Talk:Jesus

Does this article really need to exist? What does it really have to do with Transformers? Am I missing some subtle TF in-joke?

Omnisvalidus 08:49, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Jesus was referenced in the Dreamworks Transformers movie, so it's reasonable to have an article describing his relevance in the TF mythos. Hence the emphasis on his status as a moral exemplar implied by the phrase "What Would Jesus Do?", the car thing, and the cross symbol over anything of theological substance, and the snarky sentence about a possible connection to that Christmas holiday Transformers have repeatedly encountered. -Rotty 09:06, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

This article seems like a biiig stretch to me, too. Yes, the word "Jesus" has been spoken a few times in Transformers fiction. I'm not sure that really justifies the article. --Steve-o 17:00, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

And yet we already have Frijole in the Gods category. Are we going to delete that too? -Rotty 19:19, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Frojole doesn't read like an unencyclopedia entry. -Derik 19:29, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Plus, "Frijole" largely serves as a wry commentary on the stereotyping of Carlos. This article just doesn't strike me as having that much of a point to it, and seems random almost to the point of off-topicness. TVsGrady 20:13, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I think it's an article worth having, but this version is not done brilliantly. I feel like it should be done in the same way as articles like Nicholas, acting as if the references in Transformers fiction are the only existing information anywhere. Maybe Jesus (Movie) wasn't a carpenter, who knows? --Andrusi 20:26, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

That part came from the pre-existing Christmas article. I've removed it from both since, yes, Transformers have never been seen learning about the trades practiced by incarnate human deities. What else do you think is too self-aware, the possible connection to Christmas? -Rotty 22:47, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Okay, it's had the tobedeleted tag for 12 days since the issue was last (and first) discussed inconclusively. If there are no objections, I shall remove the tag on the assumption that it's not getting deleted no matter how long the tag stays there. -Rotty 00:43, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

We have bunches of articles that have been tagged for deletion way longer than that. It doesn't mean the page belongs. It just means nobody deleted it yet. If you want to save the article, how about rewriting it, since nobody in this talk page said they liked it? Andrusi at least said he might support it if it were better. --Steve-o 14:10, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

The rewrite would be... difficult in-universe. Has INRI ever been namechecked outside of the movie? (Maybe Paul Charteris's flashback to his time studying to be a priest mentions it...) -Derik 15:51, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Only on the TF Wiki would the Son of God be considered non-relevant. I'm amused. I would say we keep the article in the spirit of silly pages, but this whole wiki is snarky enough that it doesn't need separate pages for in-jokes. --Slander 13:15, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

It's overall just not a good idea, it will spark quite some wrong reactions. Decepticon Rhinox 18:14, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

As a Christian in possession of a sense of humor, I disagree. I love the fact this article exists and think it's hilarious. Ronimus Prime 21:42, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Rick Astley has an article, why can't Jesus have one?ACIDSTORM92 20:48, 25 February 2010 (EST)

This article is pointless. Yes it was mentioned once in the live-action movie, but so was masturbation, are we going to make an article about masturbation? It's not even amusing (which may partly justify the existence of an irrelevant article). Titanus Prime 14:44, 30 March 2010 (EDT)