I don't understand. --ItsWalky 19:54, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Really? It seems to me like this has happened all the time -- fiction-wise, the need to give the bad guys an easily explained way out leads to the good guys stopping the search and going home, assuming, sometimes even saying, that the threat is "gone forever" (usually contradicted in words, but not in actions or leadership, by Fearless Leader). The bad guys do this a lot, too.
It was a mainstay of the G1 cartoon, where you had all these self-contained plots, but couldn't go killing off hte bad guys to end every one, but it's showed up as recently as the movie, what with dumping the Cons at sea rather than something more technical but more permanent, like incinerating them in a basic-oxygen steelmaking furnace...--Autobus Prime 21:53, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
The problem I have with this article, personally, is that it sounds like it's trying to explain a common fandom joke/phrase, but as far as I know there is no such joke about it. I agree that it describes a well-used trope, but... with the capitalized title and tone and everything, it sounds like it's trying to be True fan or Trukk not munky, but... it isn't. I'm sure it could be salvaged with a thorough rewrite, although I don't know offhand what direction I would take it. For now I'm putting a cleanup tag on it. --Steve-o 22:37, 12 November 2007 (UTC)


"Will gone forever soon be... gone forever!?"

I say no. With a clean up, this page could be as valid as the equally 'not canonical' RBFATE; the only difference is this one's not an obscure fan term. They're both noticeable, applicable tropes. And the fact that the page needs cleanup but hasn't gotten it isn't itself a reason to delete. --Fleb 02:30, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

I've never heard "Gone Forever" used in the fandom in any way shape or form. This seems like just one fan's attempt at creating a meme. This article isn't informative in any way and is just repeating things brought up in other articles, but slapping on Gone Forever at every opportunity. As such, I fail to see its use and agree with those who say it should be deleted. --Detour 02:49, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
I'd like to see the section on toys whose modls are beleived to be lost expanded. That, IMO, would justify the article's continued existence by itself. -Derik 02:53, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
That info would be better placed on the mold page. -- Repowers 04:21, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
Or, hell, at an article called "List of molds believed to be lost", not under a shitty and unhelpful name like "Gone Forever". (While we're on topic, it'd be nice if this nonsense was deleted.) —Interrobang 04:31, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
For what it's worth, I'd say this would be right at home at the "TV Tropes Wiki," but without concrete TF universe connections, it just doesn't jive with what's goig on here. (incidentally, the TV Tropes Wiki is pretty rad, although it's heavily heavily peopled with squeeing fangirls, which is an issue.) -hx 11:58, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.