|Interrobang]] 22:26, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
| |
| :It's ''Derik''. Of ''course'' it's pointless. I think he spends more time on this wiki arguing over minutia and doing stuff the rest of us have to edit than he does actually contributing. - [[User:RolonBolon|RolonBolon]] 00: 36, 15 January 2007 (UTC)<div id="wikia-credits"><br /><br /><small>From [http://transformers.wikia.com Teletraan I: The Transformers Wiki], a [http://www.wikia.com Wikia] wiki.</small></div> | |
OTP? --FortMax 17:51, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
#5 -Derik 17:57, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
We have no way of knowing the guy in the picture isn't Pounder. -LV 18:27, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
He's reacting to the immediacy of Claw's death- Ripersnorter and Switchbalde were closer to claw than Pounder. he's closer to switchblade, who is his partner. he has a weapon in his hand-- mentioned of Rippersnorter but not Pounder.
I see several reasons to label him as Rippersnorter, none at all to call him Pounder.
(The image's composition si dubious anyway- only Sunstreaker should be coming from that direction, and all the autobots should still be in their alt-mode at the moment this illo. represents.) -Derik 18:49, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
- Setting aside the absurdity of saying "we can tell this and this and this from the image's composition; also, the image clearly doesn't represent an actual instant from the narrative", he's closer to Switchblade than WHO? Either Ripsnorter or Pounder is not shown. For all we know, Ripsnorter is immediately off-panel to Switchblade's left, which would make him closer than the orange guy. I think it's disingenous to present this as unambiguously Ripsnorter. Claw has claws. Switchblade has blades covering him. Steamhammer has hammers. The other two are almost entirely undescribed physically, and neither is particularly more important a character. -LV 18:55, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
- Ripsnorter has a gun. But very well, I shall add a note that it's not 100% certain this is the correct ID. -Derik 18:59, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Continuity note
This discussion has been moved to Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal. --Steve-o 00:49, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
