Talk:Transformers: Shattered Glass (toyline)

I see we're listing these by size class, which makes sense, but in Shattered Glass they're not called Mini-Cons, they're called Micromasters. I guess it's not a big deal, but it seems kind of funny to list them here as Mini-Cons. --Crockalley 18:51, 11 July 2009 (EDT)

I didn't know they where called Micromasters I just assumed that they where called Mini-Cons as that's what they're based of. Dead Metal 02:09, 12 July 2009 (EDT)

Section order

I'd like to suggest that we can move the Decepticon section above the Autobot section, just like this. --TX55^TALK 02:51, 12 July 2009 (EDT)

Done. Dead Metal 02:55, 12 July 2009 (EDT)

Micromasters

Now I don't know how to do it correctly noting that they're based off Mino-Cons, as a reference on just one character it seems a little odd and unclean, as trivia it kinda works but that's kinda too low, under the actual Micromasters headline it'S kinda pointless and repetitive given that we have that section 4 times. So how should we handle this? Dead Metal 09:36, 12 July 2009 (EDT)

The trivia note looks fine to me. --Crockalley 12:20, 12 July 2009 (EDT)

Redecos

Um, why shouldn't we list the potential redecos? We state right in the intro that "Quite a few additional Shattered character designs are based on existing toys/characters with new color schemes, meaning they potentially could be manufactured some day, or recreated by enterprising kitbashers," so why shouldn't we list what existing toys those potential schemes are based on, for the sake of giving readers information? The whole toyline is mostly virtual anyway, in that there's only a small handful of officially sold SG-branded toys, so anything we add beyond that is unrelated to real world brands anyway. --Jeysie 11:06, 14 July 2009 (EDT)

Well... 'cause those toys don't actually exist, would seem like a pretty good reason to me. A short note that some characters are based on certain toys and color schemes is not the same as a complete list of these non-existent things! -- Repowers 11:10, 14 July 2009 (EDT)

But it's still a toyline, even if it's a virtual one the toys in this article exist the ones you listed don't exist. The whole point of this article is to give people a resource of which SG characters have a toy that exists and not of what might happen in the future. If they want to make an SG character that doesn't have a toy, they can visit his character page. It's like listing Landslide (Decepticon) and his different colours in the Cybertron toyline article as potential toys. Dead Metal 11:13, 14 July 2009 (EDT)

I guess it just seems like... the only officially-branded toys in the brand are the BotCon toys, so anything else is completely unofficial regardless in terms of retail brands; it's only official in the fiction's canon "toyline". So I guess it seems picky to me to choose which already unofficial additions are official enough.

It seems to me like a "These toys exist but their specific SG decoes do not" list is a perfectly good Trivia note, at the very least.

Now, if we were dealing with a fully official toyline with only retail-branded toys listed, then I would agree with you. --Jeysie 11:24, 14 July 2009 (EDT)

Listing the toys one can actually buy seems plenty fine enough. --ItsWalky 11:30, 14 July 2009 (EDT)

Well, you can buy the base of the redecoed toys too, you just have to repaint them yourself for the moment. ;)

I guess I just find it a rather silly distinction when almost the entire toyline is unofficial in terms of retail anyway, but if everyone else doesn't mind leaving useful information out, so be it I guess. --Jeysie 11:51, 14 July 2009 (EDT)

The repurposings are official, though, insofar as they're extant toys designated by the authors of licensed fiction as SG characters. They're official product, named by official licensees. "Potential repaints" lacks the "official product" part... and again, they're toys that don't exist. There's really not much difference between saying SG Strafe is G1 Strafe with Blot's colors, and making a list of custom paint alterations to make some movie character more fiction-accurate or providing instructions on how to kitbash your own Emirate Xaaron. -- Repowers 12:06, 14 July 2009 (EDT)

Sure there is. The movie characters have officially-branded retail toys separate from their fictional look, and Xaaron doesn't have any toy base at all, even fiction-designated.

Whereas here, the BotCon toys so far are the only officially-branded retail SG toys. With every other entry, sure the existing toys are official product... but for other toylines. Calling them "Shattered Glass" toys is a purely fiction-based thing. So if you're already willing to include one set of toys that's only designated in the canon fiction with no official retail brand support, it just seemed a little odd to not include all of them, was my train of thought. *shrug* --Jeysie 12:25, 14 July 2009 (EDT)

I would like to thank Jeysie here for reminding me why I don't like to make certain widespread changes due to the threat of Slippery Slope. Seriously. This course of action will end in Yikes. --ItsWalky 12:44, 14 July 2009 (EDT)

I think the difference is as follows. If some canon story comes out and casts Emirate Xaaron as a gold lucky-draw Rodimus Prime figure, then that becomes, retroactively, a VERY expensive official Emirate Xaaron toy. If, on the other hand, a fictional story casts Emirate Xarron as a gold, say, G1 Hot Rod toy, it's a different matter. There is no official gold Hot Rod toy, so that would mean that we'd at most have a trivia note. Saying that it could potentially exist if we were to paint it seems silly, and a slippery slope to boot. --Jimsorenson 12:47, 14 July 2009 (EDT)

I'd actually be fine with the list just being a Trivia note if that's the way it goes.

But, basically, something like the movie's toyline is designated by official product, since we've determined elsewhere that the toys take precedence for organizational purposes. Therefore it doesn't matter if the fiction gives them a different color, other than a trivia note.

Whereas, for instance, sure, Gigant Bomb exists officially... as Gigant Bomb, that is. The toy does not exist as Shattered Glass Darkwind in terms of an officially-released toyline. That toy's status as that character is based solely in the fiction.

If we're really that worried about sticking to existing toyline, then the only toys on the list should be the BotCon toys and any future specifically-branded releases. Any additions outside of that means we're already OK with fiction-based SG toy designations.

If people feel unreleased decoes aren't important enough to be included, so be it. I just don't see anything illogical about my train of thought, however.

As for the "slippery slope" argument, I've noticed that people here do have a bad tendency to think that any proposed deviation from the rules automatically means that deviation must be applied across the board if allowed. Sometimes it really is just a matter of one particular situation having some specific quirkiness that needs to be worked around, with no obligation to apply the workaround elsewhere that the existing rules work just fine. There's no "widespread changes" being made here at all, just a bend for this one property that's very odd across the board to begin with. --Jeysie 13:35, 14 July 2009 (EDT)

Alpha Trion

An attempt to put a footnote highlighting Alpha Trion's oddity (his original release wasn't announced as being Shattered Glass, has a bio that is far from explicit about being this character, and has a red Autobot symbol) was deleted on the grounds that Alpha Trion's own page details this information. I'm not at all convinced that that's enough. I'm fine for him to be listed as "official" here (and not "a new kind of repurposing" as his own article suggests), but there should be a footnote. (My apologies for making that original footnoote while not logged in. I didn't realize that I wasn't at the time.)--G.B. Blackrock 14:24, 11 November 2009 (EST)

Of course that should be noted on this page! So what if his own page details this? Sometimes the same information belongs in multiple articles. --KilMichaelMcC 14:51, 11 November 2009 (EST)

Sure the details go on his page, but something needs to go on this one (even if it's just a "see individual page for details" note). Khajidha 15:54, 11 November 2009 (EST)

Seacons

Didn't Pete or some other Fun Pub official say that the Club Seacons were the Shattered Glass colors officially, even if they havn't appeared in any fiction yet? 207.181.17.24 20:37, 16 November 2009 (EST)

They showed up in Shattered Expectations as the Club colors, but I don't recall Pete or anybody else saying anything about Shattered Glass proper. --ItsWalky 20:44, 16 November 2009 (EST)

I found it, but it's not horribly solid. M Sipher makes comments on how if they did make a future appearance in SG they would be in club colors here: http://www.allspark.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=55636&st=20 207.181.17.24 20:55, 16 November 2009 (EST)

Drench

G2 Drench as SG Drench? That's a toy for the Vitrual toy line back in 1993? 207.181.17.24 20:55, 16 November 2009 (EST)