Talk:Ripsnorter
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
Walky, why in seven unholy fucks are you editing the continuity note so that it no longer actually tells you the continuity, but only the continuity family?
And you better have a great answer for this. -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. --ItsWalky 20:43, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
- Shenanigans on that. From the style guide:
Many articles deal with characters, ideas or entities that exist in many different continuities (usually within a single continuity family, but not always). Such articles should begin with a one-sentence, italicized clarifying statement that indicates the applicability of the article. For character pages, the statement should be very similar in form to the following: "[CHARACTER] is a [FACTION/SUBGROUP/SPECIES] from [CONTINUITY (FAMILY) OF ORIGIN]." For example:
- Sunstreaker is an Autobot in the Generation 1 continuity family.
- 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.) -Derik 21:03, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
- Also, don't you fucking treat me like I'm X-Bob. You're better than that. -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. --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. --FortMax 21:16, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
- Also, don't you fucking treat me like I'm X-Bob. You're better than that. -Derik 21:05, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
