FANDOM


Is alignment in-continuity ENOUGH to merit mention? (The e-hobby Magnus stuff seems to tell 'some version' of alignment's events, I'd consider it AS in-continuity as the Last Days of Optimus Prime, whichw as later mentioned.) -Derik 05:05, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

I would say neither should be in there. Not endorsed by Hasbro and/or Takara? Not canon. - RolonBolon

I think they can be mentioned as long as they are stated as being pseudo-canonical. I certainly think that both of those stories deserve their own articles, for example. "Fanfic" written by Simon Furman is a little different than regular run of the mill fanfic. --Steve-o 20:38, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Alignment was mentioned in detail in the Ultimate Guide, so one could say it's retroactively canon. Not that I welcome it all that warmly, but... --ItsWalky 20:51, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Galvatron

In answer to Sipher's question he posed as a comment to his edit, no, I don't think Galvatron should be here. Whether they're the same character or not, Galvatron shows up plenty enough as his own character from the future (and tends to fight/team up/interact with Megatron) to warrant his own entry. Otherwise, a combined Megatron/Galvatron entry is just going to be way too long and confusing as hell. (And, yeah, I am factoring in that Galvatron II will prolly already get his own entry.) --ItsWalky 01:47, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Probably a good idea. While some characters (Smokescreen/Hoise, Bumblebee/Goldbug) get upgraded/renamed and basicalyl continue in a straight line, Galvatron time-jumps and even fights himself. In MANY continuities, Megatron doesnt' even BECOME Galvatron. -Derik 02:26, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.