Talk:Galvatron (G1)

What you have cavalierly retiled 'Galvatron IV' (Rhythms of Darkness) was explicitly called Galvatron 2 in Alignment, like as an actual title or somejunk. (It's confusing.) So a specific number has meaning in reference to this character, and his numbering should not be reassigned for aesthetic reasons- doing so removes meaning.

Also, we have at least 1 explicit letters page reference (Backed up, IIRC by the Titan Compilation recap pages) saying he's the same incarnation of the character as the one from Perchance to Dream.

The 2nd Future-Galvie is difficult. I don't object toc alling him III, but since the numbers kinda have meaning for the other two (and reflect a need to label two distinct individuals who visited the past, as opposed to a 3rd individual who didn't, and instead exists in a timeline where no such disambuigation was needed) I think it'd be better to say "Also, a new Galvatron showed up int he future after Straxus died." -Derik 12:22, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah. Who numbered all these Galvatrons? The Rhythms of Darkness one is specifically Galvatron II. None of the others officially got any numbers. (Galvatron II gets his own page, as well.) --ItsWalky 15:09, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, that's why I requested an expert come in and rework what I wrote. I was mostly going by what Cliffy wrote at the Archive ( http://www.tfarchive.com/comics/faq/#2q ). The extent of *my* actual knowledge of Marvel Comics UK Galvatron goes no further than Target: 2006 and Perchance to Dream.--DrSpengler 21:38, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

IDW Galvatron

So, not spoiling too much be IDW Galvatron has been confirmed to not only not be Megatron, but to not even have had anything to do with Megatron, ever. I knida lean toward giving him his own page. Thoughts?--71.235.136.203 10:59, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to say no. Galvatron II gets his own page because he's explicitly a separate entity from a world which has already had a Galvatron. I see him in the same light as I see TM2 Dinobot. IDW Galvatron may be a different concept, but he's still just a new continuity's take on the character, and that's nothing new. Chip 15:57, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't know. He's got his own background, and though originally he only was in his Spotlight, he's about to get a lot more screentime. Giving him his own page would mean we could give the new character design a good central place and separate his unique backstory from his fiction appearances.--Rosicrucian^Talk 19:54, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

I say we keep him here for reasons that Chip stated. He is an incarnation of his G1 self, even if he doesn't evolve from Megatron. --MistaTee 20:04, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Marvel Comics x2?

Why is there a second Marvel Comics section after Japanese continuity? That says absolutely nothing about what happened in the comics, but is instead dilled with badly-written speculation about the events of the 'toon version of the movie? Doesn't that sort of thing belong on Wikipedia, not here? -Derik 01:49, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Scramble City (toys) OVA (Japan-only)

(Note: this OVA is not canon to anything in the known universe.)

WHAT??!?? HAVE EVEN SEEN THIS? Galvatron is now where in the Scramble City OVA which should be canon no problem. What I think you are talking about are the live action TOY ADVERTISMENTS that were done in conjunction of Scramble City(I guess the ad's were a continuation of Scramble City, but all it did was re tell the story)What is described in this article does happen in these toy comercials. GALVATRON IS NO WHERE IN SCRAMBLE CITY, HE IS IN THE TOY COMMERCIALS! --Unknown IP Address

I think you're confused, Mr. Unknown IP Address. The section is titled "Scramble City (toys)" which is the name used to seperate the animated Scramble City OVA from the stop-motion OVA. Footage from the stop-motion OVA was used for toy commercials, but never the less, the footage originated in said OVA, which ISN'T canon to the animated series, though the animated Scramble City most certainly is. So, again, there is a difference between "Scramble City" and "Scramble City (toys)" as noted in the section covering Galvatron's appearance in that OVA's fiction. Scramble City (toys) was a full-length stop-motion OVA which combined stock footage from the television series with a completely new voice track, making it more than just a standard toy commercial as it is about half an hour long and tells a story. It might do you wonders to actually watch the complete Scramble City (toys) OVA before going off the handle, just so you have some semblance of a clue as to what you're talking about. You can read a detailed synopsis of the OVA here. Also, TALKING IN ALL CAPS!1!1! doesn't make you appear more intelligent, particularly when you're wrong. --DrSpengler 22:34, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

If it's just a toy commercial and isn't cannon then why should it be included in the Galvatron article? Oh and the CAPS was to indicate irritation that some NERD decided to include an actual half hour toy commercial(I say actual because, as we all know, Transformers was nothing more than a half-hour toy commercial in the guise of "cartoon"). I realize that it apparently had some sort of story, but come on it's a toy commercial...also, why the personal stab? Did you write this article? Because I wasn't trying to attack anyone, but you were, why? Are you still bitter that they killed off Optimus Prime? PS Don't go locking yourself in your bedroom. --Unkown IP Address Guy

It is canon (not "cannon", there's a difference) with itself and would qualify as a micro-continuity just like the various Big Looker storybooks and other ridiculous oddities that fill Generation 1. The fact that segments of it are stop-motion (while just as much is animated) does not mean it should be disqualified from inclusion. The fact that it marks the first appearance of Galvatron in Japan is most certainly notable. Also, if you spent a little time perusing this wiki you might notice that we actually do include the story tidbits revealed in television commercials. The fact that the Scramble City (toys) OVA was actually sold in stores and lasted a half hour makes it even more notable than television commercials. Imagine that. Furthermore, combining clips of various episodes to make new stories is something done routinely in Japanese Transformer animation, once again making the Scramble City (toys) OVA more than just a "half hour toy commercial" (though I feel like laughing every time I hear that).

The fact of the matter is, at this wiki we strive to be as comprehensive as possible, including all different continuities, large or small, whether they're canon with any primary fiction or not. That includes toy packaging blurbs, television commercials, pack-in comics and, yes, the bizarre stop-motion OVA such as "Scramble City (toys)". --DrSpengler 05:24, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Wow.

In terms of the Marvel Continuities, should any mention be made of the characters appearances in Marvel's Transformers the Movie Adaption? Even though they are out of the normal continuity of the comics, a lot of the characters like Hot Rod, Galavtron, and Blurr were introduced there before anywhere else in the Marvel comics and the Marvel Universe profiles even make mention of this. Or would that really just confuse things? -RiddlerJ October 19 2007

Weapon name

What was Galvatron's weapon called again? A chemical-electric laser cannon? -- SFH 05:25, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

In the 1989 Annual, Megatron's and Galvatron's weapons were called "Fusion cannon" and "particle accelerator cannon" but I forget which one was which. Takeshi357 20:53, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Universe

Anyone know WHY galvatron's altmode is changed from a cannon/gun to a tank?--Grand-majin 18:48, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Because Hasbro hates you. --ItsWalky 18:51, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

That's something i know for a long time.--Grand-majin 18:52, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Because Hasbro has said that part of the motivation behind the Universe line is to pick up "realistic modern vehicle modes" when the Movie line ends. Galvatron's old form doesn't fit that criteria, but a tank does. --ZacWilliam 18:54, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Considering that tank mode is hardly what I consider "realistic", I see no reason for the change...Takeshi357 20:48, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

From Teletraan I: The Transformers Wiki, a Wikia wiki.