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)