User talk:FFN

Captions
Not to try and start a fight or anything, but who made you the arbiter of what makes a "good" caption or not? If you don't have a better caption to put there, then do you really need to edit it out? If you have something better, go ahead and edit it in, but there's was it really necassary to remove all of my changes?

I mean, I though the "Amazing what 23 years will do to ones physique" one was pretty clever, myself.--UndeadScottsman 09:49, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Because I say so and I am a jerk! *puts on a crown and purple cloak of royalty*. Seriously, that one you quoted was okay, I accidently pruned that one, but I wasn't hot on some of the others. In my opinion, captions should be thought about, and we shouldn't just caption a pic for the sake of having a caption or doing a joke. --FFN 10:27, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Movie toy information
We should not put information about leaked/stolen/whatever test shots on the wiki. It's been an unspoken rule since, well, forever, but I guess we need to put it in writing somewhere. It's just not cool. --ItsWalky 19:08, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, we have that "Coming Soon" tag made SPECIFICALLY for this (well, and Fan Club stuff). --M Sipher 19:35, 14 April 2007 (UTC)


 * What I find amusing is that I merely modified (slightly) the Energon Arcee toy description. Eh. *Shrugs shoulders* Whatever. --FFN 20:03, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * You also wrote the entire toy write-up for Blackout's Voyager toy and also recently wrote a description of Optimus Prime's 3" titanium figurine. You seem to be writing the bulk of the movie toy writeups.  --ItsWalky 21:34, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Yep, I wrote/expanded half or more of the toy articles on this wiki. --FFN 04:51, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * That's cool, and more than appreciated, but in the future, let's wait until we have more than test shots to do so. --ItsWalky 04:53, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Aren't you absolutely amazed at how I was able to deduce the transformation sequence and gimmick of toys I've never seen in person? My engineering schooling did pay off! :-O --FFN 04:56, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

You're kind of missing the point. It's the OFFICIALNESS of the information and the slippery slope of putting in stuff that's not officially announced. We don't want this wiki to become yet another goddamn Internet Rumor Dumping Ground. See: Help:Coming_soon --M Sipher 05:54, 15 April 2007 (UTC)


 * No, I'm not missing the point. I'm just dancing around it like the salsa. Ole! --FFN 06:06, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

How many times do we have to remind you, FFN? No stolen information. --ItsWalky 03:52, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, that was TX55. Whoops, I misread the history. --M Sipher 03:58, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Bad Sipher! Bad ratting out the wrong guy to me!  Sorry, FFN.  --ItsWalky 03:59, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Profile pics
I don't think we're adhering to "fair use" if every single page on the wiki uses art scanned from the DW MTMTE books. Try to reel it in some! --ItsWalky 03:13, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Nah, I won't be doing that. --FFN 03:15, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * But you are doing it! It's why I brought it up.  --ItsWalky 03:22, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * You might wanna clarify exactly what it is you won't be doing. --M Sipher 03:22, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * It was a joke, as in "Nah, I won't be doing what you just asked me to do." --FFN 03:43, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Just a thought - what is the limit on the usage of pictures ultimately owned by Hasbro? Dreamwave as a company no longer exists. --FFN 07:34, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, IDW plans to publish the MTMTE books, so I think we have to also take that into consideration. --ItsWalky 07:47, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh well, at least I gave pics to articles that didn't originally have pics/wrong models by Dery/crappy G1 box art. I'll stop for... awhile *mysterious* --FFN 07:52, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I like G1 boxart. Especially Omega Supreme's. -LV 16:15, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Underscores
You don't need to put underscores in links. The format is just something, not something. --Monzo 17:39, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Alright thanks, though I might forget and put them anyway, occasionally. --FFN 17:41, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Miranda II
And there I thought someone would complain about bashing, or something. :) - Chris McFeely 20:00, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure Energon is fair game. You know, like NAMbLA.  --ItsWalky 20:16, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, when you ruin a perfectly good, interesting character by resurrecting him as a gorilla-like dump truck who serves only as slapstick comic relief (and not even good comic relief), you deserve everything you get, stupid Takara Marketing and WE'VE! *shakes fist of fanboy fury* --FFN 20:20, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Man. Demolishor's article needs, like, made not crap. - Chris McFeely 20:24, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Feel free to do so. I get too fanboyish for this wiki whenever I write about stuff I like (like Armada Starscream). --FFN 20:32, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Formatting
It's not all that messy-looking if the main image juts into fiction section some of the time. I find it's a case-by-case scenario. Miranda II looked fine with the jut, but not so much to make it worth editing it back the other way. It's not a hard and fast rule, is what I guess I'm saying. --ItsWalky 16:25, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The problem is by having the main picture jut into the main text body, you have the text bunched up to one side, and it pushes the edit link into the middle of the screen. Frankly that looks chaotic.
 * Not really. Not on that article, no.  It just looked like text wrapped around an image.  To me, it looked much cleaner the other way.  See how subjective this is? --ItsWalky 16:44, 13 December 2006 (UTC)


 * The way I see it, we should use it when the article has relatively few sub-sections (which leads to a smaller Contents menu), or when the main picture is relatively long (like a profile picture of a character). Or when using it doesn't create a huge gap between the introductory text/main pic, the contents menu and the main body of text in the article. --FFN 16:31, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Can't you just... make the image smaller if this is such a problem? I find blank white space to be incredibly hideous, moreso than a misplaced edit link. Interrobang 17:00, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Depends on the picture itself. Some images deserve to be big, because they look great or because the focus would be hard to see. Misplaced links and pics into text reminds me of late 90s fanpages. --FFN 23:35, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

All those toypics you've uploaded
Toypics don't get a hastak tag unless they are offical images (say stock photos). Photos of objects (except scans or photos containing only printed material) are copyright of whoever took the picture. Hasbro holds just as much right to the copyright for a unoffical toypic as say, Sony owns the rights for a picture of my computer. --FortMax 03:06, 14 January 2007 (UTC)


 * The problem is some of those toy pics are scans out of some official publication, or some official picture that the fansite edited together. So I give copyright to Hasbro, but credit to the site, especially if I cannot find the original official pictures. Sometimes I forget to use fairuse on specifically fan-shot photographs. If it bothers you that much, feel free fix all the picture pages with fairuse.--FFN 11:06, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

anonymous and minor edits
Just do you know, anonymous editors don't have a minor edit option. Dunno why, though.
 * Odd - maybe its to spur us into suggesting them to register? :P --FFN 06:55, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Safeword debate
Hi there, PacifistPrime here. I appreciate that you think the link to the definition of "safeword" is a little much (although, frankly, I've seen some pretty risque stuff on this wiki anyway), and although I disagree I'm happy for the link to be removed. However, I think it is definitely an overreaction to change the caption; after all I added that specific image solely for the purpose of that joke. Without the link young kids won't get it and won't be "harmed", and those who do get it are alread in the know. However, rather than just unilaterally reverting it (sans link), I thought I'd give you the opportunity to discuss the matter further if you wish. If I don't hear from you back on my talk page in a few days, then I'll change it back. Cheers, PacifistPrime
 * Yeah, you're probably right about that; if it goes over their heads, let it. I'll change it back without the link. Cheers, PacifistPrime.
 * FFN, you mentioned that you changed the caption back to the clean joke because nobody refuted your point... The thing is, I haven't been able to find where you made your argument for its change in the first place. Not on Starscream's talk page, and not here... How can we refute your point if no one knows where it is? That being said, I personally agree with Pacifist Prime.  It's no more offensive or risque than some of the other stuff on here (i.e. Transformers Collectors' Club or anything relating to Kiss Players), and without the link it's no longer harmful in the slightest.  Besides, the new caption is pretty lame and practically screams, "I couldn't think of anything better than this." - Dark T Zeratul 06:55, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I was referring to my discussion with Walky over MP Starscream's incorrect F-15E colours, and I sorta reverted Walky's edit back to the original with modifications (with hooperx's Titanium 3" caption) to my original MP Starscream paragraph, with added notes about Starscream's other glaring inaccuracies. That's what I meant by 'nobody refuted my point'.
 * At no point did I change the safeword caption, given that Pacifist Prime and I already resolved that, like, weeks ago, and I advised that to make the joke work, he didn't need to link the meaning for people, because A. The link to the meaning is abit inappropriate given our wiki's topic, and B. Its hitting people over the head with the joke. If the joke flies over people's heads, let it.
 * If you had checked the article history, or the Recent changes page, you'll see an anonymous user made the change to the caption. In any case, it wasn't me. --FFN 09:57, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, see, I saw your comment in the history that said something about reverting to a previous caption because no one refuted your point, and assumed this was what you were referring to. My apologies. - Dark T Zeratul 20:18, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
 * No worries. --FFN 22:52, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

MP Megs importation to Australia.
Well, what can I say? I got mine (two of them, in fact: one for my buddy) from HobbyLinkJapan (scum) with no troubles. Customs didn't even open it. Maybe I was just lucky, but I suspect that those toyshops only got that response from the fuzz because they asked in the first place. In fact, they may very well have tipped them off and made it harder for everyone else to import them now. Who knows? Cheers, PacifistPrime.
 * Um, hi. This is actually somewhat old news, as I haven't checked in for a week or so, but I respectfully suggest that you're overracting just a whisker. I was unaware that there had been further developments for other Australian fans importing the MP-05; as I've stated elsewhere I don't spend any time on discussion boards so I wouldn't know about any of that. If my original few lines on the subject (admittedly based solely on my personal experience of problem-free importation) is no longer representative of the majority, then I have no objection whatsoever to the text being revised.
 * However, I think that your edit is a bit of an overlong rave and (at the risk of sounding more Seppocentric than is my wont) I have to say that I don't think Australia's situation really requires as much text as that concerning the States'. Furthermore, I think that your rebuttal "Eat that, Australia" is particularly uneccessary. First of all it sounds like a rather mean-spirited bit of one-upmanship over a comment which, although I'll conceed was smug, was only meant in the kind of good humour that this site broadly embraces (such as its pervasive mockery of Japanese fiction). Your comment sounds quite barbed by comparison, in my opinion. But regardless of any issues of opinion it frankly doesn't make sense, because it is referring to a previous edit which no longer exists in the current text, so to any newcomer reading it the comment has no context. For this reason most of all I have taken it upon myself to remove that one line, but I have left your preceding paragraph untouched. However I urge you to reconsider its neccessity and respectfully suggest that you cut it down considerably.
 * All the best, PacifistPrime.


 * If you are so offended by the fact I made fun of Australia (and I suspect its abit of misplaced patriotism right after ANZAC day), then you shouldn't make fun of America, especially given our toy gun laws are even harsher. --FFN 02:38, 26 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Err... okay. I respectfully suggest that you're missing the point: I'm not offended, nor am I particularly patriotic. In fact, I'm a dual Austalian/American citizen, so your comments regarding my national identity are actually fairly irrelevant. And uncalled for. Don't you think personal remarks on this site are a bit untoward?
 * I just think that your edit gives the impression of being a bit personal, as though you were miffed about my original text, rather than containing material of particular relevance to other readers/users, especially your sardonic rebuttal. Again, my original crack was intended in good humour, so it seems that it is you who are the one getting offended. Perhaps this is not the case, and if so I apologise.
 * But regardless of that I still maintain that the content makes little sense. Please re-read my previous post for my reasons for this.
 * Ta, PacifistPrime.
 * Sorry mate. --FFN 05:05, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
 * It's okay, I just don't understand what it is about my edits that seem to routinely rub you up the wrong way. I'm just trying to get into the spirit of the site and its refreshingly relaxed attitude compared to other uptight wikis like Wookieepedia. You seem to know a fair bit about Australia, and I'm certainly not out to offend anyone, but you seem to take exception to a fair bit of what I have to say. I don't really understand. PacifistPrime.
 * Dr. Fang says its because I'm high-strung. And I'm kind of an asshole. Sorry about that, chap. --FFN 05:19, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay then, I guess. So, will you please consider trimming the Australian stuff on the MP-05? I just honestly doubt other people need to know so much about gun laws. Cheers, PacifistPrime.

Admin

 * Excuse me I'm looking for a admin here, do you know where I can find one?Troyb(CIS ShadowFeed) contribs[[Image:Troyb2.jpg|20px]] 16:09, 1 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi, unfortunately, I believe they're all at BotCon right now. Specifically they probably just left the Hasbro product panel. --FFN 16:12, 1 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Grr because I'm here from the new Transfanon wiki, were knida your sister wiki or whatever and I'm a buericrate there so I need someone to tell others about it.Troyb(CIS ShadowFeed) contribs[[Image:Troyb2.jpg|20px]] 18:31, 1 July 2007 (UTC)


 * From the community portal - The admins for this Wiki are User:ItsWalky and User:Suki Brits. Just leave them a message and they'll get back sooner or later. --FFN 18:57, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Screencaps
Where'd you download the movie? You seem to have uploaded some pretty high quality images of the movie that haven't appeared in any of the trailers


 * They're all from the trailers and tv spots (highres, low res ect). For instance, the pic of Figueroa reacting to Sgt. Donnelly is from 'Vibration', released around May 22nd. Prime transforming in Mission City and the pics of Bumblebee standing around are from 'Freakout' (June 15). Prime jumping on/towards Megatron, Ironhide transforming and shooting his cannons in a somersault are from the Superherohype exclusive trailer that was also played during an NBA playoff or something on June 24. --FFN 02:47, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Animated toy pictures
Well, the official pictures of the toy wont come out for a LOOOOONG time, so untill then, I'm uploading some bad, blurry ones, because they STILL better than nothing. Tried to give a long description of Lockdown, but somebody just deleted it easly. Also, almost all pictures at the animated ones are blurry and in weird angles, so not mines are the first. And I made them with Paint, not Powerpoint.


 * That still doesn't mean we just dump any pics onto this wiki. The series and the toyline won't be out for a long time, so no real reason to have a bunch of pictures now, given there is relatively little information about the series itself.


 * Powerpoint as in, Hasbro's powerpoint presentation at SDCC. --FFN 19:26, 8 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually, we know pretty mutch about the series and the toys, but you guys don't let any info of it to be putten on, because they're "leaked". So that's it. --Hepathos 21:36, 8 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Any information that isn't official released about a project that is coming soon does not belong here because this wiki (usually) follows what is official, not what is unconfirmed. If you want rumour-mongering, go to the wikipedia. --FFN 06:13, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Stubs
Why do you move the stub tags to the top of pages? --ItsWalky 01:42, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I feel that Articles that need some filling out should say 'HEY! This article really needs work!' in an obvious manner. Its one of the things other wikis do that I think we should emulate, if only to get people (either registered or unregistered) to finish off these articles. --FFN 09:01, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
 * If what needed filling out was easy and simple to do, maybe, but filling some stubs would take weeks of solid work, so having a giant skyscraper of tags at the top of several articles seems excessively frustrating. --ItsWalky 15:12, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I forgot most of you guys run at lower resolution (judging by screencaps), so I misjudged how bad the messageboxes would be. Sorry man. --FFN 15:16, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Vector Sigma
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.
 * As you may or may not (probably not, I'm guessing) have read, we do use serious captions on occasion, when there's a need to convey information that isn't obvious from the text. Vector Sigma's article is one such instance.   Please go to this page and read carefully. -- Repowers 21:21, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Bonecrusher quote
Since Bonecrusher doesn't speak in the film, could you put an attribution for the quote you added to the top of his page? I'm sure I'm not the only one who will wonder where he said it. --Steve-o 17:42, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I'm writing up his Target comic #2 appearance now for that, but it would help if you can respond to the talk page question on the Transformers (2007) page regarding what we should refer to the comics as, so I can actually reference it in the quote, among other things. --FFN 18:08, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Bonecrusher has only 2 lines in 'Ghosts,' and this is neither. -Derik 19:03, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, like I said, its from the new Target-exclusive comic on their robovision site. --FFN 19:11, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Suggestions
Why don't I suggest on creating a page about Popular Cybertronian vehicle alternate modes? If the Earth and Beast gets a popular vehicle alternate modes page so does Cybertron.(Soldier 79 10:35, 20 October 2007 (UTC))
 * Because with Earth vehicles there are identifiable models and designs that are recognisable. With Cybertronian vehicles they are 'generic futuristic car/truck/plane/spaceship'. --FFN 10:38, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

More reasons why to create it. You are an awesome person, Megatron often turns into mostly a Cybertronian vehicle, Earth Vehicle modes page has a rule like 3 toy models and finally it is better that way. Plus Transformers Animated will have one heck of alot of Autobots and Decepticons that turn into Cybertronian vehicles.(Soldier 79 10:43, 20 October 2007 (UTC))

Screencap requests
Hey there, if you're in a screen-cappin' mood, there's a few shots we could really use for the cartoon's main page. Specifically: If you got the time and inclination, thanks! -- Repowers 22:04, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The Decepticons' undersea HQ
 * The space bridge receiver ring -- maybe while it's firing its rays into the clouds or while the rocks and stuff are floating up.
 * Season 1 opening credits -- maybe Prime & co while they're on that giant flying Autobot symbol, and/or the TF logo flying at the viewer.
 * I'd like to see a higher-quality cap of the standard view of Cybertron. That's a shot which deserves a high-res view, IMO.
 * I'm trying to think of a really iconic scene/moment from Season 3, but drawing a blank.


 * I'll see what I can do. I only picked up Madman's set on sunday, and I'm currently working through the G1 episodes chronologically, or characters who really needed cartoon image representation.


 * I'm not sure about the Season 1 opening credits - by the time we see Prime and co, they are either too indistinct to make out in a wide view, and the camera is already focusing entirely on Prime when they are clear enough for the viewer to see. I'll see what I can do, but I'll have to go through the episodes because the Madman sets use the broadcast masters, so some episodes are almost as clean and colourful as Rhino's, but others aren't so good. So this means trawling through episodes to find good, clean images of more generic shots like the intro or often-seen sequences such as the spacebridge. --FFN 22:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Fair enough. No hurry.  The "The Transformers" logo from the opening credits might be fine too, if the Autobot symbol thing isn't clear; it's got a pretty distinct look IIRC.
 * And, crap. For a second there you got my hopes up that there might be a flawless DVD release of G1... but it sounds like they have Rhino's screwy sound effects.  Ah well!  -- Repowers 20:56, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, it certainly has the best packaging and presentation of any available set now - the outer cardboard box even has a bio panel detailing the features and a fake tech spec meter rating the 'Story', 'Action, 'Features' and 'Appeal'. --FFN 21:09, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Image Editing
A while back, you brought up the grid-backgrounds on the CG Galaxy Force character images. Those are probably simple enough (since they're on a white BG already) that it won't take me a lot of time to do them, but in general I don't know what Photoshop trickier goes into quickly cleaning images... I usually just use the Eraser tool, which, with my tendency to be distracted, can wind up taking several hours. Is there some easier way to get a white background?

(On that topic, uh, y'think you can take a stab at these?) --Monzo 12:57, 6 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Depending on the quality of the image (lack of jpeg artefacts and the resolution), how busy the background image is and if the background somehow intersects with the image you want to preserve or not, one of the easiest ways I've found is to simply use the magic wand to cut out the background elements. In the end, I also the eraser, and yeah, it take a bloody long time. Does Walky know? I would assume he's more skilled with Photoshop than I.


 * Who do we need out of that image? Grandus, I assume? --FFN 13:10, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I uploaded the Grandus image on his page. Can you fill out the image's details? --FFN 14:37, 6 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks! Grandus was one of them, yeah, but also Sixliner... hm. Do you think we could use that painted Grandus In Base Mode art as his main pic, with the one you edited in the main body, or vice versa? We'd drop the three-Battlestar picture from his article, which would still be in the main Battlestar article. --Monzo 23:19, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Short image file names
I give them short titles, because they're far from perfect, and only temporaly. If they surely get's changed, I just short it so the next pic uploader don't get into trouble with a similar picture description. --Hepathos 11:53, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Sky Lynx and It's-A-Bird-Plane-Lynx Caption
That caption doesn't really work.

The caption I added was A) descriptive of the pic (Sky Lynx is "up in the sky"), B) descriptive of the character (he is a (dino)bird, a (space)plane, and a lynx), and C) adequately captures the ego and magnificence of the character by equating him with Superman. So, please elaborate on your objection.  JW 12:57, 19 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't think it's very funny. --FFN 16:36, 19 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, we'll have to disagree about that. Regardless, the first rule of this wiki (in 100px text on Talk:Main Page) is "The funny stays."  Removing a caption and replacing it with nothing is a violation of both the letter and spirit of that rule.  I'll restore the caption.  JW 16:41, 19 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Perhaps you should hold your horses. I don't know if you noticed, but I've been around for quite awhile so I am aware of the rules. Secondly, I blanked the caption to give you or somebody else the chance of coming up with a new caption. Thirdly, dude, I uploaded that screenshot. --FFN 17:09, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Regarding your second point, if someone replaces the caption with something that is generally agreed to be funnier, I won't have a problem with it. Replacing it with nothing is not appropriate.
 * Your third point is your personal guideline, but not wiki policy. I don't think it would be workable as a general policy.
 * As to your first point, I'll defer to admins, but otherwise I don't grant that seniority means one has the only valid sense of humor.
 * I think that the contributions I have made thus far to this wiki entitle me to put reasonably-clever captions on entirely-uncaptioned pics and to be secure that they won't be arbitrarily blanked without discussion. JW 17:24, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The caption rule on this wiki states that the uploader of an image gets to caption it, blah blah humour as a reward for doing the work blah. From what I can tell, unless the caption violates a rule itself (such as being vulgar) or there is some consensus or agreement reached with the uploader, the caption stays. I am generally not good at captions myself, so I normally leave them blank for others to fill in, but is it not unfair that I have to simply 'deal' with whatever caption is applied to an image I uploaded if I do not like said caption? Surely as the person who either tracked down an image or sat through episodes to find the exact frame to capture, I should have some sort of say in the matter. --FFN 18:11, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The caption rule on this wiki states that the uploader of an image gets to caption
 * Clearly, I must have missed this rule. Where is it stated?
 * [isn't it] unfair that I have to simply 'deal' with whatever caption is applied [...]?
 * Well, that gets into tricky territory. The idea that people "own" parts of a wiki, and have veto power over those parts, is fraught with peril.  I have no major problem with someone uploading an image, adding a caption at the time, and having a reasonable expectation that their caption be allowed to stand, due to "ownership rights".  In this case, however, my caption had already been there for weeks before you removed it.  There should be some sort of statute of limitations, I think.  JW 01:13, 20 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I believe this is the extent of our captioning policy. Though it mostly applies to random IP persons and newbies who either want to change things or remove all traces of humour.
 * I didn't mean I have some kind of legal right to do so, I might in the sense of fairness, if people get to caption their images in the first place when they upload it based upon what they think is funny, I should be able to change or ask for a 'better' caption if I don't in the first place. But anyway, I'll just grow up and learn to deal with it. Now let's all forget our troubles with a big bowl of strawberry ice cream! --FFN 01:24, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the link to the captioning policy. Alas, I think it damns us both equally.
 * On the other hand, let it never be said that I can't be distracted by ice cream. JW 03:28, 20 December 2007 (UTC)


 * How was it not funny? -- SFH 18:20, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I didn't think it fit well enough with the arrogance of the article, at a glance it seemed to be more specific to the heroic image of Sky Lynx blasting off than his personality. But not to worry, I won't question anybody's captions of images I upload. --FFN 18:29, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

BW Rampage Toypic
Um... Transformer: Generations doesn't cover Beast Wars at all, so that Rampage picture can't be from it. --Monzo 22:34, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Goddammit. Wait, actually it looks like a Hasbro stock photo. Even BETTER. --FFN 22:37, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Comic arrangement
Well, I mostly did it because I thought the character list looked ugly at the top of articles. If you don't care for it, feel free to move it back to the normal placement. —Interrobang 00:23, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm mostly concerned about the fact we seem to agree on a format or standard..... then somebody changes their mind, so the wiki ends up looking really disorganised. One only needs to look at the episode articles and you'll see what I mean. --FFN 00:26, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Perhaps style guide pages for both would would help consistency. I'll... go and make them, suppose. So discussion can be centralized. —Interrobang 00:40, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * We've already decided on the cartoon article style, and the help page lists More Than Meets the Eye, Part 1 as the example. However, the comic example is one of the older Marvel G1 styles, which is perfectly servicable, but just lacks the character box. --FFN 01:00, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Image formats
Actually, what should it read? My knowledge of image format differences is limited; the impression I'm getting from Wikipedia is that a high-quality JPEG might still display legible text and have a smaller filesize than a PNG. Is this mistaken? --Sntint 16:54, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Generally speaking, we try to keep image files under 150KB, which I believe is the recommended maximum size the software on this wiki suggests, mostly in the interests of of saving server space and to reduce download times. At the lower end, PNG files tend to be several times larger in filesize than comparable jpegs of reasonable quality, yet aren't considerably more visually impressive. So, say, a screen shot at 640x480 jpeg may average 70-80KB, a PNG might be 200KB or more.
 * However, we do allow the use of either high quality jpegs or PNGs when the file requires it, like the chart I mentioned. But for the sheer majority of images on the wiki, average quality jpegs suit us fine. I probably upload more pics than anybody else on the wiki, so I vaugley know what I'm talking about. ;) --FFN 17:01, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Erm. I don't mean to imply you don't know what you're talking about; if I thought you didn't I wouldn't be asking you. :)
 * But I don't see how that answers my question. Could a JPG's quality be increased such that a chart would be sufficiently legible, and also still have a smaller filesize than a PNG? --Sntint 17:06, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I was joking. I'm a mechanic. I know what I'm doing!
 * In answer to your question, it's possible. One problem with jpegs is they tend degrade in quality with each subsequent save you make to the single file. As I understand it, PNG files don't degrade to such an extent. Walky might know more about pngs than I do. --FFN 17:13, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Pegasus-class carrier
White Base, FFN. --Detour 12:06, 13 March 2008 (UTC)