Talk:M.A.S.K.: Difference between revisions
From MediaWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
mNo edit summary |
m →So: clean up, replaced: [[GoBots (franchise) → [[GoBots |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Shall we elaborate a little on what the original M.A.S.K. toyline was in the Notes section? This isn't quite like Spider-Man or Star Wars, where the joke is that everyone knows the basics about them and we pretend we only know stuff we learned through Transformers-related material. I'd argue that M.A.S.K. is a little less well-known, not least due to being pretty much dead since the 1980s, unlike those other external brands that are still alive and kicking today.--[[User:Nevermore|Nevermore]] 06:03, 18 July 2013 (EDT) | Shall we elaborate a little on what the original M.A.S.K. toyline was in the Notes section? This isn't quite like Spider-Man or Star Wars, where the joke is that everyone knows the basics about them and we pretend we only know stuff we learned through Transformers-related material. I'd argue that M.A.S.K. is a little less well-known, not least due to being pretty much dead since the 1980s, unlike those other external brands that are still alive and kicking today.--[[User:Nevermore|Nevermore]] 06:03, 18 July 2013 (EDT) | ||
:I would agree to that. In fact, I'd go further and say that we need to do something like this for all of Hasbro's in-house external (to TFs) properties. By which I mean things like: [[G.I. Joe (franchise)]], [[GoBots | :I would agree to that. In fact, I'd go further and say that we need to do something like this for all of Hasbro's in-house external (to TFs) properties. By which I mean things like: [[G.I. Joe (franchise)]], [[GoBots]], [[Jem]] and [[Inhumanoids]]. GoBots currently is the most informative of these (for obvious reasons). On the other hand, Inhumanoids has the realworld and in-fiction materials completely reversed from how I would propose. No, we should not cover them in detail but a basic "this is what this franchise is about" for each of them would be appropriate. I don't think we need quite as much on the truly external properties such as Marvel, Star Wars, Star Trek, etc. {{unsigned|Khajidha}} | ||
Latest revision as of 13:29, 2 March 2020
So
[edit]Shall we elaborate a little on what the original M.A.S.K. toyline was in the Notes section? This isn't quite like Spider-Man or Star Wars, where the joke is that everyone knows the basics about them and we pretend we only know stuff we learned through Transformers-related material. I'd argue that M.A.S.K. is a little less well-known, not least due to being pretty much dead since the 1980s, unlike those other external brands that are still alive and kicking today.--Nevermore 06:03, 18 July 2013 (EDT)
- I would agree to that. In fact, I'd go further and say that we need to do something like this for all of Hasbro's in-house external (to TFs) properties. By which I mean things like: G.I. Joe (franchise), GoBots, Jem and Inhumanoids. GoBots currently is the most informative of these (for obvious reasons). On the other hand, Inhumanoids has the realworld and in-fiction materials completely reversed from how I would propose. No, we should not cover them in detail but a basic "this is what this franchise is about" for each of them would be appropriate. I don't think we need quite as much on the truly external properties such as Marvel, Star Wars, Star Trek, etc. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Khajidha (talk • contribs).
