Talk:Lugnut (TF 2010)

Movieverse?

Is this figure part of the movieverse of the 2010 toyline? The article says nothing about it being a representation of an older character, but sites like Seibertron and YouTuber Peaugh both referred to it as a Generations figure. Bioniclepluslotr 18:22, 2 November 2010 (EDT)

This figure is being released in the 2010 toyline. Many people call any homage figure a "Generations figure", doesn't make it true. Look at the Special Ops Jazz and Turbo Tracks figures. --Khajidha 18:35, 2 November 2010 (EDT)

This might be determined if "United" has comics included like Henkei! did. --ItsWalky 18:38, 2 November 2010 (EDT)

Wait, so are the Jazz and Turbo Tracks figures Generations or not? They're part of the 2010 line, but look just like the old characters, and the toy is listed on the old characters' articles. Bioniclepluslotr 17:14, 3 November 2010 (EDT)

They are not part of Generations, they are part of the 2010 line. They represent the original characters, so they are on those pages. Many people thought they were Generations figures and you still run into that misunderstanding, thus my mentioning them. The 2010 line is very fluid in what characters it represents. And, to go back to your original post, the similarity of this figure to Animated Lugnut is mentioned in the notes section. --Khajidha 18:37, 3 November 2010 (EDT)

He's featured in the United comic within Generations 2010 book alongside Scourge and Frenzy. So I'd say G1. Poweredconvoy 12:10, 11 December 2010 (EST)

Yep, G1. --Terrortron 11:27, 15 December 2010 (EST)

So he's also in the Battle In Space comic as well, so in both Hasbro and Takara's fiction he's G1. Poweredconvoy 12:22, 15 December 2010 (EST)

Wait, seriously? Crap, now I have to hunt down that set. --Detour 12:27, 15 December 2010 (EST)

If the United comic is considered G1, would that make the War for Cybertron figures G1 too, since they are featured in it?Riddlerj 01:22, 22 January 2011 (EST)

It would make their toys G1, but not ours. It's happened before. --ItsWalky 01:26, 22 January 2011 (EST)

Yeah, sorta like Hasbro's "Universe" Hot Shot is Armada Hot Shot, but Takara's "Henkei" Hot Rod is a new G1 character named Hot Rod. --Detour 01:40, 22 January 2011 (EST)

Move?

Should we move this page to "Lugnut (G1)"? For example, Drift's page isn't "Drift (AHM)". --Kaymac192 21:18, 10 February 2011 (EST)

No, we shouldn't. Disambiguation goes by franchise, not continuity family. Lugnut first appeared in the 2010 line, not the Generation 1 franchise. "All Hail Megatron" is a story, not a franchise. Drift debuted in the G1 franchise. --NCZ 21:30, 10 February 2011 (EST)

I'd say yes based on Poweredconvoy's last post. He's in the Rodimus vs. Cyclonus comic which is a "behind the scenes" of the 86 movie. The 2010 toyline itself has no real fictional precedent --MistaTee 21:33, 10 February 2011 (EST)

No. Cryotek is only in the Wreckers comic book, but his toy is Robots in Disguise. He's at RID because, as NCZ pointed out, we disambiguate by franchise, not fictional appearance. --ItsWalky 21:36, 10 February 2011 (EST)

I agree that this article should stay "(TF 2010)", and I'd like to add that all TF fiction is published under the franchises too. The "Rodimus vs. Cyclonus" comic is just as TF-2010-branded as the Lugnut toy, so either way you go, that's the proper parenthetical.

The only way I could see justifying "Lugnut (G1)" would be if he had appeared in actual G1-branded fiction that preceded the toy. For example, if IDW had put Lugnut in their G1 comic, then later the TF 2010 toy came out, and the toy was clearly meant to represent IDW-Lugnut... THEN I think the parenthetical would need to be "(G1)". But the real situation is very far from that, so the page is solid where it is.

Edit: Just found an example: Drift (G1). He appeared in IDW's G1-branded comic long before the toy was on the shelves, so G1 is his franchise of origin. If he hadn't existed in the IDW comics, or the toy had come first, he would've been "Drift (Generations)" for the same reason that this page is "Lugnut (TF 2010)".

- Jackpot 04:43, 11 February 2011 (EST)

Wait, this guy's been released?

This is news to me, as far as I'm aware there hasn't been a legitimate sighting in the states in a B&M store. Karhukjnsi 22:54, 11 February 2011 (EST)

Walky reviewed the one he got on his blog a couple of weeks ago, so it must be out. --abates 23:10, 11 February 2011 (EST)

Because he couldn't have gotten it from eBay or shipped from Asia? Karhukjnsi 23:18, 11 February 2011 (EST)

No, he bought it from Big Bad Toy Store. --abates 23:48, 11 February 2011 (EST)

Fists

In the United section of the article, it says that Lugs fists are prone to jamming. Is that to say that the American version suffers the same misfortune?--Megatron Prime 21:56, 4 March 2011 (EST)