Talk:Grand Galvatron

Untitled

I don't agree with putting the combiner on this page; they don't really share anything other than the name, and I GUESS the fact that they're both bigger bodies for Galvatron. It deserves to be two separate pages; Grand Galvatron (UW) and Grand Galvatron (Headmasters), I guess...? --Riptide (talk) 10:09, 9 December 2015 (EST)

I agree with the above, but I wonder whether it could go on Galvatronus' page. By this wiki's standards, is it the English name for Takara's guy, or are the limbs and deco enough to seperate them? Sky Shadow (talk) 10:14, 9 December 2015 (EST)

Isn't it a little early to be making this kind of determination? --Giggidy (talk) 12:18, 9 December 2015 (EST)

It definitely wouldn't be Galvatronus, the whole identity is different. I could see the logic in deleting this and replacing it with appropriate descriptors/links on Galvatron (G1) - but by that logic, why wouldn't Grand Galvatron be entirely merged into Galvatron (G1)? We don't have a separate page for Super Megatron. --Thylacine 2000 (talk) 14:23, 9 December 2015 (EST)

I think the reason we don't merge this into G1 Galvatron's page is because this is technically it's own entitry from him. But yeah, I say we move this page to "Grand Galvatron (G1)", and the combiner Grand Galvatron can go to "Grand Galvatron (UW)" or something along those lines. That seems like a good-enough compromise to me. MaximalBroadjaw (talk) 15:38, 9 December 2015 (EST)

This article is specifically about the hypothetical body conceived in Headmasters. Unite Warriors Grand Galvatron is just Galvatron hijacking Cyclonus's body. Character continuity. KISS. Saix (talk) 15:41, 9 December 2015 (EST)

So should we maybe move the UW toy to Galvatron's page, then, if we don't create a new article for it? It is technically Galvatron's combiner, even if he's using Cyclonus as a proxy. MaximalBroadjaw (talk) 15:45, 9 December 2015 (EST)

It's already on Galvatron's toy page. Saix (talk) 15:50, 9 December 2015 (EST)

So all we'd really need to do is just get rid of it's mention on this page, because UW Grand Galvatron is obviously not the same as Headmasters Grand Galvatron. That's basically the best option to satisfy all parties. May as well just do it myself, then, if we have some amount of consensus. MaximalBroadjaw (talk) 15:59, 9 December 2015 (EST)

It's seems kind of bizarre to me to insist that this Grand Galvatron upgrade has to go on a different page than the other Grand Galvatron upgrade. --Giggidy (talk) 16:00, 9 December 2015 (EST)

The thing is they're basically only being put on the same page because they have the same name; otherwise, they're totally different. Putting them both on just the one page is kind of like putting G1 Roller and IDW Roller on the same page just because they're both named Roller; that's basically the only similarity they have. Same logic applies here; they only share a name. MaximalBroadjaw (talk) 16:05, 9 December 2015 (EST)

So, um, put it to a vote, maybe? Put the combiner on Grand Galvatron's page OR make a new page for the combiner OR have the combiner only on Galvatron's toy page. --Riptide (talk) 17:23, 9 December 2015 (EST)

Let's not turn this into another Ulchtar, guys. Way I see it, there's a couple of ways to look at this.

1) Redirect this page to Galvatron. We don't have separate pages for "Super Ginrai" or "Burning Megatron". The only real logical counter to this is that we don't know if this combiner is controlled by Galvatron's consciousness, or if it has it's own unique, merged mind that would justify it as its own character (ie: the reason we split Optimus Maximus from Optimus Prime).

2) Rework this a page just a little to make it about concept of "a super-mode Galvatron", rather than one specific version, and deal with both of them on here.

3) Separate 'em.

-Chris McFeely (talk) 17:42, 9 December 2015 (EST)

I'm gonna throw in for #1 myself. The ambiguity on the UW figure isn't really enough split-page justification. --M Sipher (talk) 17:49, 9 December 2015 (EST)

Honestly? Since Galvatronus has his own article, Grand Galvatron should probably get his own, too. They're counterparts for each other, essentially; just one has dedicated limbs and the other doesn't. Though then we don't have a page for Predacus yet either, do we?

From what I've seen from over on TFW2005, I think it's implied that at least Cyclonus himself is being controlled by Galvatron, but it seems to say nothing on the combiner having it's own mind. That sort of complicates this scenario, really; we don't know if it's Galvatron controlling Cyclonus and Grand Galvatron or if Grand Galvatron is a different conciousness than Galvatron himself. Judging by how the other combiners operate, I'm assuming that Grand Galvatron might be a unique entity from the original, but again no fiction to firmly place it. MaximalBroadjaw (talk) 17:56, 9 December 2015 (EST)

I vote for #3; Thunder Mayhem got his own page, and that's the same concept, IIRC. --Riptide (talk) 18:16, 9 December 2015 (EST)

I think 2 is the smartest choice. They called him Grand Galvatron for a reason, it's silly and pedantic for us to second-guess that. --Giggidy (talk) 19:11, 9 December 2015 (EST)

Well, yes, they named him that as a homage; it's still a different enough concept that I think it'd be disingenuous to put them both on the same page. We don't have Optimus Maximus the battle station and Optimus Maximus the combiner on the same page. --Riptide (talk) 05:31, 10 December 2015 (EST)

I feel like number 1 has maximum consistency with the rest of the wiki, though I would accept number 2 as well. I see no reason to create separate pages beyond being different in an entirely arbitrary way. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 19:22, 9 December 2015 (EST)

"Entirely arbitrary"? One Grand Galvatron's a combiner made of four dead Decepticons and a posessed Cyclonus and the other is an imaginary planet-sized version of Galvatron; they are not arbitrarily different. Either we split the two Grand Galvatrons or we just merge this whole article into the G1 Galvatron article. Lumping a combiner with a planetformer just because they use the same name is ridiculous, really. It'd be like lumping RiD Hot Shot with Armada Hot Shot just because they both have the name Hot Shot; outside of name, the two entities are entirely dissimilar to one another.

I'm not saying we can't merge Grand Galvatron from Headmasters into the G1 Galvatron article, but putting UW Grand Galvatron in that same lump is problematic, as Grand Galvatron is not entirely Galvatron; he's also Cyclonus, Starscream, Breakdown and Roller, as well. He's basically his own distinct character in essense; even if Galvatron's technically the core of him, since combiners always are distinct individuals unless we're talking Energon-style combiners. We don't lump the other combiners into their team leaders' articles, and I see no reason as of now to break the mold now unless definitive proof that UW Grand Galvatron is merely a superbody for G1 Galvatron arises. MaximalBroadjaw (talk) 20:00, 9 December 2015 (EST)

For reference, there's reasonably good translations of the bios here. The gist does indeed seem to be that Grand Galvatron is Galvatron using five other guys as his body. On that basis, I'd say merge. It's not like we have a separate article for, say, Starscream-using-Waspinator's-body. Jalaguy (talk) 06:32, 10 December 2015 (EST)

I agree. It sounds like Galvatron is using these guys as an extension of his will, and I definitely think we should merge both the Headmasters Grand Galvatron and the Unite Warriors Grand Galvatron onto the Galvatron (G1) page. -Foffy the Sheep (talk) 07:42, 10 December 2015 (EST)

I don't agree, but it sounds a hell of a lot better than keeping two hugely different concepts on the same page on the basis of a shared name. --Riptide (talk) 08:07, 10 December 2015 (EST)

The concepts really aren't as different as you're making them sound. Both are powered-up Galvatron forms accomplished by combining the bodies of his followers with his own. It's easy to forget that was a big part of the Headmasters Grand Galvatron 'cause... well, look at it - but it was. They're not identical no, but it'd be a very mild retool to the page as-is to encompass both. - Chris McFeely (talk) 08:19, 10 December 2015 (EST)

...Eh, I guess I'd forgotten that, yes. I'd still vote for page splitting, but now I understand where you're coming from, I suppose? --Riptide (talk) 08:24, 10 December 2015 (EST)

What does this mean for Roller? Is he a turncoat who changed sides mistakenly believing his friend had left him to die? Certain parts of the bio seem to point that way... but on the other hand, it does say that his memory is patchy. To make matters worse, the bio mentions "wandering the space between dimensions", which might mean that this Roller is a different Roller from the G1 Roller. So, my question is: what page does the "Wanderer Roller" belong on? -Foffy the Sheep (talk) 08:50, 10 December 2015 (EST)

There's nothing that indicates that it isn't a version of IDW Roller. Let's not make this more complicated than it needs to be. --Riptide (talk) 09:06, 10 December 2015 (EST)

Er, yes, it obviously goes on the IDW Roller page. It might not be literally the exactly same Roller who appears in the pages of MTMTE (because the bio has nothing to do with Roberts's plans for the character), but it's absolutely a version of him. - Chris McFeely (talk) 09:08, 10 December 2015 (EST)

Oh, my bad. The whole Minimus Ambus/Alpha Trion thing left me under the impression that Japan didn't get MTMTE. Turns out I was wrong. In that case, I have no problem placing this Roller on the Roller (IDW) page. Sorry for the confusion -Foffy the Sheep (talk) 09:19, 10 December 2015 (EST)

Two giant Galvatron upgrades with the same name, each made of the dead bodies of his troops, is enough for me. I think either the toy stays on this page, or everything on this page gets merged into Galv G1. I do not see either Grand Galvatron as being distinct enough to warrant NOT having them in the same place, whatever that may be. --Thylacine 2000 (talk) 11:47, 10 December 2015 (EST)

That's my take, as well. --Khajidha (talk) 12:58, 10 December 2015 (EST)

The post itself says the bios are very messily translated, so it's entirely possible that there might be some mistakes. And quoting the full bio;

"Emperor of Destruction Galvatron's loyal Air Staff Officer. Transforms into a Sci-Fi jet. Receiving a revelation from the dead -Galvatron, Cyclonus takes Galvatron's spirit into his body and reformats himself into a new combination-capable "scramble body". Using the power of the Interstellar Emperor Unicron, Cyclonus summons from other dimensions warriors bearing strong malice and evil power. Using the combined energy of their malice, they seek Galvatron's complete resurrection!"

This, allowing for translation error, seems more like Cyclonus is still controlling the gestalt, but Galvatron allows him the ability to combine at all and Unicron gives him the limbs, all in the name of giving Galvatron a new body. So in any case it seems like Cyclonus is the core still; just that Galvatron's spirit gives him the ability to combine.

This seems like an Optimal Optimus situation, honestly; we lump Optimal Optimus in with Optimus Primal, even though technically Optimal Optimus is both G1 Prime and Optimus Primal in the same body; Primal is the core body, so that's where it goes. So I guess we could always lump UW Grand Galvatron in with Cyclonus' article. MaximalBroadjaw (talk) 10:48, 10 December 2015 (EST)

If anything, I'd say the idea that Cyclonus and these other undead 'bots merging themselves into order to resurrect Galvatron lend more credence to the idea that the combiner has Galvatron's consciousness than anything else. And I have to say I don't agree with that comparison to, or reading of, Optimal Optimus at all.- Chris McFeely (talk) 11:23, 10 December 2015 (EST)

What I was referring to by saying Optimal Optimus is both G1 Prime and Primal is that he was created when Optimus Primal took in the Spark of G1 Prime, therefore making him essentially both G1 Prime and Optimus Primal at the same time; though then that would mean we'd need to put the OptimOp toy on G1 Prime's toys page, as well. Just as how Grand Galvatron is both Galvatron and Cyclonus at the same time; where Galvatron lends his power to Cyclonus to allow for him to combine. So it's similar in that it's two Sparks sharing a body, with one giving the other something new (combination for Cyclonus, a new body for Primal). MaximalBroadjaw (talk) 11:31, 10 December 2015 (EST)

That's not how it works, MaximalBroadjaw. Optimus Prime's spark only served as a mutating agent for Optimus Primal's body. Prime never woke up to control anything. Though highly different they may be, both Headmasters and Unite Warriors Grand Galvatron are instances of Galvatron functioning as the controller of a body made from other things. S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47 (talk) 12:53, 10 December 2015 (EST)

Optimal Optimus is created because of the two sparks being placed in the same body, yes; but Primal never uses Prime's catchphrase at any point outside of this one episode, and his deepened voice also dissapears after Prime's spark gets put back in his body. I'm not saying they were explicitly fused in any matter, but they were sharing the same body and Primal basically grows to be the size of Optimus Prime when the Optimal body is created.

The only way the implication of a shared body would be more obvious is if they actually made it so we had both voices reading the same lines.

Grand Galvatron the combiner and Grand Galvatron the planetformer have nothing to do with each other outside of name. We don't merge Armada Wheeljack with Energon Downshift just because they're both named Wheeljack in Japan, so we definitely shouldn't merge Headmasters Grand Galvatron and UW Grand Galvatron on that basis alone; the name is a homage, and that's all it is. At best, I say we should maybe just sink the combiner into the Cyclonus article and the planetformer into the Galvatron article. MaximalBroadjaw (talk) 13:12, 10 December 2015 (EST)

Putting the combiner into Cyclonus's article is literally the worst suggestion in this entire discussion, so no, we don't be doing that. - Chris McFeely (talk) 13:14, 10 December 2015 (EST)

It's better than placing the two completely disparate ideas (Galvatron-possessed Cyclonus using limbs collected by Unicron should not be in the same article as a hypothetical Galvatron super-body inspired by Unicron, IMO) in the same article just for sharing a name and having dead people make them up in common. Since it seems, for all intents, that the Galvatron and Cyclonus here are G1 cartoon continuity, the merging of the combiner made of the G1 cartoon Cyclonus, albeit controlled by Galvatron, with the article of a hypothetical super-body for G1 Galvatron doesn't make sense. Names alone shouldn't dictate how we merge articles unless explicitly canonized as the same by a source. This toy makes much more sense on either Galvatron and Cyclonus' page or it's own article than it does here, where the only thing linking it to the original subject is the name.

We should be as informative and accurate as possible even in spite of being lax for an encyclopedia, and in that case I would support either spliting the combiner into it's own article (ala Optimus Maximus and Galvatronus) or merging it with either Cyclonus or Galvatron's articles. Reworking this article is a compromise I can accept, though. MaximalBroadjaw (talk) 13:30, 10 December 2015 (EST)

This is off-topic, but Armada Wheeljack is actually called "Rampage" in Japan. -Foffy the Sheep (talk) 13:50, 10 December 2015 (EST)

Oh, right. Oops. :p This is what I get for not checking up on UT fiction very often. :p MaximalBroadjaw (talk) 13:53, 10 December 2015 (EST)

Just to chime in here... I wrote those translations, and the original specifically says Cyclonus is "possessed by Galvatron's spirit" ("ガルバトロンの霊体を憑依された"). This is definitely Galvatron, operating through Cyclonus (who willfully allowed himself to be possessed). I vote this either goes on G1 Galvatron's page, or the combiner gets a separate page to himself (as most combiners do). G1 Grand Galvatron should be on G1 Galvatron's page regardless, IMHO. I find the assumption that this is IDW Roller more objectionable - it's clear that this Roller doesn't line up with the future plans for IDW Roller, which would mean that he's Roller from a continuity similar to, but distinct from, IDW. In those circumstances, wouldn't we normally create a separate page?--BraveMax (talk) 15:28, 10 December 2015 (EST)

This is a good compromise, IMO; the combiner gets his own page while the hypothetical body gets merged. As for Roller, I'm not sure. I know we've made articles for toy-only characters before, but the bio seems to indicate that it's IDW Roller, or at least a quantum duplicate of him. So I still think he should be under IDW Roller, at least until further notice. MaximalBroadjaw (talk) 15:37, 10 December 2015 (EST)

I'd say that this Roller is meant to be the same as IDW Roller in the sense that Sunbow Shockwave ane sd Marvel Shockwave are "the same". --Khajidha (talk) 15:40, 10 December 2015 (EST)

(Resetting indents to preserve sanity) I think we should merge Headmasters Grand Galvatron with Galvatron (G1), and keep Unite Warriors Grand Galvatron on a separate page. -Foffy the Sheep (talk) 18:02, 10 December 2015 (EST)

Okay, actually, I changed my mind again; I reject any plan that involves Headmasters Grand Galvatron not having its own page. Because... look at it. I can't think of anything that deserves its own page even at the expense of consistency more. --Riptide (talk) 18:26, 10 December 2015 (EST) [this comment is only half serious]

I would think the combiner entity would get his own page and not just be a subsection of Galvatron (G1), citing the precedent followed in Mega-Octane/Ruination (RID). Both setups involve the components of the combiner ceding agency to a central figure, and yet Ruination isn't just a portion of Mega-Octane's page. --ItsWalky (talk) 18:55, 10 December 2015 (EST)

Ruination (RID) was controlled entirely by Mega-Octane? *checks wiki* Huh. I never knew that. Well in that case, I agree that Unite Warriors Grand Galvatron should have his own page. (I already thought he should anyway, but the fact that there's an established precedent for it is nice to know.) -Foffy the Sheep (talk) 19:06, 10 December 2015 (EST)

Can't argue with that. - Chris McFeely (talk) 20:06, 10 December 2015 (EST)

So far, it seems that pretty much everyone is in favor of Unite Warriors Grand Galvatron having an article of his own, separate from both Headmasters Grand Galvatron and Galvatron (G1). So I guess all we have to do now is figure whether we want Headmasters Grand Galvatron to have an a separate article as well, or if we'd rather just merge him with Galvatron (G1). Thoughts? -Foffy the Sheep (talk) 20:29, 10 December 2015 (EST)

I think it's good that we're mostly coalescing behind the position of not putting UW Grand Galvatron on a page with Cyclonus or Galvatron, but I think there's still a strong case to be made for keeping him on the same page with HM Grand Galvatron. The argument is straightforward and powerful: same concept, same name, same character. --Giggidy (talk) 20:35, 10 December 2015 (EST)

Is Unite Warriors Grand Galvatron really the same character as Headmasters Grand Galvatron, or a similar alternate universe counterpart? After all, Unite Warriors Grand Galvatron has limb components that come from various different continuities. Is there any definitive proof that the Galvatron whose spirit possesses Cyclonus is the same one as the guy from Headmasters? If I remember correctly, Galvatron didn't so much die in The emperor of destruction vanishes on an iceberg as just get stuck in the ice. -Foffy the Sheep (talk) 20:49, 10 December 2015 (EST)

I think what Giggidy means, something which I agree with, is that the two Grand Galvatrons are the same character archetypes, like cartoon, Marvel, and IDW G1 Optimus Prime. He doesn't mean they have to be the exact same individual character from the exact same universe. S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47 (talk) 20:56, 10 December 2015 (EST)

Ah, my bad. Sorry for the confusion. -Foffy the Sheep (talk) 21:05, 10 December 2015 (EST)

With that in mind however, I don't think "same character archetype" is enough reason to keep two characters on the same page. Almost all of the Optimus Primes, Megatrons and Bumblebees and so forth are the same character archetype, and we don't keep them together in the same article. Why should we do that in this case? -Foffy the Sheep (talk) 21:14, 10 December 2015 (EST)

In case you haven't noticed all over this wiki, that's not how the wiki operates. We classify G1 Optimus Prime, UT Optimus Prime, and Movie Optimus Prime as different archetypes. We are well aware that names alone don't make two individuals the same character archetype. Those of us in favor of putting Unite Warriors Grand Galvatron on this page see him and Headmasters Grand Galvatron as being sufficiently similar like Marvel G1 and G1 cartoon Optimus Prime. S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47 (talk) 21:25, 10 December 2015 (EST)

Yeah, that's the long and short of it. If we can same-page all of the G1 origins of, say, Grimlock or Trypticon or the Constructicons, the Grand Galvatrons aren't much of a leap in my opinion. --Thylacine 2000 (talk) 22:10, 10 December 2015 (EST)

(Resetting indents) Alright, that's fair. My example was a pretty bad one. I think I finally understand your point, though. You're saying that the Grand Galvatrons from Unite Warriors and Headmasters, though not identical, are similar enough to share a page. Have I got that right?

I think that while the two could be made to share a page, they might be better off on separate articles. I can't put together a sandbox to save my life; perhaps if someone could make one to give a rough idea of what a page shared between the two Grand Galvatrons might look like, we can discuss whether or not that's what we want to do. -Foffy the Sheep (talk) 21:49, 10 December 2015 (EST)

Vote

This is a really interesting conversation and it can stay interesting for a long long time. I think we need to get a clear feel of the room:

• Option 1 - Both Grand Galvatrons move to Galvatron (G1)
• Option 2 - Both Grand Galvatrons stay on this page (perhaps with rewrites)
• Option 3 - Headmasters Grand Galv goes to Galv G1; UW Grand Galv gets its own page
• Option 4 - UW Grand Galv goes to GalvG1; Headmasters Grand Galv gets its own page
• Option 5 - Each of the Grand Galvs get their own, separate page

I vote for #2. --Thylacine 2000 (talk) 22:19, 10 December 2015 (EST)

I'm with 2. S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47 (talk) 22:26, 10 December 2015 (EST)

I prefer number 5, but I think that number 2 could work as an acceptable compromise. -Foffy the Sheep (talk) 22:36, 10 December 2015 (EST)

2.--Giggidy (talk) 23:01, 10 December 2015 (EST)

I'm fine with either Options 3 or 5, honestly. MaximalBroadjaw (talk) 23:46, 10 December 2015 (EST)

I don't care whether the Grand Galvatrons share a page, but I absolutely don't think either should be on Galvatron's. --ItsWalky (talk) 00:30, 11 December 2015 (EST)

5. I'd accept 2 with a good enough rewrite. --Riptide (talk) 06:40, 11 December 2015 (EST)

The more I think this over, the more option 2 sound like the best choice. My only concern is this: How would the opening bio paragraph be handled, and what his main pic be? If somebody can enlighten me as to what we can expect from a properly merged version of this page, I'll gladly throw myself behind number 2. EDIT: Bio shouldn't be hard. Unite Warriors Grand Galvatron doesn't have any official art, so that might make the main pic tricky, but it shouldn't be too much of a problem. I'm officially changing my vote to 2.-Foffy the Sheep (talk) 08:30, 11 December 2015 (EST)

From most to least preferred: 2, 1, 4, 3, 5. --Khajidha (talk) 09:07, 11 December 2015 (EST)

3. I can see the argument for keeping UW separate with the various other J-combiners who are more-or-less "central guy is still predominant force". But I really don't see how HM Galvatron gobbling up Earth and permanently cannibalizing parts from other robots to become a (doofy-looking) Unicronian planet-bot is the "same concept" as a combiner made up of a robot possessed by the spirit of Galvatron who combines with some other varying deadish bots who retain their individual bodies and identities. Frankly, the HM "Grand Galvatron" page is a relic of a less self-referential time in TFs, when it wasn't jerking itself off so much so that job fell to, well, us, so we get a ha-ha page. It really ought to be merged into Galv's page. It's just Galv with more mass. A lot more mass, yes. UW GrandGalv is just making a reference for yuks. --M Sipher (talk) 10:09, 11 December 2015 (EST)

2 is what I'd prefer. It's two separate takes on a similar concept (Galvatron incorporating dead Decepticon warriors into his system to make himself more powerful), both of which share the same name, so they seem worthy of sharing an article. Obviously with rewrites to provide context. --DrSpengler (talk) 10:27, 11 December 2015 (EST)

I'd say 5. If not that then 3. poweredconvoy (talk) 10:41, 11 December 2015 (EST)

2. --Xaaron (talk) 12:21, 11 December 2015 (EST)

Option 3. --BraveMax (talk) 20:07, 11 December 2015 (EST)

3 or 5. Saix (talk) 20:13, 11 December 2015 (EST)

Vote Results

Since it's been a day with no activity, and Foffy is asking, I see the results as follows:

• 2: 6 votes - Thylacine 2000, S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47, Giggidy, Khajidha, Xaaron, Foffy the Sheep. Further, Riptide indicates 2 as a tolerable second choice.

• 5: 4 votes - Riptide, Powered Convoy, MaximalBroadJaw (split with #3), and Saix (split with #3)

• 3: 4 votes - Sipher, MaximalBroadJaw (split with #5), Brave Max, Saix (split with #5). Further, Powered Convoy indicates 3 as a tolerable second choice, and Walky votes NOT 3 (also, not 1 and not 4)

• 1: No votes, but Khajidha's second choice.

• 4: No votes.

So... looks like the plurality favor keeping things as they are. Shall we consider the matter resolved, barring new information? --Giggidy (talk) 16:05, 12 December 2015 (EST)

Sandbox?

I think a sandbox might be in order. We can debate theoretical solutions all day, but until we get something solid and concrete, I don't think this debate is going to get anywhere. -Foffy the Sheep (talk) 13:49, 11 December 2015 (EST)

I've attempted to make a short stub article here; what do you guys think? It's really short because we don't have much about Grand Galvatron in terms of the combiner yet, so it's denoted as a stub article for now. MaximalBroadjaw (talk) 15:18, 11 December 2015 (EST)

I like it. When the toys actually come out, they might include some pack-in material we can use to beef up the article a bit. Even if they don't, I think having Unite Warriors Grand Galvatron on a page of his own will allow for more a complete and informative write-up. -Foffy the Sheep (talk) 15:49, 11 December 2015 (EST)

Plus it's consistent with how we handle other same-name characters, as well. The only potentially damning argument I could find is that we don't lump Galvatron's article with Megatron's; but even then, that's because they're two totally different entities, much like the two Grand Galvatrons seem to be. The name is most likely just an homage. MaximalBroadjaw (talk) 15:56, 11 December 2015 (EST)

Yeah, I think the name's just a sort of homage. I think the best comparison would be Cybertron Metroplex, in that, while they have some surface similarities, It becomes clear that they're not the same guy if you look a little closer. (I put all the sandbox talk under a new section. Since we're not just voting anymore, it wouldn't make much sense to keep it under a section called "vote." Hope nobody minds) -Foffy the Sheep (talk) 18:57, 11 December 2015 (EST)

Digression: Roller isn't a Decepticon or dead. Saix (talk) 20:07, 11 December 2015 (EST)

Ah, true. But what would be a accurate, but non-cumbersome way to say it? I wouldn't want "three dead Decepticons and an not-dead Autobot who was only part by coincidence" to be the choice; that's far too awkwardly-worded. Any suggestions on how to phrase it, then? MaximalBroadjaw (talk) 20:25, 11 December 2015 (EST)

Had an edit conflict with MaximalBroadjaw, but he said pretty much what I was gonna say. As for the clunky phrasing: yeah, that's unfortunate, but given the choice between inaccuracy and clunky phrasing, I'd rather have clunky phrasing. I'll think on it and see if I can't something that's both well-phrased and accurate. -Foffy the Sheep (talk) 20:34, 11 December 2015 (EST)

I had a thought regarding the clunky-wording issue caused by Roller's ever-so-inconvenient choice to be not-dead: what if the wording was made to emphasize how random the choice of characters who make up the limbs are, rather than try to hide it? Like something along the lines of "using battered cybertronians to construct himself a new body, Galvatron became Grand Galvatron", or maybe "with battered Transformers forming the limbs of his new combiner body, Galvatron became Grand Galvatron". It's not perfect, but I thought I'd throw that out there. -Foffy the Sheep (talk) 21:41, 11 December 2015 (EST)

That's still a little weirdly worded, though. Maybe "With a set of revitalized Cybertronians from across the multiverse, Galvatron's spirit infuses Cyclonus with the ability to form Grand Galvatron, a mighty gestalt warrior in the image of the fierce Decepticon." is a bit better? It's not implying all the components are dead, but doesn't cause a need for any clunky wording. MaximalBroadjaw (talk) 21:57, 11 December 2015 (EST)

Yeah, that sounds awesome! You should go ahead and add that to [sandbox]. -Foffy the Sheep (talk) 22:11, 11 December 2015 (EST)

Hello?

Sooooooooo...has anything been decided yet? -Foffy the Sheep (talk) 15:44, 12 December 2015 (EST)

I just tallied the vote for you. However, as I myself am trying to learn, a little patience never hurts. The page will get there in the end. --Giggidy (talk) 16:08, 12 December 2015 (EST)

Okay. I just wanted to know what the was going on with this. It's probably best to let this discussion air out anyway; it was getting kinda heated. Maybe we'll revisit it when the Unite Warriors toy comes out. Cheers! -Foffy the Sheep (talk) 16:58, 12 December 2015 (EST)

Putting this here... http://www.allspark.com/2015/12/unite-warriors-uw-06-grand-galvatron-mini-comic/ poweredconvoy (talk) 08:26, 16 December 2015 (EST)

Yeah, the comic directly references the planetoid Grand Galvatron, so that settles it. This belongs here.--Rosicrucian^Talk 18:50, 16 December 2015 (EST)