Talk: Transformers: Prime Directive

Wasn't this also the name of the first Dreamwave G1 mini-series?--UndeadScottsman 03:49, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Without the plural, it is. --ItsWalky 04:34, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Wans't it also an early name of the movie script? -Derik 06:50, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Indeed. --ItsWalky 06:50, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

should this be added to trivia?-Chipmonk3288

Hub

Reference Hub for page restructuring

• [1] - new Umbrella Page (moving to "Movie Prequel (2007)")

• [2] - Old Prequel Special page (IDW Omnibus)
  • [3] - Special #1
  • [4] - Special #2
  • The links relating to these comics are an abject mess. They've been moved so many times (and of course no one bothers to change the links,) that they're horribly cross-connected. Both have redirects pointing to them claiming they're the only target prequel-- as well as links in in articles doing the same. Their comic nav doesn't link to one another. No one bothered to set links putting these things in sequence with the other series-- and the individual comic pages make it sound like they take place after the mini-- despite the mini's page claiming they take place BEFORE it.
  • A deep loathing for my fellow editors has filled me.

• [5] - Old Mini Page
  • [6] - Mini #1
  • [7] - Mini #2
  • [8] - Mini #3
  • [9] - Mini #4

You may be wondering- "Wouldn't it be easier to create a new umbrella page than convert this one, move it, and redirect the links?"

The answer is no.

Right now I'm wondering why you're not signing your posts.--Nevermore 15:44, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

1) I support keeping all 6 issues on the umbrella page. As Derik says, it's clear, concise, and informative.
2) I don't think we can rationalize using "Prime Directive" as the title for the 4 miniseries issues. As Chip and Interrobang have both pointed out, it's not in the issues or the trade. That's pretty much that.
3) "Movie Prequel Issue 1" is probably the best title format for the 4 miniseries issues. (IDW) doesn't clarify anything. (2007) is, at this point, unnecessary (it may become necessary at some point... but we're not in the crystal ball business. We can blow up that bridge after we've spilt milk under it.) The other two "Movie Prequel" books have their own titles now, so there's no overlap there; we just put a disambig at the top of all 6 issues directing the reader back to the umbrella page.
4) "Movie Prequel Special" (the trade collecting the two Target books) can remain as-is. The two Target book pages, and the umbrella page, need to link to it. No need for a parenthetical, jsut the same disambig note as the 6 issues.
5) The nav box chain was working fine when I ran through these things 2 months ago, but it's probably broken now. Somebody's gotta fix it once the dust settles. -- Repowers 16:20, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm gonna take a sledgehammer and start whacking things into rough shape in ~1 hour.

I also think that the Movie prequel titles probably can move to Movie Prequel instead of Prime Directive... but I want to leave it at PD until there's a firmer idea what kind of stupid titling we might get for stuff related to the 2009 movie.

Does anyone know Chris Ryall? Is he on IDW's boards? The movie's out in like 9 months, production on comic books is like 3, licensing and meetings for external brands imposes a longer lead-time... he might have an idea already what (if any) other movie-related shit IDW will be producing. Can we just... ask him if there'll be title overlap again? Or make him promise to give us distinct subtitles, at least int he indica? (I can understand why Target wanted their stuff to be called 'the' movie prequel, it makes it sound more important.) -Derik 17:00, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Transformers: Destiny. —Interrobang 18:23, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Very nice. And is he also writing tie-in specials for Abercombie & Fitch like he did for Target in 2007? I want to know if there is any chance of ANYTHING on the shelves being called 'movie prequel.' -Derik 18:30, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Can you hold your breath until June? 'Cause that's when we'll know for sure! Seriously, I know you're irritated at the mess these pages have become, but as I said, we can deal with any required name changes when the time comes, which will be several months down the road at least. Presumably by then we won't all be so irritated by this anymore. -- Repowers 18:47, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Fine then, can we at least put off any name change until the pages are sorted out and the links are all pointing ONE PLACE instead a web of places? The links are the real killer here- they're an awful mess, and keeping moving things-- sometime under names that USED to belong to other things (3 things called "official Movie Prequel" will do that.)

Moving things while they're in disarray merely puts them in FURTHER disarray. Can we wait until it's tidied up and working and orderly before having this argument again? If not until June- then the end of September? -Derik 19:55, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Nitpick: The Target comics were never called "Official Movie Prequel". That phrase only shows up on the covers for the miniseries. —Interrobang 20:33, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, if you're willing to do the legwork, you can do it however and whenever you like, far as I'm concerned. Mess or not, it seems to me that moving the pages to their (semi)final name would be best done first, but YMMV. -- Repowers 20:39, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

I've got all the various movie prequel links pointing at the current article locations, so nothing is currently pointing to a redirect. All that needs to be changed now is changing all the "Prime Directive" link text to "Transformers: Official Movie Prequel" or "Official Movie Prequel", and Derik's bot can take care of the rest after we get everything moved. --FortMax 21:31, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

"Prime Directives" or "Prime Directive"?

Compare: "Prime Directive" (singular) vs. "Prime Directives" (plural). The latter results in a lot of Wiki pages. The former gives us solicitations for the IDW Prequel mini. So unless someone objects a change, I'd propose renaming the article about the mini, as well as the articles about the individual issues, from "Prime Directives" into "Prime Directive (IDW Prequel)". Which would then require renaming everything related to the first Dreamwave G1 mini to "Prime Directive (Dreamwave Generation One)". And renaming all the myriard links in other articles. Opinions and suggestions for alternative titles are welcome.--Nevermore 20:33, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

"Prime Directive"?

Why are we calling the series "Prime Directive" when it's nowhere to be found in the issues? The cover calls it Transformers: Official Movie Prequel, while the inside calls it Transformers: Movie Prequel. —Interrobang 19:46, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

And why did you remove the trivia bit that explains where the title originates from, regardless of how the article is named?--Nevermore 10:07, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

You... might want to read the first sentence of the article. —Interrobang 19:14, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Also, thanks to you, we currently have:

• An article named Movie Prequel, which is the main page for the four-issue mini-series
• Transformers Movie Prequel, which currently redirects to Interlude.

If anything, either "Movie Prequel" or "Transformers Movie Prequel" should be a disambiguation page, the other one should be a redirect, and the miniseries should have a (miniseries) suffix or somesuch.--Nevermore 10:22, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

"Transformers Movie Prequel" should really be a disambiguation page, since 3 separate stories were published with that exact name. All of those books were retroactively assigned distinct and unique titles, which for practicality's sake should be the page names. Which... I thought they were, until a day or two ago. -- Repowers 13:28, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm also sure I created a disambiguation page at either "Movie Prequel" or "Transformers Movie Prequel" a few weeks ago.--Nevermore 18:34, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, for the love of Cheese, just move it back. --ItsWalky 19:02, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

The boss has spoken, and it shall be done.--Nevermore 19:05, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Does nobody get the concept that "Prime Directive" IS NOWHERE IN THE FINISHED PRODUCT? It's "Movie Prequel", and was only called "Prime Directive" in some fucking solicitations. Moving back, as there wasn't an ounce of actual reasoning in it. —Interrobang 19:14, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

"Prime Directive" was also nowhere in the finished product of the first Dreamwave mini. It was only slapped onto the back cover of the trade as an afterthought. Thus, we should also move that to "Generation One (Dreamewave) volume 1".

And thinking about it, "Interlude" and "Planetfall" were also after-the-fact names put into the Movie Prequel Special reprint of those stories. The original releases were simply called "Transformers Movie Prequel".--Nevermore 19:21, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

And those examples have what relevance to something that was only acquired from solicitations and not from official product? (Ignoring this, the issues do have titles; it's "Transformers: Movie Prequel Issue Number (blank)", as spelled out on the first page of each issue.) —Interrobang 19:30, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

That still doesn't explain why "Movie Prequel" should be the new location of the mini-series overview article rather than a disambiguation page, and why "Transformers Movie Prequel" should redirect to "Interlude" instead.

And, for that matter, there is no product officially referred to as Prime Directive issue 1 anywhere on the cover or in the masthead either.--Nevermore 19:39, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Then make it a disambiguation page. And "Transformers Movie Prequel" redirects to "Interlude" because you made it as such. It should point to the disambiguation page when all this is said and done. I was planning on doing that eventually but got sidetracked and forgot.

And I still don't see the relevance of your examples. We have no better name for the first issue of Prime Directive (I don't know; I don't have those issues), therefore, we should keep "Transformers: Movie Prequel Issue Number One" (as spelled out on the first page, making it the closest thing to a title it has) at a title gleaned from solicitations and nowhere on an official, finished product? —Interrobang 20:09, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

The solicitations are official. They're the lists of upcoming stuff that IDW sends to retailers every month. They are also published on IDW's website. Therefore, they are just as official as anything Hasbro puts up on their website. --FortMax 20:40, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, and Injector still isn't Aquasting. What takes priority is the actual, finished product (and, no, this doesn't exclude renames by later product), which contains no trace of "Prime Directive", as I've said multiple times. —Interrobang 20:55, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Solicitations are official- but they're also subject to change. I'm not saying that we shouldn't use the solicitation title in the absence of a more official one- but I think it's worth taking a nice long look at the thing and really weighing- "Do we want to file these stories under a name none of the comics or trades had, or will have, in any incarnation?" -Derik 21:29, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Just so we're totally clear here, and correct me if this is wrong: the title Prime Directive wasn't actually added to the final trade paperback? -- Repowers 02:39, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Since nobody used that as an argument and it's not mentioned in the article at all, I'm going to go with "no". —Interrobang 18:59, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, let's not assume; let's get it from someone who knows. It's a fair bet that a lot of us don't actually have the trades, since -- fanatics that we all are -- we got the individual issues instead.

Also, if it's verified... since Interlude and Planetfall do have new titles, maybe it'd make sense to have this page at Movie Prequel (IDW) or (Mini-series), and have plain old unparenthetical Movie Prequel be the disambig? -- Repowers 19:06, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

I've already made Movie Prequel a disambig page. If moved, this page should be "(miniseries)", since the Target issues were made by IDW, too. —Interrobang 19:25, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

I get all the TPBs. The thing is consistently called "Transformers: Movie Prequel" throughout. "Prime Directive" appears nowhere. Chip 02:28, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

No. Not "Prime Directive".

Look, we need to resolve this one way or the other. I appreciate that the thing was solicited as "Prime Directive", but this appears nowhere in the finished comics or TPB. I think that tells us all we need to know about the final intent. Is there still any disagreement with moving everything permanently to "Transformers: Movie Prequel"? Chip 02:45, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Okay, so WTF?

Currently issues 1 and 2 are located under Prime Directive (IDW) issue 1 and Prime Directive (IDW) issue 2, respectively, whereas issues 3 and 4 are located under Movie Prequel Issue Number Three and Movie Prequel Issue Number Four, respectively. I doubt this is the way it's supposed to be.--Nevermore 23:09, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

And now, instead of fixing the article naming inconsistency, the redirects from the mini's main page have been terminated. Awesome.--Nevermore 21:06, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

This is ridiculous. If nobody cares enough to give a compelling reason for these articles to remain under this "Prime Directive" label within 24 hours from now, I'm moving the whole kit and kaboodle to Movie Prequel. I recommend that any further movement after that point, without a conclusive discussion, be grounds for auto-banning. Chip 21:43, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

I want it to remain at Prime Directive for purely practical reasons; "movie prequel" isn't very informative since we're getting a second "movie prequel" set in the same continuity. Not to mention the Target prequels set in the same continuity. (If anything, "Movie Prequel" should be an umbrella covering this mini and the target issues together.)

In order to avoid a mind-bogglingly generic (and mid-level confusing) title, I think we should instead go with the solicitation title. -Derik 21:53, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure why "Move Prequel (miniseries)" (Movie Prequel is a disambiguation page) is that difficult to comprehend, nor how it would confuse readers. It may be generic, but it's the fucking name in everything other than some fucking solicitations. —Interrobang 22:01, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Nor is "Prime Directive" any less confusing, when we already have something called Prime Directive. —Interrobang 22:16, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Derik, what's the rationale for including the Target comics? —Interrobang 22:28, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

The mini and the specials were produced at the same time, both feature the same writer and the same artist (Don worked on both!) are both set in the same continuity, and both are required reading to understand the backstory of Reign of Starscream. (Even though there are minor continuity conflicts, oy.)

We could argue about the most lexically correct way to portion out the naming of two 1-shots and a mini that all had the same official name- except one started out with another one it lost and the others got new one after the fact and blah blah blah...

They are too interlocked, and the naming issues too confusing, to treat them like as separate "things" without getting our reader completely lost. "Wait, so I'm reading the prequel, but there's prequels to the prequel, which are also the prequel? But they actually came out after, and take place in the middle of..." Look at the page now. Look how clear, and easy, and not-confusing it is when you just put them side by side. This is how it is going to be.

I am not interested in objections-- I stayed out of it while you guys have moved, renamed, re-directed an generally snarling these articles for for like six weeks-- and managed to get exactly nowhere. Unless someone has an outright imperative reason why I should not move this article to "Movie Prequel (2007)," I am cutting this knot, then going back to try and figure out what the hell to do about the links.

(There are hundreds of links to these articles! Don't just keep moving them! Have a conversation, decide on a course of action, and move them once! Jesus.)

And if the parties involved here both object to that, I'm going to request that everyone keep their hands off the articles (myself included) and kick it up the ladder and force the admins to choose a direction. There is no "best choice," here, there isn't even a good choice! The goal then is to pick a choice and GO with it, because dickering over degrees of awfulness is demonstrably massively unproductive for all concerned, and it's starting to spill over onto other users. -Derik 22:36, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Wait, why is "(2007)" necessary? —Interrobang 22:50, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Because there's going to be a prequel to the 2009 movie, and while it may have a subtitle, adding the year to this one's article will make things clearer.

If you really despise the year once the dust settles you may petition for the article to be moved-- after June 15, 2009. (at which point we should have a firm idea of what the prequel(s) to the 2009 movie will be, and will know if any disambiguation nightmares like the Target prequels will exist for for that film.) -Derik 22:56, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

But... that's not how we do things. We add parentheses when we have to, not in expectation of name reuse. If we did that, we would still have every character article with a parentheses in their titles. As for it not being "clear", that's what disambiguation templates are for. —Interrobang 23:05, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

That is a very good argument. You should bring that up in June.

But right now I'm organizing stuff, and I have decided to organize it so that if in addition to Transformers: Official Movie Prequel: Fall from Grace there is also a store exclusive called the "Official Movie Prequel" they will not conflict. (Which is stupid and ridiculous-- they'd never put out 3 things in 1 year,f rom 1 company, with identical titles... but they did it in 2007.) I am tired of playing catch-up on stupidly identical titles for the sake of anal-retentive lexical accuracy. -Derik 23:13, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Fort Max, please explain what you meant by "restoring so it can be properly moved to Prime Directive (IDW) issue 3)". So you're leaving the current Prime directive issues 3 and 4 links on the Prime directive page intentionally broken so the Movie Prequel issues 3 and 3 pages can be moved to Prime Directive 3 and 4 once the old Prime Directive pages have been deleted? Unless I have completely misunderstood your grand scheme, isn't that a waste of time given the end result will be exactly the same? ie, Prime Directive 3 & 4 being the article pages, but Movie Prequel 3 & 4 (and thus whatever they are storylinked as around the wiki) as redirects?

Isn't it also needlessly unhelpful for this very page to have two links to two articles which are scheduled to be deleted (and haven't been deleted since you requested the delete on the 6th)? --FFN 15:41, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

When an article is moved, it needs to be done with the "move" function. This not only moves the article and puts a redirect at the old location, but it also moves the edit history as well. Simply copy-pasting the article content leaves the history at the old location, which makes it much more difficult to looking at earlier versions and complicates reverts. --FortMax 19:31, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Mini only or including Target issues too?

Right now the article starts with a disclaimer that it is about the four-issue mini only and that the Target issues are located under "Movie Prequel Special", then explains what exactly the four-issue mini was and what names it had... and then contains links to the two Target issues AND the four regular issues. This is kinda confusing.--Nevermore 21:33, 12 September 2008 (UTC)