Talk:Transformers: Animated/Archive 1

ATTENTION ALL EDITORS

This page is not a forum for discussion of the series, its purpose is to discuss the article itself. Please see the talk page guidelines if you are unsure what discussion is suited for this page. Lucky number 49 15:49, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

---

Isn't it considered rude to delete other people's comments? Optimus Sledge 03:58, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Generally, yes, particularly when such is clearly an act of vandalism. However, many editors consider it acceptable behaviour to remove inappropriate content from talk pages, especially when that content is an attack on the article's subject, or is otherwise not constructive. The purpose of talk pages is to improve the article and discuss activity related to its improvement, not to badmouth or praise the topic. Lucky number 49 13:34, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Solar cycles

While the "solar cycle" might be real term I think in this show it was supposed to be synonymous with "year" - example: starscream was talking about 50 solar cycles which passed.

Vandalism

I removed some vandalism from the article. ...forgot to sign 4.165.117.245 22:17, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

...and again x_x Ilyeana 22:25, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Before anybody changes anything back, I ran the article through my word processor to check for grammar and spelling. If any links need fixed, then fix them. --Presario2200 (talk) 14:08, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I've dont hat too, just a tip though, when running references through a spell checker, the quotation marks dont translate back to the wikibox right and the wikicoding does not recognize them. I had that problem with the [[Avatar: The Last Airbender|Avatar] articles. Rau J16 16:59, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Where's Ironhide?

How come I don't see him in the Autobot section? 989 RVD 02:48, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Vehicle Modes

Are the Autobots going to be anything that is not flying nor military vehicles again? IG Optimus Prime turns into a Fire Truck.

Are the Decepticons going to be flying vehicles and military vehicles again? IG Megatron turns into a jet.

Over time the Decepticons always turn into a Military vehicle or a jet. The Seekers are full of jets.

Over time Autobots always turn into civilian vehicles, trucks, cars and anything not military.

How come most movie characters appear in this? Ratchet, Bumblebee, Optimus and Jazz.

How come you are ignoring this?

Also I saw Starscreams new look. His chin and his jet is based off from a Su-47 Berkut.

(TougHHead 00:26, 26 September 2007 (UTC))

Voice Actors

Some put the late Chris Latta as voicing Starscream. I corrected it to say Tom Kenny, seeing as how Chris Latta is dead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.159.32.223 (talk) 00:21, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Megatron!

Megatron is a gun? I think he is a jet again or something. I doubt he will be a gun again. Also I doubt the show will be out in december 26.(TougHHead 07:51, 6 November 2007 (UTC))

It's easy enough to source that it will be out December 26. A Cartoon Network press release has already confirmed it. It will be an animated movie to introduce the characters entitled "Transform and Roll Out."--Rosicrucian^Talk 22:08, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Megatrons an Osprey as odd as that sounds.155.33.109.198 (talk) 16:13, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

The article is horrific

Speculation, uncited information, spelling mistakes, grammar mistakes and general untidiness. It's also quite obvious that the main culprits are under 16 years old. Furthermore, like it says, this discussion page is for the ARTICLE, it is NOT a forum to talk about the series. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.106.153.178 (talk) 16:16, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

What did you expect? It's about an upcoming Cartoon Network series. That said, I have to consider even the "cited" information to be uncertain. Cartoon Network is far too unpredictable for any information about any thing they are involved with to be certain. Brittany Ka (talk) 20:15, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Wikilinks on the episode list

I've removed the wikilinks on all the episodes:

1. the majority of them were redlinks, and I seriously doubt that individual episode articles will pass muster
2. those which were not redlinks were linking to inappropriate topics. I seriously doubt that a Transformer episode has any bearing on a novel based around a 1930's kidnapping in New Jersey (for a single example)

Yngvarr 22:31, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Theme Song

It states that the theme song is a remix of the 84 theme. This is inacurate statment, it's a re-recording with a different vocalist.

Who is the vocalist for the revamp of the theme song, could it be Stan Bush? It sure sounds like him. Sarujo (talk) 04:19, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Nanosec's Age

The article lists Nanosec as ending the episode aged in his early 60s, his age was never mentioned in the show but he is clearly support to be be in at least his 80s by the end of the episode. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.83.222.244 (talk) 13:39, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, actually, his age does not change at all seeing as age is relative to time, only his physical state of being is changed. I am removing his age altogether. Rau J16 19:29, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

This article is horrible.

It still retains many of the problems that were present before it premiered. Unsourced information, speculation, trivia, grammar mistakes, spelling mistakes, MOS mistakes, format mistakes, and many other I cant think of off the top of my head. Any chance of those editors who know of reliable sources to help out? Rau's talk 01:40, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree. And this will probably be the same for a long time since most edits are done by people who speculate or use unreliable sources like forums. Moccamonster Talk 18:18, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

The edits have died down severely, considering it used to be around forty edits a day. But i am going to work on the content, and focus on sourced and unsourced as i go. Rau's talk 01:51, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Trivia

Shouldn't we add that the voice of Spongebob (Tom Kenny)and the voice of Patrick (Bill Fagerbakke) both are voices in this show? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.48.69.102 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.10.49.13 (talk) 01:33, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

No. WP:Trivia. Rau's Speak Page 01:40, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Air date wrong

Last week when I checked the TV listings the latest Transformers Animated episode was not listed to air that week. It is now April 21 so would someone please remove the air date since it turned out to be wrong?65.173.90.94 (talk) 10:50, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Porter C. Powel

Wouldn't it be better to list him under the villains, since he is obviously not an ally. 86.88.117.225 (talk) 15:04, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Split

I have moved the episodes to their own page. Rau's Speak Page 03:06, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Shouldn't we make a link to this page, since i only found on in the schematic all the way down, and this may be a bit hard to find. Moccamonster Talk 06:27, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Protection?

Seeing the constant adding of speculation, should we request protection? Moccamonster Talk 21:40, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

It needs heavy vandalism. The addition of speculation count as Good Faith edits. Rau's Speak Page 22:45, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't see any reason for protection. If it gets worse (such as links to items with no relevance to the universe, or to inappropriate items) then I vote on protection. ShermanT Speak Page 15:55, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Sari's age

For the last time people in "Survival of the fittest" I remember Captain Fanzone stating that Sari's 8 years old. It's also what her article said her age is. So will people please stop stating she's ten or twelve years old when that's not true?--65.173.90.94 (talk) 10:33, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Cliffjumper

According to Transformers Wiki, they now Idetify the little red bot Cliffjumper. Rodimus Rhyme (talk) 18:53, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Does the Transformers Wiki have a source. Not everything the Transformers Wiki says is true, but if it's sourced, then just add it and it's ok. Moccamonster Talk 20:24, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Proposed character article(s) split

This article requires a split, the whole character list attracts the greatest amount of edits from anons and registered editors alike and seems to be detracting from the remainder of the article. In addition, the whole thing is longer than the remainder of the article. I'm proposing a split into one or more articles dependant on consensus on how many will be required. If no objections are made then a split into the separate articles in a week of this notice. Please add your views on this proposal and thanks for reading. treelo _radda 15:56, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

While i do agree that the character list is quite long, i think it also contributes to the article, but only in the context of the article, and not as a standalone article. If more information besides the charaters is made available, then he split will be more easily done, which, with the probability of new charaters in future seasons, will be inevitable. Moccamonster Talk 17:18, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

The split could be easily done right now because that section is excessively long as it stands with more content in that area than anywhere else and should be spun off into it's own character list or lists given the length and sub-sectioning involved as the article is about the show and not the characters within it. Right now, it's basically the list plus a few things about the show which demands a split sooner than later as any real information about the show beyond the characters is lost. treelo _radda 18:03, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree. This split could be done very easily. What I propose though as well as the split is just the basic list of the names of all the Transformers, Humans, and whatever else could be considered a "Character". This would make it easier to control the amount of information coming in to the article and whats coming out. Plus, it wouldn't be that hard to make sure everything worked all right. ShermanT 21:34, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

(big edit) The solution here is segregation between the information between characters and that of the show. Without the list, it's barely worth a C-class so why given the fact that over a 24 hour period you can see 20+ edits, few of those go towards anything besides the characters? Because everything goes towards keeping that list clean and it's sucking the life from what could be a great article. The split I see is one where the list goes into two separate articles, List of bots from Transformers: Animated (or similar) and List of humans from Transformers: Animated so yeah, just like what I think you mentioned.

Thing is, I can see two further options, one which is the "sugar pill" way that just requires some cut and paste jobs and a {{main}} tag in the right place and the "bitter pill" way which requires heavy pruning of the list before or after the split and may end up killing some personal babies, add to that the actual choosing of what gets cut and drawing up some form of criteria for future reference and you've got your bitter pill. Most of the main characters have existed within the Transformers universe for some time and have their own articles as you'll know, pretty much all of these characters have the same information for this generation within the character articles so why are people writing at such length when writing a single short paragraph and pointing people to the main character article which they could edit instead, build the T:A sections further and help spread the edit amount out? There has to be a give point with minor one-shot or infrequent characters also with this "bitter pill" scenario, cut them out and it'll reduce your workload. All I see right now is an article with no direction because of this, set a plan and start to improve where it matters, character bios can wait and also be written elsewhere. treelo _radda 00:17, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

What I proposed was just one list with the Characters of the show. Then divide that list into Transformers, Humans, etc... Plus, like you said "Most of the main characters have existed within the Transformers universe for some time and have their own articles...", these articles that do exist for the transformers that have been around since G1 have information pertaining to transformers animated towards the end of the article. So instead of creating a giant list about who is who, just create a set of links that send you to the main page of which ever transformer it is. For instance, have Optimus Prime (Animated) set up as a link to the main optimus prime page, which then most users and readers can figure out that they need to scroll down to the bottom of the page to see who they are talking about. Or, if there is a way, have it automatically show up at that part of the article on Optimus Prime where it has Animated information. ShermanT 02:15 1 July 2008 (UTC)

There wouldn't be the giant list issue if you split into two and then solve the issues I mentioned. Following established conventions other CN character lists have and I maintain (I'm from the Cartoon Network Wikiproject and look after CN-related articles) as well as WP:MOS, having one list of links wouldn't work as it adds nothing of context. Review WP:RF as it has good info you and others might want to read and use. The way the links currently work is correct and doesn't require changing, what does however is how much you write about them upfront on the list. Like I said a paragraph of 2 or 3 sentences should cover it if you're linking out anyway, make sure that the section is tagged with {{main}} which points to the main character article and you'll be set, we can use anchor links to get to the right section and if you need someone just to make sure it complies with MOS, I'll be around. There's a more weird issue in terms of the satellite articles like the ones you linked to where the info for Optimus Prime is written about twice which could be the case with others, consolidate them. treelo _radda 10:18, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

That isn't a bad idea, but the problem is, is that the some articles on transformers in the animated show are usually full of speculation or do not have much information. Also, the editors working on the article may seem reluctant to suddenly having more information in the article since it is not written in the way they want it. This can be solved off course, but it might take a lot of time. Moccamonster Talk 07:46, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, if that sort of this is an issue then you as a regular editor along with others need to make sure that anons who most likely only have edited a few times here if that know what is allowed and what isn't seeing as you are outnumbered and usually it's the anons who make these content errors. How it's written to some doesn't matter as they don't own the articles and sometimes you need to cut the rot or rebuild entirely in order to build it better. Write up a "gold standard" version of how the list should look and use that as a base to build from. treelo _radda 10:18, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

(undent) I like this, shame it's only two of you give half a damn about it but good enough. Having one list doesn't seem to cover the issues I see adequately as it just ships off the problems regarding OR and unsourced claims elsewhere and whilst it'd help the article it would only treat the symptoms and not offer a cure so one list isn't the best option. The sugar pill only does the simple thing and just gets the list elsewhere but doesn't actually do anything about the problems inherent to the list when it was here, it's little more than a placebo which is where the bitter pill comes in as it'll actually solve what issues there are effectively if people are willing to do some judicious editing and make sure people know what goes in and what shouldn't. Might be hard but given some thought and people willing to push for what will help and not hinder the development here and elsewhere and it can be done. Just need a plan and if we're agreed on anything it's that a split is best and if it helps to get these unsourced claims under the noses of other editors elsewhere then it's probably the best thing we can do right now. Any more suggestions or requests for clairty, go ahead and ask. treelo _radda 10:18, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, i do have a small request for clarity, due to the large amount of text, i've kinda lost track of what solution seems to be the most obvious, is the split to 1 list or the referencing to other articles about the characters? 86.88.117.225 (talk) 12:55, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Bit of both, I'm suggesting taking the whole thing out and splitting it into two separate lists as I reckon there's a natural splitpoint between the bots and the humans as both are long enough to justify having their own lists. In those lists, the amount written about any longterm character who has an article right now should be cut down to a brief summary with a link to the character's article. Any others such as minor or one-shot characters or the amount written on any character should be dealt with on the talkpage of the lists. treelo _radda 14:03, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

(undent) As previously mentioned, the character list has been split out to List of bots in Transformers: Animated and List of other characters in Transformers: Animated. Any discussions relating to the content of the lists should be taken to the talkpage of the respective list. treelo _radda 15:39, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Expanding the plot

Seeing that a split of the character list(s) seems to be inevitable, and seeing how incredibly short the plot section is, i suggest moving plot related things from the characters list and put them in the plot section. i.e. Starscream creating clones of himself, the Allspark being destroyed, Megatron's space bridge project, Shockwave being a spy etc. Please comment or suggest something. Moccamonster Talk 20:04, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Seems the most obvious thing, wouldn't you say? treelo _radda 20:39, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Not Japanese

Just because a show is animated overseas does not make an "American/Japanese" cartoon. Animated is designed, written, produced, performed, recorded and masterminded by America, and three different Japanese animation studios have simply been contracted to draw it - nothing more. These studios have done everything from Gargoyles to Winnie the Pooh, and those shows are not considered "American/Japanese," just because Japanese people drew them. Is Super-Robot Monkey Team "American/Japanese"? Is Teen Titans "American/Korean"? Is THE SIMPSONS "American/Korean"? No. It doesn't work that way. - 78.32.44.57 (talk) 09:58, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Work, yeah... Hey, to provide context for those not totally aware of the issue, there is a little dispute in regards to just what the origins of this production is and as is very clear, they don't like the implication of it being American and Japanese at the same time as "it doesn't work that way" apparently. Everyone up to speed now? Great, let's continue. Now, the examples you cite are good but not entirely applicable in this context. Those shows are as you say animated in Japan or Korea and shouldn't be considered American/Japanese or American/Korean as the vast amount of shows out there would be called, thing is that this show doesn't just have it's animation duties shipped out overseas like they do. No, see some of the names within direction? They're Japanese and as explained before, all that Cartoon Network do is write, voice and partially direct the thing, they don't deal with anything on the production front whereas the series that you cite have almost full control of the show. I don't even watch this show but know that it is a co-production between these 4 studios, you may not like it being called as such mentioning something about it not working that way (which isn't true) but that's how it is. Strange though, consensus seemed to be with the idea of it being a co-production and now it seems they're wrong, funny that. treelo _radda 10:45, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

TF:A is not made entirely in the US, like the shows you mentioned. The show is animated in Japan, and the character design has been done coöperatively, mainly because the toy line is produced in Japan. Moccamonster Talk 11:57, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Sigh. Y'know what, I actually don't care enough to drag this out into a snarky argument, so I've just changed it back. - 78.32.44.57 (talk) 13:12, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh yeah? Good, I wasn't that involved either and just happen to have this article on my watchlist to see if anyone undid some work I did earlier on or asked questions. Nothing seems to be going wrong and people know where the articles are I don't need to watch anymore and I'm glad we can put this minor little difference behind us as today is not my day to debate. Move along children, nothing to see here... snarky, really? treelo _radda 13:30, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Season 3 Confirmed!

I have decided, once and for all, to let you all know that Season 3 has been confirmed at BotCon 2008. The actual names and number of episodes in season 3 has not been announced yet. This is the link that I use as my reference to the Season 3 addition: http://www.seibertron.com/energonpub/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=40517

I understand that this is a forum, ladies and gentleman. More research does need to be done to insure that season 3 is still a go, but as of today I have changed the season number in the main bar to "3". ShermanT My Talk Page 30/07/2008 19:14 UTC —Preceding undated comment was added at 19:15, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

As long as there is no reliable source, the season number can't be changed. Moccamonster Talk 09:00, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Cast list

I'm sorry, but the cast list is not in past tense, and included sources, and prose. Per WP:LIST, even lists fall under WP:V, so removal of the sources is actually detrimental, and prose is suggested as preferrable to lists in the MOS, the last time I saw it.

Furthermore, many accurate entries have been removed:

• Corey Burton - Spike
• Tom Kenny - inaccurately claimed to voice all clones
• Al Yankovic - systems technician who designed the nanobots featured in Wreck-Gar's episode.

I simply don't see how this format is preferential, and the reasons given for it are simply inaccurate. Instead of reverting it again, please at least explain how this is preferrable. If there's an update to an MOS that claims it, please show me.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 16:50, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

contiuty

I have watched a few episodes, but is this TV series related to any of the previous one, or do they just reboot everything every time they start a new Transforms series. And if they are created in a continuty, then how come in every show the chracter names a the same. --Gman124 ^talk 23:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

MANY of the shows have an Optimus, Prowl, Ironhide. It's original, but similar to the other series. Mathewignash (talk) 00:58, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

There are several main continuities(and numerous smaller ones), All were originally Japanese series dubbed for the US, also US and UK comic book lines. Barring crossovers e.g GI Joe the main continuities are:

• Generation 1 1984-92 original series/comics, UK and US comics began diverging evebtually, also charachter deaths wernt always consistent between series
• Generation 2 1992-95 was a re-release of the original series with new CGI scenes added and historical narration from the future
• Beast Wars/Machines 1996-01
• Robots in Disguise 2000–02 one off series continuity
• The Unicron Trilogy 2003-06 three linked series in the US, but in Japan the first series wasnt connected to the following two
• Live action Movies 2007+ American live action
• Transformers Animated 2008+ new continuity, American commisioned rather than Japanese dubbed

83.104.138.141 (talk) 01:46, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Everything there except RID and the Unicron Trilogy originated in America, for that matter.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 13:24, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

I think the Beast Wars/Beast Machines and Generation 1 and 2 were supposed to be in same continuity. --207.172.203.11 (talk) 15:41, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 21:02, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Cast

The season three episode "Three's A Crowd", while not listing Dirt Boss' VA, does list what seems to be all voices used up to that point:

David Kaye - Optimus Prime, Grimlock, Technician 1, Firefighter, Fan #2, Fan #1, Nature Show Narrator, Security Bot, Customer, Man, Intercom voice, Trash Bot, News Bot, Irate Citizen

Corey Burton - Ratchet, Megatron, Ironhide, Longarm, Shockwave, Cyrus "The Colossus" Rhodes, Computer Voice, Narrator, Husband, Pile, Dispatcher, Man

Bumper Robinson - Bumblebee, Blitzwing, News Anchor, News Reporter, Computer Voice, Worker

Bill Fagerbakke - Bulkhead, Master Disaster, Technician 2, Citizen, Project Manager, Teller, Customer Scientist #1, Patrol Man, Security Bot

Jeff Glen Bennett - Prowl, Fanzone, Ultra Magnus, Driver, The Angry Archer, Condiment Bot, Domestic Bot, Soundwave, Man, Mixmaster

Tara Strong - Sari, Teletran-1, Boy, Fan #1, Reception Bot, Gary, Daniel, Mother, Soccer Mom, Press Secretary, Wife, Slo-mo, Female Starscream

Tom Kenny - Sumdac, Starscream, Burger Bot, Commercial Announcer, Security Bot, Guard Bot, Scientist #2, TukDie, CbDi #1, Police Man, Scrapper, Wasp

Cree Summer - BlackArachnia

Townsend Coleman - Sentinel Prime, News Bot, PA Voice

Peter Stormare - Prometheus Black (Meltdown)

Sue Blu - Arcee

Lance Henriksen - Lockdown

Brian Posehn - Nanosec (Nino Sexton)

Kath Soucie - Professor Princess, Trisha, Police Dispatcher

Alex Polinsky - Headmaster (Henry Masterson)

Eh why was George removed from the cast? what he isnt worth adding or soemthing? he does do a role so it makes no scence why he shouldnt be there.Behellmorph (talk) 20:17 27 Friday 2000 (UTC)

Because 1) the episodes hasn't been officially released, and is stolen (and legally actionable) material at this point, and 2) because it isn't sourced, and it's pathetically easy to find sources for that list.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 04:16, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

We don't really know something was illegal unless the people who own the product complain that they want it removed. They have not. Leaked footage, story boards, toys showing up on ebay before the street sale date and the like are constantly the source for in production films and TV shows. This is no different that a leaked concept drawing of say Brawn or Alpha Trion showing up and then us mentioning them as Animated characters. It's just bigger. We saw some footage early, and unless the boardcast version constrdicts it, it's valid to mention it. Same thing would happen if a film leaked out early from a DVD screener and someone wrote up a plot of cast list for Wikipedia. Mathewignash (talk) 12:50, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

...yeah, they have. Wyatt has specifically complained about it. As for the "leaked concept drawing" - we didn't mention those, and continuously removed them. Aiding and encouraging the theft of material is just as actionable against wikipedia as it would be anywhere else in America.

As for using "leaked footage and toys" - there is a very good reason why its stupid to use those - the same reason they haven't released the toys and film already - they are subject to a lot of change. So, it might be valid to mention that the info was leaked - once it has been confirmed that the info is at all relevant. I've seen a fair number of "leaked" Wyatt designs that turned out to be nothing more than doodles, like Kickback or Wyatt himself.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 19:00, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

If an eventual broadcast of the show somehow changes, it should be noted and changed on Wikipedia. For instance if SOMEHOW the episode airs and they have someone else voice Yoketron in the finished product, then it will be changed on Wikipedia. That is good enough for me. Honestly there is planty to fix in the pages here, like people who constantly add fake Japanese voice actor names to the pages. I'm not concerned with people adding information a couple days before the actual broadcast date of an episode. Mathewignash (talk) 19:22, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

...why? Every single episode or movie ever changes between early versions and the final cut. What possible reason could we have to list all those changes?

As for "adding information a couple days before the broadcast" - 1) IT IS ILLEGAL. 2) Because they're releasing it before it's officially out, most editors can't check their info. 3) I have seen 1 out of 10 of these early additions actually add the correct names, and at least twice they have added completely false information - which everyone left there until I reverted it. How does this not illustrate how unhelpful it is to use stolen info?Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 20:22, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Those false additions are not based on the leaked episodes, they are just trolls adding fake info, which was happening long before episodes on youtube. I see ne reason to spend energy removing correct information because it shows up 2 days early when there is enough real false stuff to remove in the various Transformers articles. If you see something totally false or unproveable then remove it by all means. Focus your limited energy on fixing things which are truely broken. Besides if we based writing on official releases only, then I could NEVER write an article about an episode of Transformers: Victory or Masterforce, as they have never been broadcast legally in the U.S. EVER! Yet somehow I seem to obtain copies and add info to articles. Mathewignash (talk) 01:33, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Each of them was based on the leaked episodes. And the problem is, they can't be known to be false by someone who hasn't seen the episode, so the information is unverifiable by anyone not willing to break the law.

Again - 1 OUT OF 10 actually added the correct info - the rest added a heap of mispelled names, false spoilers, etc., because who's going to know? This kind of thing is the one of the reasons we have the WP:V policy.

Please don't be obtuse. Those episodes have been officially released, whether in America or not. It's a completely different situation, and you know it.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 05:40, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

By "unverifiable by anyone not willing to break the law" you mean people watching youtube? I don't think watching any video on youtube is a proscutable crime, no matter what you watch. Try to understand, it's just a horrible waste and counterproductive for someone to watch the episode on youtube, then put the into on a wiki page, then you remove it, then a couple days later re-add it. If it's WRONG remove information it, if it's just a few days early, find yourself something better to do, and in a few days it will straighten itself out by being broadcast. Do you have ANY proof that youtubed full episodes of TF Animated EVER being wrong or changed at the last minute from the broadcast version? Ever? Mathewignash (talk) 10:59, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Personally? No, because I haven't sat down and compared them. That doesn't change the fact that it is quite possible, and that using stolen episodes for sources is both unethical, and makes it impossible for most editors to verify the info.

You know what? I'll just go by the wikipedia policies - if they add unsourced material, I'll remove it.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 12:52, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Don't hide behind policy technicalities, by removing accurate data added by users in good faith you are discouraging helpful good people from contributing to Wikipedia. You are doing no one favors by removing George Takaei from the cast list for couple days while waiting to see a show "officially". I havn't watched an episode LIVE since it premiered, I always watch it on youtube or the Cartoon Network site. Your energies are better spent on fixing REAL problems then enforcing nonsense volunteers. Mathewignash (talk) 13:37, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

This is mostly for the "List of Robots" page, where this stuff is going down the most, but still here as well:

Case 1: Voice Actor's. Definitely need to be confirmed. No point in adding until the credits or imdb confirms the actor. These are about 30% of the additions.

Case 2: Quick, inaccurate blurbs about new characters (or for this page, rewriting the plot section for the new episode). Most spell the names wrong. This also includes the "concept art"-based reveals, which Wyatt himself said were often inaccurate, and which had no point or use to the article but to . And they were, as seen with Sideswipe. 50%.

Case 3: Full-blown episode summaries that don't actually provide relevant information about the character, and are there because the person wants to be first to add it. Must be removed anyway, due to undue bias policies. 10%.

Case 4: Actual, accurate info. Badly formatted and spelt, of course. 10%

I'm precisely trying to enforce this policy, not just for, again, ethical reasons (to not abett theft, and to discourage ridiculously early spoilers), but to 1) try and get this and the list article to a well-sourced "good article" status, and 2) Discourage the 90% of editors who are messing up the pages, and again, can only be detected by editors willing to spoil themselves early. I shouldn't have to constantly look through the fansites to find leaked episodes in order to confirm whether these edits should be kept. 3) The entire point of WP:V is that other editors can verify the info added. If an episode is only available as stolen, that is impossible. 4) Editors should be adding sources anyway.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 14:27, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Anime Influenced Animation.

I'm thinking of adding this show to that category because:

1. It's animated in Japan and 2. The characters look, and act like Anime characters.

Is it alright with you guys if I do so? Philipnova798 (talk) 20:37, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

1: A lot of stuff is animated in Japan, doesn't mean it's anime.

2: It looks and acts like "traditional american cartoon character" from what I can see. The art designer has specifically said before that the main influences are old cartoons.

3: It is influenced in small part by some of the earlier Transformers anime, but not in the same meaning that you're going for.

4: Why not ask Wyatt on his twitter how much it's influenced by anime? That would be a good, sourcable answer.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 21:37, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Possible to redo the Cast list to incorporate the Japanese cast?

As with the other Transformers entries, we have included information on the Japanese version, even if production of origin was not directly from Japan. However, with the way the cast section is, I cannot fully incorporate information from the Japanese voice cast, simply due to the fact I feel that this section is a bit of a mess. If anything, some of the extra tidbit of information could be moved over to the Production section. I was wondering if anyone would be willing to redo the cast section, maybe by using a table. It would clean up the clutter of that section. Mendinso (talk) 23:19, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Help! DX

Why Isn't there ANY home video of Season 3??? Budets? Angry Fan-Base? What Happened??? 24.8.211.167 (talk) 06:37, 28 July 2010 (UTC)