Talk:Goldbug (IDW)

'87 toy

This discussion is carried over from Talk:Popular Earth vehicle alternate modes#VW Beetle. My view is that the '87 toy = Bumblebee renamed. It says so in his bio. So, at best, the toy could be said to have been repurposed into IDW Goldbug, except that IDW Goldbug is not a VW Beetle, so it is not even repurposed. - Starfield 17:05, 9 August 2009 (EDT)

The bios often vary wildly from the depiction in the fiction, yes? I'd say that this version of Goldbug is at least as close to the toy as, say, G1 Bumblebee is to Hearts of Steel Bumblebee, which co-exist on the same page. Or IDW Sunstreaker, who's a Headmaster. Maybe we should make a separate page for the non-gestalt, non-animal Predacons of IDW. I'd say that if we're willing to accept that there can be bodies for characters that aren't based on the toys, but are still associated with the toys, then it has to cut both ways. The only thing that makes Goldbug different from the other characters is that the character is sometimes the same guy as Bumblebee. Otherwise, if this toy can't live on the same page as Goldbug (IDW), then really none of the other IDW Throttlebot bodies (or any other kind of bodies) should live on the same page with their more toy-like other depictions. --Jimsorenson 17:23, 9 August 2009 (EDT)

Well, except that the other characters live on the same page because we consider them to be the same characters, just portrayed slightly differently between continuities. So the fact that the toys don't always represent every single depiction is considered low priority.

However, since we already decided that IDW Goldbug is a separate enough character to get his own page, that means that assuming the same toy as the Goldbug characters we separated him from is a "good enough for government work" match is no longer a "valid" assumption. --Jeysie 17:29, 9 August 2009 (EDT)

Ah, but we decided that he's separate enough from prior depictions of Goldbug to warrant his own page. But that's emphatically not the same as saying that he's a separate character. It's purely a wiki convention, for our own convenience. Clearly, the idea that Goldbug is a member of the team called Throttlebots is something that ultimately traces its roots to the toys. Ignoring a line on the bio, well, that's nothing new for us, or for Transformers fans, pros and everyone in between. This is not an analogous situation to, say, Galvatron II, where there were two guys running around with the same name. This is just, well, IDW's Goldbug, and in this continuity he's not Bumblebee. Just like in this continuity, Galvatron isn't Megatron. We still call them the same guy, and associate all the toys together, even though really the Galvatron G1 toy looks almost nothing like the Galvatron from IDW. And if the IDW Rodimus Prime isn't Hot Rod, which seems likely, then that toy should still be on the page too. All IMO, of course. --Jimsorenson 17:48, 9 August 2009 (EDT)

Well, I tend to take the stance that we shouldn't assume/make up things unless we need to. And if we do need to make any assumptions, we should mark them as being such (which is why we have things like the "nameless character" templates, after all).

If we consider IDW Goldbug to be separate enough to get his own page, mere wiki convention or not, then IMHO he's separate enough that we shouldn't make an unofficial assumption that the toy still applies, unless we see something from IDW themself that suggests it does (like an Earth mode that looks like the toy). Seeing as how inclusion of a toy is not important enough that it demands an assumption on our part in order to fulfill the bare basic requirements for a character page. --Jeysie 17:53, 9 August 2009 (EDT)

I agree with Jim. I don't think the visual depiction of a character needs to match the look of a toy for the toy to "apply," nor do previous personality depictions come into play at all, since bio/story-portrayal disparities have been a fact of Transformer life since the beginning. It's very odd to see the VW-Beetle Goldbug on this page, I agree, but the logic is sound. Imagine for a moment that, up until IDW, Goldbug had been a toy-only character. Then suddenly IDW uses him in "Cybertronian" form... wouldn't we still put the old toy on his page? It doesn't matter how much the bio differs; the toy of the yellowish Throttlebot named "Goldbug" in the G1 toyline was obviously the inspiration for IDW's character of a yellowish Throttlebot named "Goldbug" in their G1 comic. And, to return to the real world, it also doesn't matter that there's this other interpretation out there of Goldbug being a rebuilt Bumblebee. It doesn't affect the logic of this page's content, other than that the stories about him being Bumblebee belong on Bumblebee's page instead. The toy, being an independent entity (independent even from its own packaging bio), belongs in both places. - Jackpot 18:51, 9 August 2009 (EDT)

That is one way to go about it, but taking that logic to its logical conclusion—both Goldbugs should be on the same page. I think the only reason we are squeamish about not merging them is because it says "Bumblebee" on the top of the page. That shouldn't matter, technically, since Goldbug (G1) redirects there. - Starfield 18:59, 9 August 2009 (EDT)

You're right; it's purely for convenience's sake that we've separated them. IDW-Goldbug is an incarnation of G1 Goldbug, so if we were being completely literal, we would put IDW-Goldbug's info on the page that Goldbug (G1) redirects to. But how would that read? We'd have to break the Bumblebee section up somehow between 'Bee and Goldbug, which is unprecedented and strikes me as an awkward solution, especially since we don't know how major a character Goldbug might become - or even how intertwined their storylines might get.

Actually, I think the most logically-consistent solution would be to make a separate Goldbug (G1) page and transplant all of the Goldbug info from Bumblebee (G1) into it. It's the Galvatron (G1) approach. The only counterargument to that I see is again one of convenience: it would put the reader through an unwarranted amount of work, jumping to a different page just to see the miniscule amount of material about, say, the Marvel Goldbug before jumping BACK to the Bumblebee page when he becomes a Pretender. Especially considering that, unlike Galvatron, there's no significant difference between Bumblebee and Goldbug's identities or story-roles.

So we're left with the pages as they currently stand, not really the most logical conclusion but the most convenient one. And... well, honestly, now I'm at a loss as to how this pertains to the toy question. If we can accept separating IDW-Goldbug from the rest, he's still an incarnation of the character represented by the toy, so why wouldn't the toy go here?

- Jackpot 20:24, 9 August 2009 (EDT)

I don't find the logic sound at all. There's no official statement that toy Goldbug = IDW Goldbug, period. I really don't see why this is even an issue. The toy information is not at all important enough that it must be included, so there's no reason for us to make up a completely fanon assumption with zero canon support. If IDW ever does give us some canon info that makes assuming the toy is the same reasonable, then we can add it. But we shouldn't be putting fanon on the wiki. --Jeysie 19:09, 9 August 2009 (EDT)

Jeysie, is there any official statement that toy Goldbug == Sunbow Cartoon Goldbug? I don't remember them every saying that. The character model is pretty different. Actually, I don't know of any official statement that, say, Activators Cliffumper is the same as Cliffjumper from the animated cartoon. One is an earth mode, one isn't. Or almost any other toy for that matter. Where would such a statement be made? Under what circumstances? --Jimsorenson 19:15, 9 August 2009 (EDT)

The fact that we consider them enough the same character to put them all on the same page is "good enough" there. But, if we consider a character incarnation separate enough to warrant its own page, then I fail to see any logic at all in assuming that the toy that belongs to the other incarnations we just declared as different still applies.

Now, if you wanted to argue that either this incarnation of Goldbug isn't different enough to separate out, or that we should separate out more (or all) different incarnations, those points would have some logic and consistency to it. But "we consider this character separate for its own page by fiction yet it's somehow still the same toy as the characters we just separated it from" just seems doofy to me unless there's some sort of actual canon support for the assumption.

Especially since we don't need to include toy info to fulfill the basic requirements of a character page, so there's nothing forcing us to add it, as opposed to leaving it off until we're sure we're being factual instead of fanon. This isn't like the "nameless character" situation, for instance, where we're forced to make something up just so we can create the page. --Jeysie 19:47, 9 August 2009 (EDT)

I see no difference between Goldbug (IDW) and Goldbug (G1), vis a vis the state of his toy. If you think we need an 'official declaration' that the Goldbug (IDW) character belongs to the 1987 Goldbug toy to be valid, then that requirement should apply to the Goldbug (G1) toy. You've made a moderately compelling (but flawed, IMO) case that the toy might not apply to both characters, but you haven't even come close to coming up with an argument as to why the toy belongs with one more than the other. --Jimsorenson 19:52, 9 August 2009 (EDT)

I had an edit-conflict with Jim there, but I was going to say basically the same thing in a single sentence: What are your standards for figuring out if a toy "applies" to a character? - Jackpot 20:24, 9 August 2009 (EDT)

I feel pretty comfortable assuming the other Throttlebots' bios apply to them unless something were to conflict with them. IDW Goldbug? I don't know who he is. I considered putting the Category:Spies tag on the page, but I don't know if he is a spy. He doesn't appear to be an "espionage director." HOS Bumblebee was pretty close to G1 Bumblebee, actually. There wasn't anything that jumped out at me that would make me say, "Bumblebee wouldn't act like that." IDW Sunstreaker was very Sunstreaker-esque, so I don't know what you mean. He became a Headmaster? Well that is just imagining what would happen if G1 Sunstreaker became a Headmaster. Many Headmasters aren't Headmasters in IDW but have the same personality. - Starfield 18:36, 9 August 2009 (EDT)