User talk:FortMax
Downshift (UT) move
Hey man, I hate to be a pain, but doesn't the Style Guide say to abbreviate Energon, Armada, and Cybertron as (UT)? He's not a Cybertron character, apparently, but we could mark on the page that he's from the Energon portion of the Unicon Trilogy continuity. - Doogles 21:31, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
- Hi, Doogles - The style guide is undergoing revision, see note on the community portal. It could probably be better marked. We had a long discussion on the Community Portal's talk page about it and eventually decided to use the franchise of origin for characters if and only if they needed disambiguation. So, no more "UT" suffixes. Sometime after Comic Con and the academic conference I'm going to right after that, I will update all the wiki's help pages. --Steve-o 22:29, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
"series Character"
No. I thought it was necessary after seeing how absurdly bloated the Generation 1 category was and thought it would make things much more organized. I'm only doing it for series that have a significant amount of articles that aren't characters; I'm not doing pointless ones like "Operation Combination characters", as only one article in "Operation Combination" isn't a character page. Same goes for stuff like Robot Masters and Victory.
My interpretation of the Generation 1 category differs from yours, evidently. I take "Generation 1" to be the catch-all category of the continuity family, which includes stuff like the Beast Era and Robot Masters. Obviously, this includes Classics. Interrobang 17:18, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
- I agree that the Generation 1 category was bloated and I think having a "Generation 1 characters" category to address that is a good thing. I also think that this sort of significant reshuffling of how we categorize things could probably have stood to have been thoroughly discussed somewhere, like the Community Portal's talk page, prior to implementation. --KilMichaelMcC 18:19, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
test test
David Kaye
I'm not sure about the word "regularly". In this context, it means Kaye has voiced both characters multiple times, and yeah, there are multiple episodes of Animated, but Animated should be taken as a whole. It's the only one series in which Kaye has voiced Optimus. "Regularly", used like this, I would expect to convey the same role across multiple series.
At the same time, G1 Megatron's speaking role in BW was so *small*... --Sntint 18:59, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
- By your definition, Frank Welker's Galvatron wasn't a regular role, as he only voiced him for one full season + three episodes, where Kaye voiced Galvatron for three series.
- For Animated, Prime is a regular role for Kaye. He was hired to voice the main protaginest for the entire series. This isn't like the VA for Sixshot, who was hired to voice one character in a single episode, Wally Burr who would fill in to voice a recurring character if the main VA was unavailiable, or the various regular VAs who would also voice the one line for "Guard #1" --FortMax 19:17, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
- I see what you're saying. For the record, I was going along the line of thought that "regular role" and "voiced regularly" were two seperate (though similar) uses of the word "regular". Apparently that line of thought isn't a common one, nor the one by which the word is used.
- I still don't think the word needs to be there; the sentence makes perfect sense and is still noteable without it, unless I'm forgetting something. King Starscream, at least, seems to have used the same thought process I did, so the note as-is may again be considered inaccurate by others. --Sntint 20:50, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Lordhighannoyingstarscream 21:05, 16 January 2008 (UTC) I am a new user here and I am also sorry for the caption thing, but i just discovered that someone took away all the humourous captions and sarcasm in Vector Sigma's info page. he is a somwhat important character so I think somebody should look into that. I also had an idea for the Unicron trilogy so if yoyu wanna fix anything i put a basic theme there as well as some content and images.
Edit conflict
My apologies about that. Believe me, I know what that's like. And it was on my own talk page. -- SFH 00:53, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Comic dates
Why did you add dates to to original miniseries, then make them "unknown"? The month for original publication of The Transformers was right, if nothing - I got it from an old issue of Marvel Age. --Monzo 15:35, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- crazysteve had made a post on a.t.t where he was trying to figure out the actual release dated for the original miniseries. the dated for issues 3 and 4 come from Marvel Age issues 21 and 24. He then deduced issue two came out on July 31 and issue 1 came out on may 29th. However, there was a review of issue 1 posted on net.comics at midnight on may 21, so I then removed the release dated for issues 1 and 2. --FortMax 15:55, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- ... oh. Apparently I am a liar, as I not only did not add the month for issue #1, but - having dug out my copy of Marvel Age #17 - the original publication date for issue #1 was sometime in April. --Monzo 16:09, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Spoilers in profiles
For fuck's sake, stop putting spoilers in the character profiles! Those go in the Fiction sections, and always with the {{spoiler}} template. --FortMax 01:09, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
- Er, was there more than just the one? Because I was only aware of the one in Nanosec that got edited, and am not exactly sure how I merit a "for fuck's sake stop doing ____" notice.--RosicrucianTalk 01:14, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Note
Do not revert me, I have been instructed by staff to remove all edits by this user. --{{subst:User:Charitwo/SigX}} 23:38, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
- "Evidence" is present in the article history, btw, but you need not worry, this is being handled. --{{subst:User:Charitwo/SigX}} 23:40, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
