Talk:Nightstick (G1)

I'm not really up to rewriting the entire bio section over the Ricochet deal. I'd sooner assume Rico's partner is a new guy, but that's me. Any rate ,Artfire's partner is also a Ricochet... --M Sipher 04:03, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Without any reason to assume otherwise I go with Occam's razor:I just figure: it's the same toy, with the same deco, with the same name = the same guy. Not like folks havn't defected before. ZacWilliam 04:20, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Toy/Trivia

There's a lot of information there that really doesn't belong under "Toys". The whole Japanese Nightstick/Nebulon thing hasn't got any bearing on US Nightstick's toy. We note the mold was used for Nebulon, then move on. The models and are that are related to the character, but should go under Trivia. --M Sipher 20:46, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Shrug. I see the "Trivia" section as a necessary evil for stuff that simply won't fit anywhere else, so I try to find relevance any other place I can. Mileages vary, and all that. Certainly I'm less invested in the toy side of things than you, so I'll defer to your judgement. - Jackpot 22:49, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Move

I just want to say ins the strongest possible terms how fundamentally I disagree with the decision to move "Nightstick (Decepticon)" to "Nightstick (G1)."

This consistency is not victory. It is failure. -Derik 17:00, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

It would work better if they'd just release and rename Artfire/Nightstick for the Western market so we can have a Nightstick (G1) vs Nightstick (Headmasters) (provided they aren't the same guy... or should be with the name switch). But, in arguments, what's your objection to this move? Geewunling 17:06, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

For me, it's that there are TWO Nightsticks in the un-sub-franchised G1, the Decepticon who comes with Cyclonus and the Autobot who comes with Ricochet. Add in that "Headmasters" is ALSO PART OF G1 and there is ANOTHER Nightstick in that... and this is a stupid move. Return the page to (Decepticon). --M Sipher

Wouldn't Nightstick (Cyclonus) make more sense, given that the other ones are at Nightstick (Ricochet) and Nightstick (Artfire), and he's technically a Nebulan not a Decepticon? - SanityOrMadness 18:14, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

Why not "Nightstick (Nebulan)", seeing as the others are both robots? - Magnus Maximus 18:17, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

Given that "Nightstick (Ricochet)" was known as "Nebulan" in Japan, that doesn't really seem like it reduces confusion.

"Nightstick (Cyclonus)", "Nightstick (Artfire)" and "Nightstick (Ricochet)" seem like the make sense to me.

...I just had a sudden horrible thought... did Henkei declare Nightstick a robot or a Nebulan? -Derik 18:45, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

...I just had a sudden horrible thought... did Henkei declare Nightstick a robot or a Nebulan?

Don't think they ever did, really... Most of the written material (packaging bio and card) was more focused on Cyclonus, other than the usual mention of Nightstick being Cyclonus' partner... --Lonegamer78 18:00, 4 June 2009 (EDT)

If there's no objections, moving to Nightstick (Cyclonus), then... - SanityOrMadness 19:14, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

I found Ricochet (Headmasters) a little odd, but that was the first franchise the character himself appeared in. - Starfield 18:29, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

Yes well, I'm of the mind that if a charactwer has no name-conflict within Generation 1, their disambig should be (G1), regardless if they're from Zone or whatever.

This is the opposite problem-- there are other risochets from G1, so (G1) is a bad disambig.

Disambigs don't have to be perfect... keeping them consistent is for our convenience, not our inconvenience. In this case (G1), though arguably consistent, is a damn inconvenient standard to follow.

(I'm also gonna cite Help:Ignore all standards here, though I think I've already covered the relevant ground. ) -Derik 18:45, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

In that case though, why don't ROTF characters who don't have different-character name counterparts in movie 1 go to "Name (Movie)" rather than "Name (ROTF)", Energon or Cybertron characters who don't have names reused from Armada characters go to "Name (Armada)" [or "Name (UT)"] and the G2 Swarm and Jhiaxus go to "Swarm (G1)" and "Jhiaxus (G1)" respectively, since it's all the same continuity? That makes at least as much sense to me as a Headmasters character going to (G1). - SanityOrMadness 19:14, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

Soooo Minicon

Just curious how we want to deal with the "Reveal the Shield" Nightstick being a Minicon? Enough for him to be a new character? --76.28.76.206 07:49, 4 October 2010 (EDT)

We haven't made new pages for Laserbeak, Ravage, etc., even though they've all been ret-mini-conned too. There's really nothing "different" to depict--it's just one word of cardcopy, worthy of a "Notes" entry at most. --Thylacine 2000 09:41, 4 October 2010 (EDT)

Your counter examples don't really match the situation here. Laserbeak et al. were and still are Transformers, it's just that we now know that they are examples of mini-con TFs in Generation 1. Nightstick was a Nebulan, not a Transformer. The fact that this new toy is considered to be a TF (specifically a mini-con) seems like an important difference to me. --Khajidha 09:49, 4 October 2010 (EDT)