Talk:Grimlock (RBA)
From MediaWiki
Why is this its own article? Saix (talk) 08:19, 9 May 2019 (EDT)
- Because TGB made it without waiting for outside input. Heck, unless someone can point out where the two versions we have now have been explicitly shown to be separate, I'd merge all three. --Khajidha (talk) 08:26, 9 May 2019 (EDT)
- Well considering the RID writers say their Grim is separate from FOC Grim, those two stay separate. And considering this Grim is going to be in the RBA cartoon (he's been in the intro since the beginning), if he ends up being incompatible with the others as well, then yeah, making a new page was the right call. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 08:32, 9 May 2019 (EDT)
- We can wait till the cartoon airs to make that decision. It's easier to split out a toy than to merge it in and delete an article. Saix (talk) 08:34, 9 May 2019 (EDT)
- Have the writers shown us anything in fiction that says so? Cause "author intent" carries virtually no weight with me. --Khajidha (talk) 08:37, 9 May 2019 (EDT)
- Did you even watch RID 2015? The Grimlock from that show was a natural Dinobot (instead of the product of a heinous experiment) who was a originally a Decepticon (FOC Grimlock was always an Autobot) and had a young goofy childlike personality with a fetish for punching things (unlike FOC Grimlock's harsh and grownup personality). Literally the only thing the two Grimlocks had in common were their names and T-Rex altmodes, but even the latter still differed in that it was forced upon FOC Grimlock while it was simply RID 2015 Grimlock's natural form. RID 2015 treated Grimlock's being a Dinobot as though he was a kind of Cybertronian fauna, while FOC Grimlock was a normal Cybertronian person forced into an animal form. --Sabrblade (talk) 10:17, 9 May 2019 (EDT)
- And Generation 1 toy and comic Grimlock was a pre-existing Cybertronian while cartoon Grimlock was built by Wheeljack on Earth. Doesn't stop them from being the same character. --Khajidha (talk) 10:21, 9 May 2019 (EDT)
- Except that the G1 comic and cartoon aren't meant to be continuations of one another and exist in the same universe, while FOC/Prime/RB/RID/RBA are (albeit with some squinting). That was the whole point of the "Aligned" continuity. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 10:37, 9 May 2019 (EDT)
- No, the point of "Aligned" was that Transformers media used the same base or general backstory for their fiction, not that they all had to be in the same continuity as how we define it. Individual characters get irreconcilable interpretations all the time in Aligned. (This isn't an argument either way; I don't really care that much about RID Grimlock not being FOC Grimlock outside of the fact that it looks more elegant to split them.) But we're getting off the point. This specific article should be at FOC Grimlock because it's basically just G1 Grimlock. Saix (talk) 11:14, 9 May 2019 (EDT)
- I made it because while our best guess was that RID 2015 Grimlock was a discontinuous WFC/FOC Grimlock, we have no such starting point for RBA Grimlock; we have no way to guess which of the two - if any - RBA Grimlock is. If they clarify, then merge. I said that when I created it. In the meantime, we have a body of appearances and toys starting to form, and putting them on either existing page is simply guesswork, because AFAIK, there's no evidence to put one more likely than the other. Especially since the same people who established that RID 2015 and WFC Grimlock are separate also said it's presumably a common name. That justifies 3 as much as it justifies 2. Let's also not forget the audience here - the target RBA group would have neither watched RID 2015 nor played WFC/FOC. Bumblebee and Optimus are explicitly the same because they said so. If I'm wrong, then show your work. I'm more than willing for this to be merged back in with either Aligned Grimlock, which I made pretty clear in the Notes - hell, I'll do it myself (and really, it's a 2 minute jobs)... once we actually know. I mean, that's the entire reason all the Cyberverse pages were started; because they didn't explicitly tell us that it's a version of a pre-existing continuity. Even though they use the evergreen appearances shared by G1 characters. If they came out and said Cyberverse is G1, then we would marge. Until they do, we leave them. Exactly the same logic applies here. TGB (talk) 11:30, 9 May 2019 (EDT)
- Except that the G1 comic and cartoon aren't meant to be continuations of one another and exist in the same universe, while FOC/Prime/RB/RID/RBA are (albeit with some squinting). That was the whole point of the "Aligned" continuity. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 10:37, 9 May 2019 (EDT)
- And Generation 1 toy and comic Grimlock was a pre-existing Cybertronian while cartoon Grimlock was built by Wheeljack on Earth. Doesn't stop them from being the same character. --Khajidha (talk) 10:21, 9 May 2019 (EDT)
- Did you even watch RID 2015? The Grimlock from that show was a natural Dinobot (instead of the product of a heinous experiment) who was a originally a Decepticon (FOC Grimlock was always an Autobot) and had a young goofy childlike personality with a fetish for punching things (unlike FOC Grimlock's harsh and grownup personality). Literally the only thing the two Grimlocks had in common were their names and T-Rex altmodes, but even the latter still differed in that it was forced upon FOC Grimlock while it was simply RID 2015 Grimlock's natural form. RID 2015 treated Grimlock's being a Dinobot as though he was a kind of Cybertronian fauna, while FOC Grimlock was a normal Cybertronian person forced into an animal form. --Sabrblade (talk) 10:17, 9 May 2019 (EDT)
- Well considering the RID writers say their Grim is separate from FOC Grim, those two stay separate. And considering this Grim is going to be in the RBA cartoon (he's been in the intro since the beginning), if he ends up being incompatible with the others as well, then yeah, making a new page was the right call. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 08:32, 9 May 2019 (EDT)
