Talk:Bumblebee (film)

2248:" where exactly did you see that? if you have a source please show it, provide a link. I understand that the failure of this series to be careful about continuity or canon has resulted in some people interpreting that as a reboot, but please read the above discussion and note carefully that journalists reporting on this have called it just about everything you can think of, and there have been misleading headlines but I haven't seen a source where Knight himself is directly quoted as calling it a reboot (and DiBonaventura has been conspicuously avoiding calling a reboot because he doesn't want to risk turning off any protentional customers). Knight actually made some efforts to maintain continuity (for example by deliberately not including Megatron in the Cybertron sequence) but ultimately 2125:

Bonaventure actively avoided calling this a reboot, and it does not seem like a good idea to contradict what he said. Knight tried to maintain continuity (leaving out Megatron) and more recently Caple Jnr claimed he was mostly maintaining continuity with the Bay films. None of these statements from the film makers have stopped third parties from labeling it otherwise (even in the very same article as Di Bonaventure actively trying to avoid the term reboot). I have tried to maintain that weak local consensus but I can see with hindsight it was a mistake it never belonged in the lead section in the first place, but should be explained as best as reliable sources allow in the article body.

1292:

ask that you cancel your revert of my edit and stick to the talk page instead of cancelling out any editor who attempts to add info on the "reboot". Otherwise, if you don't roll back your actions or if you continue with the edit warring, you could be blocked for the violation. You should read up on the 3RR policy. As for the options you mentioned, numerous sources are at the moment citing Hasbro that its a reboot, while none are contradicting it, and thus it is option 2. That said, I will wait for the opinion of other editors.

685: 422: 582: 555: 1342:

article refers to Bumblebee as a "spin-off" from the rest of the franchise, spin-off does somehow feel like a better less loaded term than prequel. Di Bonaventura rejects the term reboot but explains the balance of changing things to keep it interesting and fresh while keeping the parts people like. The quote we have from from TFW2005 is “a new storytelling universe” which doesn't go actually against what Di Bonaventura was already saying. We really should

1553:; (critics already used in this article) Liz Shannon Miller of IndieWire "spin-off/prequel"; Peter Debruge of Variety "conceived as an origin story, rather than a reboot"; James Berardinelli of ReelViews "a re-imagination (technically, a prequel)"; and many more. Good sources support any of the above, which is why we had so many edits changing it back and forth, so there's no need to use source like Comicbook.com or Movieweb.com in the intro. -- 754: 592: 471: 733: 450: 1236:

passing the buck then maybe they'd be worth taking seriously. On top of that as I said before the article from TFW2005 doesn't even use the term reboot. Reboot was the subjective interpretation of other sources. The page from TFW2005 merely said the Hasbro were going continue the new continuity established by Bumblebee (“a new storytelling universe”), and it isn't like the franchise was strict about continuity to begin with.

2467:. (From a story perspective it seems it could be years since he died.) Using vague phrases such as "sometime later" are not helpful either. We don't know how much time passes between Bumblebee landing on earth and being found by Charlie, we only know that the year is 1987 and that is already stated. If these phrases are added again I will continue to revert them, and any other changes should take care not to 352: 328: 280: 481: 697: 362: 219: 297: 764: 1316:, and they might use the word "official" but it is clearly anything but official. Your edit was in good faith but four bad sources do not add up to a good source, and if another editor agrees with you and you restore your previous edit I would still urge you to only include the least worst of those sources, namely CinemaBlend. 2040:

enough to exclude the term disputed "reboot" term but again it is not as clear and conclusive as I would like. It might be helpful to clarify, and quote which specific lines of the article you think are most important. This is supposed to be an encyclopedia, I think things should be very clearly supported by the sources. --

2560:

I hate having to reference videos so I'm not sure if I'll add this to the article or not but as part of a panel discussion GalaxyCon Richmond 2020 Peter Cullen expressed his dissatisfaction at the film (or you could say his own performance in the film) because an inexperienced actor had been hired to

2217:

It's not personal beliefs, the director called it a reboot and film itself supports that. The film was original going to be a prequel but the prequel elements were mostly removed from the film. So how can you call it a prequel when the filmmakers intentionally removed those connecting elements to set

2035:

and several films in the series changed things around a bit). It is not clear which specific part exactly of the article you think absolutely refutes the "reboot" claims that people applied to Bumblebee. (I ask for clarity, and to get a firm conclusion, not because I have any desire to keep that term

1805:

and people are arguing over what type of sequel it is. I remind editors that Di Bonaventura rejected the label "reboot" and it is not clear that Hasbro ever used the term but we ended up using the word "reboot" because almost everyone else called it that anyway. If anyone believes a different wording

1567:

Lousy sourcing over minutia was mostly the reason for my revert, and a few things that looked like screwing around, if I remember correctly--but I'm not about to go to war over it, and you seem to know what you're doing. As for my talk page--if you had admin glasses and could check the history, you'd

1440:

where they said: "Hasbro specifically stated that a new team at Paramount will reset the Transformers Live Action Movie Series following the release of Bumblebee: The Movie. Sure enough, the company has removed Transformers 6 (sequel to Transformers: The Last Knight) from the upcoming list of movies.

2124:

Thank you for belatedly joining the discussion. It has been like pulling teeth to get people to actually discuss this years long slow dumb edit war, and Rise of the Beasts has shattered it. Versions of this text have been contentious from the start and remained so. If you go right back to the top Di

2039:

where the director Director Steven Caple states that Rise of the Beasts "doesn’t mess up any of the timeline in 2006, 2007" and "We’re actually going in a direction that allows us to protect that side of the universe" which seems to strongly imply it is all just one continuity. This would seem to be

1711:

of the text is acceptable. Thank you. But I would again remind you that per Knowledge's policy of citing secondary reliable sources, the "reboot" is properly cited as per Forbes. You may think what you want of TFW2005 (primary source), but if a reliable secondary source relays its news (like Forbes)

1239:

The film could be both a prequel and a soft reboot, but what I've been trying to establish this whole time is something based on reliable sources or failing that at least some local consensus. How about establishing even a tiny consensus of 2 or 3 editors, if even EkoGraf and Fradio71 can come to an

1191:

The producer rejected the term more than two months ago, before the movie even came out and way before the latest news its now considered a reboot. So the producer's rejection is at this point highly out-dated. Also, agree with Fradio71, no reason to dismiss the current reports about a reboot. If we

932:

It's a reboot which kept being changed which lead to a bunch of plot wholes. More or less it started as prequel, became reboot, went back to being a prequel and then became a reboot again hence why megatron had a almost complete concept design that was cut pretty late in production and it's also why

3166:

The level of vandalism seems low to me, locking seems like overkill. Flagged edits requiring approval would be better, or even better yet admins actually going after the few disruptive individuals causing problems rather than locking targeted pages. Unless Knowledge completely ends its claims to be

2062:

than have this continue to churn. It is one series, with many continuity errors and retcons. The fans are welcome to argue and discuss it endlessly but this is supposed to be an encyclopedia article based on facts we can reliably confirm not and anything this unclear shouldn't be highlighted in the

2006:

Yeah except doesn't really since the absolute fucking moron that is lorenzo di Bonaventura doesn't know shit about the movies he's talking about since obsessed with saying they're connected to michael bay movies, which they clearly aren't. It's getting to the point the transformers fandom wants him

1548:

If there is actually a consensus to use the term reboot, the sources currently being used in the lead are still really awful, there's no need to rely on lousy sources. Some critics have called this film a sequel/prequel/spinoff/reboot/soft reboot all along, only it seemed like a bad idea to use the

1196:

might apply, but even then the site in question here has been show to be reliable in the past. But regardless of that, we are not actually citing the fansite directly. Instead, we are citing other sources like Cinemablend. Per Knowledge's policy, we are actually told to cite secondary sources (like

2919:

I still don't think the requirements for a hatnote have been met. There is no need to add unnecessary clutter or potential confusion for the majority of readers for the insignificant possibility of confusion in a vanishingly small minority. Reliable sources referred to called Beasts Transformers 7

2078:

Years of churn, and discussions such as this one and the one on the Rise of the Beasts page show this not simple undisputed information from reliable sources but contentious unreliable information that cannot be reliably established. (The tenuous consensus was based on a mere three editors hashing

1800:

even really mean and why is it so important for some editors to insist on using that term, based on what sources is this distinction necessary? The series has never been a stickler for continuity anyway. Ultimately this is all arguing semantics, it is just another film in the series, by definition

1291:

109.77.237.77, first, you should be made aware that you made 4-5 reverts within a period of 24 hours on this article. Per Knowledge's policy, if an editor makes more than 3 reverts within 24 hours, in violation of Knowledge's 3RR policy, it can lead to a block of the said editor. So I would kindly

1235:

doesn't make it not a fansite. Nearly all those reports make it clear they are just repeating the fansite, they aren't making even the smallest claim of having done any research of their own or getting confirmation from Hasbro like a reputable publication would do, and if they weren't so blatantly

975:

I'd like to add some discussion. The Last Knight made a big thing of Bee being on earth during the second world war, but in Bumblebee, it shows bee arriving on earth in 1987. Also, the way prime talks about earth suggests that it is an unfamiliar planet to them at this point. It seems clear to me

3200:

from the start, but people love to argue about canon and continuity and declaring that something is a "reboot", forgetting that this does not best serve the ordinary reader (because for all intents and purposes it is all one series, albeit with sloppy and contradictory continuity). The disruptive

2143:

did also remove the text at least once, it wasn't only me.) Fans care deeply about canon and continuity, but I do not believe that an ordinary encyclopedia reader needs or expects the summary in the lead section to include a knot of seemingly contradictory labels, and think they just want to know

1227:

This back and forth over prequel, reboot, or both (or none) has been going on for weeks. It calmed down slightly when I finally bothered to find a source disputing the term reboot. Due to comments attributed to Hasbro at Toyfair it is happening again. Although I think we need to work towards some

1146:

I'm leaning towards removing both terms (prequel, reboot) from the intro, and maybe expanding the article text, but the thing I want to avoid is the back and forth of another slow dumb edit war. What do you suggest? If we can establish some sort of local consensus and stick to it I can get behind

3024:

Summarizing more succinctly might be an improvement, but it is relevant to this article that Knight was reluctant to direct another but still had some ideas for a sequel and also that Hodson had initially planned to return. Those details, which I think are relevant here, are less relevant to the

1082:

weight, because it doesn't really tell readers anything useful and despite all the back and forth about the terminology in the intro, no one has cared enough to add anything about it to the main article (the development section most likely). There's the fact that Di Bonaventura rejected the term

2082:

and it has been a slow edit war for years now. Try and establish the facts and gain consensus before including this continuity trivia in the lead section. Stick to the undisputed facts: Bumblebee was the 6th film in the series; it was the one after Last Knight, it was the one before Rise of the

1515:). I thank EkoGraf for his good faith efforts and engaging in discussion, despite my disagreement. I feel it is necessary for Drmies to comment to to show he is at least aware of this discussion, and that he doesn't just think reverting to the version by EkoGraf was the article status quo. . -- 1341:

I've expanded the Sequel section of the article, which already referenced the Slashfilm article and summarized comments from Di Bonaventura. Rereading the Slashfilm article more closely they refer to confusing rumors of a reboot before Bumblebee (pointing to an article from Feb 2018). Then the

1360:

Whether an editor thinks he is right or he is wrong, a violation of 3RR is strictly prohibited and can not be disregarded. Also, it is not up to individual editors to determine the reliability of a source, but the wider community based on credible material confirming the source in question is

2369:(despite the failure to update or delete the total runtime). Track 16 is listed as "Back to Life (80s Remix) – Hailee Steinfeld (3:13)". I could add that track instead but albums are often released with different bonus tracks, so someone with an interest in Soundtracks should check this. -- 2028:

Thank you for reopening the discussion, I wish I had noticed it sooner and do wish you had mentioned in your edit summaries that a new discussion had occurred on the talk page and that new sources had been introduced. I have some minor concerns, I do not think this is as all quite clear as

1611:

made a good point that this should be detailed in the article body, the film is was developed as a spin-off and a prequel, and critics described it as effectively a soft reboot, only later did Hasbro (or so it seems based on the weak sources currently available) declare that it was “a new

3084:

is supposed to summarize not supplant what is in the article body). If anyone wants to argue for adding or removing alternative titles then feel free to discuss the issue here, but the information was previously referenced so please don't use the lack of references as a reason. --

1168:

but again they're just repeating what they got from the fan site TFW2005, albeit with a better overview of the developments that lead to here. I think this article could do with that sort of commentary in the Development section. Also the quote people seem to be latching on to is

1177:. TFW2005 doesn't actually use the word reboot either. We don't know much of anything yet, and that should be okay, we should wait. I'd be surprised if Hasbro didn't make more statements soon as they try to gain attention for the home media and streaming release. -- 2724:

documentation then and I read it again today. I do not think it is bold assertion to say that readers are not accidentally end up at this page while looking for Rise of the Beasts. I do not believe this film needs a Transformers 6 hatnote any more than I believe

2414:. RelishMix noted superfans agreed Bumblebee "is the Transformers movie they’ve been waiting and yearning for, which means a more authentic look at some of their favorite characters and dosing down of the super-action in previous, Michael Bay-directed chapters." 2595:

Although Cullen is essentially criticizing his own performance, this doesn't seem like a particularly good fit for the Reception section, it might work better as a Production detail. Also video links die too easily, so a different reference would be better. --

2639:

are unintentionally ending up at this article, and in the unlikely event anyone does there are links to even if they do. I simply do not believe people trying to find out about the latest film are navigating that way and accidentally ending up here.

2432:

Still thinking of adding RelishMix to the article but I might shorten the quote or have to rephrase it because I don't believe "dosing down" is actually a phrase and as far as I can tell it is a typo and "dumbing down" was the intended meaning. --

2252:

because if you are describing it to an ordinary reader (who isn't already a Transformers fan) like an encyclopedia should, then the most important details are that it is the one released after The Last Knight and before the Rise of the Beasts. --

1307:

Those numerous sources you mention are not reliable on this matter, even if one of them might be generally considered reliable sources on other matters (e.g. Cinemablend). They all clearly pass the buck and plainly state they are only repeating a

1463:

I think the reboot info needs to be detailed in the body of the article and described appropriately such as "described by xyz source(s) as a reboot" to clarify unofficial nature unless/until the studio or producers officially states this.

948:

Since no one has bothered to discuss this let alone provide sources and the tedious back and forth continues, I finally went and looked for myself. In an interview with SlashFilm producer Lorenzo Di Bonaventura rejected the term reboot

3079:

but some editors seemed to feel it was important to include it in the lead section anyway so I left it alone, despite the fact that it is so inconsequential that it is not mentioned or explained anywhere else in the article body (the

2800:

InfiniteNexus says there is possible confusion as to the meaning of "Transformers 6". People get confused buy all kinds of things, but I do not believe people are _commonly_ referring to the films by numbers or that there is any

3151:

I've requested page protection. The constant edit wars over such mundane matters is tiresome and meaningless. Unfortunately, this also means you will not be able to edit the page, so you are encouraged to create an account.

2716:

used to refer to RotB, and that Bumblebee was almost never referred to as Transformers 6, but that the common name of both films is clear, numbered titles are rarely used for the series, and that there is no real ambiguity

1197:

Cinemabland) which are acceptable, and advised to avoid primary sources (like the fan site in this question). So, since Cinemabland is a secondary source, and not primary source, it is acceptable per Knowledge's policy.

2173:

It pretty clear though that this film is not a prequel. As the continuity and what the characters say do not remotely line up with the Bay films. So the word should be removed. Cantomic66 20:56, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

153: 1828:

I strongly disagree with lame long term slow edit wars even more. I will defend the small consensus we managed to establish unless and until there is a new discussion that establish a bigger better consensus. --

2561:

provide a temporary voice track and the animators worked off that temporary track as a reference. Cullen then had to then match the details of his performance and inflections to the existing flawed animations.

2243:

Sources called it a prequel, and the Bumblebee film is set in the 1980's which is chronologically before the 2007 Transformers film, so I hope you can see why some thought it was logical to call it a prequel.

2158:

Allow me to propose a compromise: how about we say in the lead that the film has both been referred to as a prequel as well as a reboot? I do think continuity information is important to discuss in the lead.

3074:

Some toys and merchandising included the longer title "Tranformers: Bumblebee". The title was stylized on the poster and various other places to to use CamelCase as "BumbleBee". I don't think any of this is

2460:

It is not helpful to claim that Charlie's Father's death is "recent", because we don't know if it was recent in any meaningful sense, and to claim it is recent requires guesses based on the flashback scenes.

1162:(and even a year later the cruft hasn't been cleared out). I don't think the failure to follow the rules was a good idea there and I don't see a particular convincing reason to break the rule here either. 2628:

over whether or not Bumblebee is the 6th film. I do not believe that there is a significant use of "Transformers 6" to begin with or that there is enough confusion to merit including a redirect hatnote.

1050:

Yeah loenzo doesn't even know what hes talking about since it can't let go of the michael bay movies, honestly the transformer fandom wants him fired because he keeps muddying the water with statements

990:

Knowledge claims to be based on sources. If anyone wants to use the term reboot then they will need to have a good source to back it up, a better source than the producer saying it isn't a reboot. --

2708:"When notes feature a trivial detail or use of a term, or links to overly specific and tendentious material, they are unwarranted." The title of this film is clear, no significant confusion exists. 1083:

reboot, but there wasn't much information about the director Travis Knight thought about it. Even if we can get a decent source about what Hasbro actually said at New York ToyFair it is all so much

2083:

Beasts. Highlighting minor continuity issues does not serve serve readers of an encyclopedia and only raises questions and complicates matters that are best explained in the article body, ie it is

820: 2008: 1037: 1825:

I am not a fan of labelling things as reboots, soft or otherwise (remember adding Wahlberg to the franchise was a significant change too) and even though I might personally agree with changes

3299: 2931:

to a disambiguation page that points to the articles for both Bumblebee and Beasts, without any subjective notes about the alleged continuity (or lack of it) in this series of films. --

1012:

and continuity calling it as "a prequel that also doubles as a soft reboot", so while I haven't been able to find Knight using the term some people are interpreting the film as both. --

1642:. This is why I made the extra effort to try and find consensus but Knowledge failed hard. This dumb slow edit war will probably continue because too many people will not discuss. -- 1753:

I realize it is a little bit stilted but I still think that slightly awkward wording is necessary to discourage people from arguing about it and changing it over and over again. --

1379:

twice). The dumb slow edit warring I pointed out at the start of this discussion was probably a violation of 3RR too. Then again Knowledge rules are selectively enforced and people

622: 710: 565: 431: 338: 1846:

is a practically meaningless distinction, and entirely subjective. Even if it was anything other than fan commentary, producer Di Bonaventura actively avoided the term "reboot"

2240:

I regret ever agreeing to a compromise wording, I should have argued more convincingly exclude this contentious wording years ago, instead the slow dumb edit war continued on.

1420:

at the 2019 New York Toyfair, Hasbro officially declared the Bumblebee movie to be “a new storytelling universe” which other sources have called a reboot of the franchise..

2489:

in addition to the above, we don't know when exactly Bumblebee arrived on Earth, or how much time passes after he arrives, but we do know that Charlie's story is in 1987. --

2055:

People keep reposting the same old sources, articles make claims that the words of the interview subject don't clearly support. This is contentious and unimportant and it is

3060:

Some editors in the past have disputed the title of this film. The lead section previously included references to support the alternative names but these have been removed (

2144:

that this film was the one after the Last Knight and that the next film is Rise of the Beasts. Do you really believe this mess is helpful to the average ordinary reader? --

2927:

Instead, if you really think readers are not already well served by the clear link to the next film already in the lead section, I would suggest changing the redirect page

639: 272: 1592: 1550: 147: 2131:

in his edit summary that the talk page indicated consensus, what little consensus there ever was was tenuous at best, and it was frequently ignored anyway which is not

3304: 3279: 2541:

for the film. Might be possible to fit it into the article somewhere eventually if it was expanded to include more details about the filming and practical effects. --

715: 537: 527: 1726:

So we've finally got something we can keep stable? Good enough. (At least for a while, other sources may become available.) Thanks for making effort to discuss. --

3068:

those alternative titles. (I don't think this was even the first time similar references to prove the alternative titles have been removed from the lead section.)

3294: 1587:

As I said before you could call this film a prequel, a spin-off, or a reboot just depending on what sources you pick. It seems even reputable sources like critic

675: 665: 1680:. I didn't want to let such a blatant bad faith edit stand, but since there's such a failure of discussion here I will probably leave it if it happens again. -- 1375:

It seems you are technically correct, even though I've not been reverting the same person it seems strictly speaking it goes against 3RR (and I see I did revert

3284: 2037: 1600: 1170: 1111: 2409: 3264: 1165: 3309: 3192:. I wish I'd stood my ground instead of conceding to a compromise wording that didn't make anyone happy either. I should have been more forceful about the 2921: 629: 2976:

and this was reverted because no sources were provided. But sources such as (the films credits and) Variety say the film was produced in association with

2539: 1277:, based on the sources currently available. I'd settle for option 4 over either of option 2 or 3. (I will ping both EkoGraf and Fradio71 for comment.) -- 503: 79: 1549:

term reboot when the producer clearly rejected it. For example: when discussing the film opening in China, noted critic Scott Mendelson called the film

3274: 3259: 2887:

arguments canon, and the suggestion that this is anything other than film series (with a casual attitude to continuity and contradictory retcons). --

1132:

attend the panels to say something? Seems a little misguided to dismiss a dedicated, reliable Transformers fansite as a source for Transformers news--

268: 3249: 634: 44: 3289: 3064:) by an editor who did not understand why those references were there, so I am writing this to make it clear that those references were added to 2622: 3319: 810: 3126:) because sources were removed without understanding why they were there in the first place another editor came along and said why isn't this 3041: 3026: 2888: 2841: 2810: 2730: 2662: 2145: 2106:

need to gain consensus to remove the wording, not the other way round. The fact that this wording has been around for a while shows there is

2088: 2064: 494: 455: 85: 2463:

The word "recent" is often subjective and better avoided in any writing but particularly in an encyclopedia, and Knowledge specifically has

2079:

this out and that was frequently ignored, it only slowed and did not stop the slow dumb edit war.) This is not simple continuity information

1852:

Fans are welcome to argue about this distinction as much as they like but it doesn't make much sense for this encyclopedia to give any more

3138: 2984: 2932: 2565: 2490: 2434: 2418: 2330: 2313: 2254: 1861: 1856:

than it already has. It remains to be seen how much the next film will change things (or like Bumblebee not really change much at all) but

1780: 1754: 1727: 1681: 1433: 1391:? I still think the sources that EkoGraf says are reliable fail because they are openly reposting from each other and hearsay written on a 1178: 1115: 1088: 915: 898: 874: 855: 2643:

If you honestly believe this Redirect is necessary or that it really is helpful to a significant amount of readers please explain why. --

1383:

but I am actively trying to find a consensus that we can stick to, and despite the reverts we've only just started to have a discussion.

3324: 3172: 3086: 3002: 2861:

received 500 pageviews in the past year, that means at least 500 people found it helpful, and any one of them may have been looking for

2597: 2589: 2542: 2514: 2472: 2389: 2370: 2294: 2041: 1830: 1813: 1663: 1643: 1623: 1554: 1535: 1516: 1483: 1442: 1347: 1328: 1278: 1013: 955: 605: 560: 2417:

I was thinking of including this note from RelishMix in the Critical response section after CinemaScore and PostTrak. Any comments? --

3269: 3202: 2983:

so could editors please clarify for the record why China should not also be listed if this was part financed by a Chinese company? --

2644: 2012: 1694:

An apparent unsourced and POV-pushing edit under the cover of a "Fixed Typo" edit summary? Yeah, its most certainly a bad faith edit.

1041: 991: 617: 3201:

edits don't fit the strict definition of vandalism so hopefully setting this article to flagged edits will be sufficient. Thanks. --

2621:

The series has never emphasized the numbers in the titles. As a result very few people search for the films based on numbered title.

2503:

I don't recall the film explaining much of anything about her father's death, but apparently he died of a heart attack according to

1507:(verbatim) but unfortunately has not added anything to the discussion here yet. For some reason his talk page appears to be locked 2786:" into the search bar, it is necessary for us to point them to the right direction on this page. This hatnote is not unwarranted. 2636: 2233: 2189: 1968: 786: 2879:

If it must exist -- I really don't believe it should, no _significant_ confusion exists -- I dispute the wording "For the sixth

1441:". That time too despite not using the term reboot either a whole bunch of other sites reinterpreted their comments as such. -- 954:

so unless someone makes some effort to discuss this and produces some compelling sources this article should not say reboot. --

3314: 1850: 380: 190: 99: 30: 3254: 2030: 1946: 1875: 168: 104: 20: 3040:

I trimmed it a little bit, perhaps someone else can phrase it more succinctly but I think what remains is worth keeping. --

613:

on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.

135: 392: 384: 74: 2883:

installment" because that is a weird notion not supported by reliable sources, and feeds into the contentious claims and

1806:

is necessary please discuss, explain, and show reliable sources to support your argument. -- 15:15, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

308: 2855:

The difference in pageviews is about what is typical of redirects, so I do not find this to be sufficient evidence. If

1942: 2132: 2107: 777: 738: 65: 2592:) added this to the Reception section without any explanation and unfortunately using a YouTube link as a reference. 2363: 1534:

is aware of this discussion because he reverted all the effort to improve the Sequel section of the article too. --

2632: 2511: 1857: 1395:

and then subjectively summarizing it as "reboot" even though the fansite they are quoting didn't even use the term.

486: 388: 375: 333: 185: 2981: 1158:

make excessive use of fansites like TrekMovie.com because editors didn't want to wait until better sources become

3045: 3030: 2892: 2845: 2814: 2734: 2666: 2149: 2092: 2068: 2536: 199: 129: 3142: 2936: 2438: 2422: 1784: 1758: 1182: 1119: 1092: 1005: 976:

that this is not a prequel, and the producer may have said what he said merely to act as a decoy of some sort?

878: 859: 255: 2988: 2569: 2494: 2334: 2317: 2258: 1865: 1731: 1685: 919: 902: 3176: 3090: 3006: 2601: 2583: 2546: 2518: 2374: 2298: 2274: 2063:

lead section, this mess is not the best way to serve encyclopedia readers and is better avoided entirely. --

1834: 1817: 1558: 1539: 1520: 1487: 1446: 1351: 1056: 1017: 938: 3220: 3206: 3157: 3113: 2950: 2910: 2870: 2791: 2696: 2648: 2476: 2393: 2208: 2164: 2115: 2045: 1989: 1954: 1929: 1889: 1667: 1647: 1627: 1332: 1282: 995: 959: 109: 1240:

agreement and we can avoid people slow edit warring over this I'll step back. Let us consider some options:

125: 2032:

the author uses the term "soft reboot" to describe Rise of the Beasts (a term Bonaventura has long avoided

1596: 1388: 3215:

It's now set to pending changes protection, so you can still edit, but your edits are subject to review.

842:

Prequel or reboot or both? Could we get some consensus on this so people quit slow edit warring over it?

2579: 2359: 2270: 1434:

https://news.tfw2005.com/2018/02/16/transformers-cinematic-universe-current-movie-series-rebooted-358641

1052: 934: 314: 234: 3130:

and deleted the alternative title. So very predictable. I have restored the alternative title this time

952: 1008:

as he deliberately excluded Megatron, but another article (again at Screenrant) only a few days later

175: 2354:

from the soundtrack without any explanation. I could (and might) revert it for failing to follow the

2229: 2221: 2185: 2177: 1876:

it's confirmed both Bumblebee and the forthcoming sequel are canon to the Bayverse. Just as intended.

1809: 1398:

While I think it will be difficult to agree on changes to the intro, I would not oppose edits to the

1155: 851: 597: 1431: 296: 2658:

Two years later, a "Transformers 6" hatnote still seems entirely unnecessary so I again removed it.

2562: 2366: 1622:

to emphasize reboot in the intro when it isn't properly explained anywhere in the article body. --

684: 421: 161: 55: 3071:

I don't think anyone actually disputes that the primary common name of this film is "Bumblebee".

1150:

Knowledge rules are so vague and so selectively enforced it is ridiculous, and most of the time a

1009: 785:

on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

502:

on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

3216: 3193: 3153: 3109: 2946: 2906: 2884: 2866: 2787: 2692: 2635:

and the sequel section points to the next film. I do not believe anyone looking for the upcoming

2468: 2454: 2204: 2160: 2111: 1985: 1950: 1925: 1915: 1885: 1469: 1137: 204: 70: 1402:

section of the article. Perhaps something along the following lines would be helpful to readers:

581: 554: 218: 3021:

An editor deleted a large chunk of information from the Sequel section without any explanation.

2508: 1106:(is Comicbook.com evan a reputable source?) still makes it clear that they are sourcing from a 2806: 2721: 2464: 2326:

Still people who are convinced it is inaccurate to call this film anything other than "reboot"

1717: 1699: 1676:

And again the slow edit war continues, with an edit summary claiming it was only correcting a

1604: 1392: 1366: 1343: 1313: 1297: 1259:

Include both, the film is a prequel and a reboot (the article was like this for quite a while)

1256:

Include term reboot without the term prequel (the edit people seem to be making at the moment)

1232: 1202: 1193: 1159: 1151: 1107: 1084: 51: 1511:

so I can't even add a talkback request. EkoGraf was bold, I reverted, and EkoGraf discussed (

3134: 3127: 3065: 2977: 2712:?? Factually it is the seventh film, but I would say that that the "Transformers 7" is only 2705: 2355: 2249: 1853: 1573: 1508: 981: 260: 201: 141: 24: 3197: 3168: 2837: 2833: 2225: 2181: 2136: 2084: 2056: 1619: 1588: 1309: 1079: 499: 2135:. It is contentious mess, putting this continuity trivia in the lead section is any less 1775:

which unfortunately shows we need to continue to call cover all bases and describe it as

1482:

Thanks for noticing my attempt to improve the Sequel section, and fixing my mistakes. --

3167:

open for anyone to edit I have no plans to create an account (and maybe not even then).

2033: 1847: 3188:

For the record it's been that way since this film released, a long slow dumb edit war,

3081: 2928: 2203:, we can't come to a conclusion ourselves based on our own interpretation and beliefs. 1984:

article was edited, adding that it's "the second installment in reboot/remake series".

1430:

Funny thing is all this talk of reboot was kicked off in 2018 by comments from TFW2005

753: 732: 3243: 3076: 2720:

I gave this plenty of consideration when the issue came up years ago but i read the

2457:

requires brevity, 400-700 words which leaves little room for any unnecessary words.

2196: 2140: 1911: 1608: 1512: 1465: 1380: 1324: 1133: 610: 470: 449: 2480: 2200: 1713: 1695: 1384: 1376: 1362: 1320: 1293: 1198: 769: 250: 1849:

and the series "weren’t exactly sticklers for the laws of time and space, either".

239: 1262:

NEITHER. Don't include either term prequel or reboot in the intro at all, follow

950: 379:. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can 1797: 1569: 1531: 1500: 1266:

more strictly and only summarize what the rest of the article actually supports.

1228:

clear agreement I must thank you for making the effort to add to the discussion.

977: 702: 367: 2809:

guidelines was not encouraging the proliferation of redirects and hatnotes. --

2629: 1843:

The long slow war of the fan cruft seems like it will never end. "soft reboot"

1327:. Again thank you for being one of the few to finally try to discuss this. -- 759: 692: 587: 476: 357: 351: 327: 2901:"Mainline" means it is not a spin-off and bears the name of the series (i.e. 1154:

is not good enough and the discussion ends there. Other times articles like

229: 203: 1966:- one of the edit descriptions claimed that - going off the newly-released 609:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the 480: 3224: 3210: 3180: 3161: 3146: 3117: 3094: 3049: 3034: 3010: 2992: 2954: 2940: 2924:) and it is rare enough that these films are referred to by number at all. 2914: 2896: 2874: 2849: 2818: 2795: 2738: 2700: 2670: 2652: 2605: 2573: 2550: 2522: 2498: 2461: 2442: 2426: 2397: 2378: 2338: 2321: 2302: 2278: 2262: 2212: 2168: 2153: 2119: 2096: 2072: 2049: 2016: 1993: 1958: 1933: 1919: 1893: 1869: 1838: 1788: 1762: 1735: 1721: 1712:

than that's that. In any case, thank you for the new version of the text.

1703: 1689: 1671: 1651: 1631: 1577: 1562: 1543: 1524: 1491: 1473: 1450: 1370: 1355: 1336: 1301: 1286: 1206: 1186: 1141: 1123: 1096: 1060: 1045: 1021: 999: 985: 963: 942: 923: 906: 882: 863: 2624:

Despite this, there seems to be a vanishingly small minority of fans who

1263: 396: 2269:

Yeah but the source is an unreliable baffoon so is it really any better

1972:

trailer - as Unicron isn't part of the Earth anymore, as established in

2675:

And I've reverted it again. It is necessary because the sixth mainline

2625: 2504: 2453:

An editor keeps adding to the plot section, without any explanation.

2412: 763: 2465:

guidelines warning against using relative time words such as recent

2036:

in the article.) I also see an article from The Hollywood Reporter

1128:

So are you waiting for press that is considered more reliable but

1066:

Not again. It might be better if the intro avoided using the terms

2838:

compared to the numbers of pageviews the film articles are getting

2365:) does not include any song from Creed, so the delete might be in 782: 2758:" can mean two things: one, the sixth overall installment in the 2744:

The title of this film is clear, no significant confusion exists.

2535:

Found a reference from the special effects company that provided

1612:

storytelling universe” that everyone seems to be interpreting as

1319:

I will reread the documentation but I don't recall 3RR trumping

1087:

that isn't really about this film but about the next film. --

290: 213: 205: 15: 3001:

If anyone removes it again please do explain and clarify. --

933:

optimus appears at the end which means it can't be a prequel

2973:

An anon editor added China to the country list for this film

2509:

https://tfwiki.net/Transformers:_Bumblebee:_The_Junior_Novel

2308:

Will the long slow dumb edit war ever end? Apparently not. (

683: 420: 278: 1591:

at Forbes.com are interpreting it as a reboot (his article

1551:"the prequel/spin-off that became a proverbial soft reboot" 2834:

comparing the Transformers 6 and Transformers 7 redirects

2059:

to put it in the lead section at all. Better to remove it

2218:

up a new canon. Cantomic66 06:46, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

1945:

linked as a source, though I've reverted it considering

3131: 3123: 3061: 3022: 2999: 2974: 2857: 2659: 2617: 2487: 2385: 2351: 2327: 2309: 2291: 2129: 2087:

to put them in the lead section. Please cut it out. --

2080: 2060: 2029:

NoobMiester is asserting it to be. The Collider article

1963: 1938: 1844: 1826: 1794: 1772: 1768: 1750: 1709: 1677: 1660: 1658: 1640: 1637: 1504: 1253:

Include the only term prequel in the intro (status quo)

1103: 912: 895: 892: 871: 847: 845: 843: 2616:

A redirect hatnote was recently added to this article.

271:. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at 160: 2199:, we have sources that support this being a prequel; 1599:

which as with all these stories points right back to

1980:

is apparently considered a reboot. In addition, the

781:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 498:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 3133:but I might not restore it next time, it is all so 2905:). Do you have a suggestion for an alternate word? 2766:; or, it could mean the sixth mainline film in the 2411:

that quoted social media analysis company RelishMix

1910:Thanks for the update! I hope that is left alone. 1603:). It is a house of cards, sources all based on a 1192:were citing a fansite alone and directly then yes 273:Template:Did you know nominations/Bumblebee (film) 2998:Added again (not by me), this time with a source. 1779:. Compromise, means we get this unhappy mess. -- 1231:Unfortunately a bunch of other sites repeating a 1036:yeah but lorenzo doesn't know what the hell he's 264:, which is currently in production in California? 3300:C-Class United States articles of Low-importance 2691:", so we're doing the same with redirects here. 2507:and "Transformers: Bumblebee: The Junior Novel" 33:for general discussion of the article's subject. 2836:would help? It does not seem significant to me 395:. To improve this article, please refer to the 2805:amount of confusion. It seemed to me from the 3108:) should not be removed without good reason. 1004:Apparently director Travis Knight was trying 897:. It would be funny if it wasn't so lame. -- 711:WikiProject Film - American cinema task force 174: 8: 2945:I would be okay if we went with a DAB page. 2358:rules and explain the deletion but the the 2683:and not this one. But sources widely call 2219: 2175: 2007:fired so he can "produce" some other crap 1807: 1102:So far the sources haven't been good, the 849: 727: 549: 444: 391:. To use this banner, please refer to the 322: 3025:development section of the next film. -- 1173:" then running with that to declare it a 269:Knowledge:Recent additions/2017/September 242:). The text of the entry was as follows: 2290:Slow dumb edit war continues 5 years on. 3305:Low-importance American cinema articles 3280:Low-importance science fiction articles 2778:. Because someone might be looking for 2661:See reasons already outlined above. -- 1771:and saying "prequel" and other editors 729: 551: 446: 324: 294: 3185: 2743: 2709: 2245: 2009:2A02:C7C:DACE:F100:9D2A:D459:8459:C74F 1038:2A02:C7C:DACE:F100:9D2A:D459:8459:C74F 3295:Low-importance United States articles 2631:The intro/lead already points to the 1438:Toy Fair 2018 Hasbro Investor Preview 1166:Cinemablend has reported on the story 512:Knowledge:WikiProject Science Fiction 267:A record of the entry may be seen at 7: 3285:WikiProject Science Fiction articles 2729:needs a Transformers 5 hatnote. -- 1361:unreliable and per Wiki guidelines. 775:This article is within the scope of 603:This article is within the scope of 515:Template:WikiProject Science Fiction 492:This article is within the scope of 373:This article is within the scope of 3265:American cinema task force articles 2388:but again still no explanation. -- 1769:messing with the compromise wording 650:Knowledge:WikiProject United States 313:It is of interest to the following 23:for discussing improvements to the 3310:WikiProject United States articles 2505:https://tfwiki.net/Charlie%27s_Dad 653:Template:WikiProject United States 14: 2469:unnecessarily bloat the wordcount 2408:Deadline Hollywood had an article 1773:obsessing about calling it reboot 1662:the back and forth continues. -- 429:This article is supported by the 279: 3275:C-Class science fiction articles 3260:C-Class American cinema articles 1969:Transformers: Rise of the Beasts 762: 752: 731: 695: 590: 580: 553: 479: 469: 448: 389:regional and topical task forces 360: 350: 326: 295: 217: 45:Click here to start a new topic. 3250:Knowledge Did you know articles 2865:but ended up here by accident. 2246:the director called it a reboot 1505:restored the changes by EkoGraf 815:This article has been rated as 670:This article has been rated as 532:This article has been rated as 3290:C-Class United States articles 1: 3320:Low-importance 2010s articles 3118:19:30, 21 December 2023 (UTC) 3095:14:46, 21 December 2023 (UTC) 3011:17:42, 24 December 2022 (UTC) 2637:Transformers: Beast Wars film 2303:18:56, 25 November 2023 (UTC) 1939:The wording was changed again 1870:03:59, 17 December 2022 (UTC) 1704:18:42, 26 February 2019 (UTC) 1690:17:40, 26 February 2019 (UTC) 1672:15:54, 25 February 2019 (UTC) 1652:01:07, 24 February 2019 (UTC) 1632:13:23, 23 February 2019 (UTC) 1578:15:43, 22 February 2019 (UTC) 1563:13:59, 22 February 2019 (UTC) 1544:13:01, 22 February 2019 (UTC) 1525:12:59, 22 February 2019 (UTC) 1492:22:19, 21 February 2019 (UTC) 1474:15:17, 21 February 2019 (UTC) 1451:22:19, 21 February 2019 (UTC) 1371:20:29, 21 February 2019 (UTC) 1356:17:02, 21 February 2019 (UTC) 1337:15:06, 21 February 2019 (UTC) 1302:08:43, 21 February 2019 (UTC) 1287:00:56, 21 February 2019 (UTC) 1207:23:57, 20 February 2019 (UTC) 1187:08:08, 18 February 2019 (UTC) 1142:05:48, 18 February 2019 (UTC) 1124:04:55, 18 February 2019 (UTC) 1097:04:43, 18 February 2019 (UTC) 1078:entirely since it gives them 1022:22:50, 21 February 2019 (UTC) 924:23:01, 23 December 2018 (UTC) 907:20:13, 23 December 2018 (UTC) 883:17:44, 22 December 2018 (UTC) 864:16:01, 22 December 2018 (UTC) 789:and see a list of open tasks. 708:This article is supported by 506:and see a list of open tasks. 42:Put new text under old text. 3189: 2993:15:17, 5 December 2022 (UTC) 2443:00:30, 20 January 2020 (UTC) 2398:02:12, 2 February 2020 (UTC) 2322:14:13, 6 December 2023 (UTC) 1789:05:26, 24 October 2019 (UTC) 1777:prequel, spin-off and reboot 1595:, points to an article from 1530:It really doesn't look like 1000:12:19, 9 February 2019 (UTC) 986:00:11, 18 January 2019 (UTC) 238:column on 2 September 2017 ( 2955:22:55, 14 August 2023 (UTC) 2941:19:52, 14 August 2023 (UTC) 2915:04:56, 12 August 2023 (UTC) 2606:16:21, 27 August 2021 (UTC) 2574:01:16, 24 August 2020 (UTC) 2523:04:03, 26 August 2020 (UTC) 2427:04:28, 5 January 2020 (UTC) 2263:02:35, 22 August 2023 (UTC) 2213:02:07, 18 August 2023 (UTC) 1418:Hasbro Product Presentation 1171:a new storytelling universe 964:18:17, 5 January 2019 (UTC) 795:Knowledge:WikiProject 2010s 495:WikiProject Science Fiction 50:New to Knowledge? Welcome! 3341: 3325:WikiProject 2010s articles 3122:The inevitable happened, ( 2750:" that's ambiguous, it's " 2379:13:04, 13 April 2019 (UTC) 1994:10:06, 28 April 2023 (UTC) 1959:15:10, 27 April 2023 (UTC) 1934:21:37, 26 April 2023 (UTC) 1920:18:50, 26 April 2023 (UTC) 1894:18:34, 26 April 2023 (UTC) 1858:Michael Bay's Transformers 1763:16:18, 23 March 2019 (UTC) 1636:This shit keeps happening 1607:, ugh, I give up. However 1387:you could maybe ask for a 1269:Other ... write in comment 1010:complains about plot holes 798:Template:WikiProject 2010s 676:project's importance scale 538:project's importance scale 487:Speculative fiction portal 432:American cinema task force 405:Knowledge:WikiProject Film 3270:WikiProject Film articles 3225:20:40, 9 March 2024 (UTC) 3211:15:44, 8 March 2024 (UTC) 3181:09:45, 6 March 2024 (UTC) 3162:18:06, 5 March 2024 (UTC) 3147:08:40, 5 March 2024 (UTC) 3050:19:17, 16 July 2023 (UTC) 3035:19:06, 16 July 2023 (UTC) 2897:08:57, 22 July 2023 (UTC) 2875:15:00, 21 July 2023 (UTC) 2850:20:08, 20 July 2023 (UTC) 2819:20:04, 20 July 2023 (UTC) 2796:14:26, 20 July 2023 (UTC) 2739:09:53, 20 July 2023 (UTC) 2701:02:00, 20 July 2023 (UTC) 2671:13:58, 19 July 2023 (UTC) 2551:16:23, 13 June 2020 (UTC) 2339:21:31, 26 July 2024 (UTC) 2279:15:35, 26 July 2024 (UTC) 2250:none of it really matters 2169:14:56, 21 July 2023 (UTC) 2154:19:47, 20 July 2023 (UTC) 2120:14:23, 20 July 2023 (UTC) 2097:09:43, 20 July 2023 (UTC) 2073:18:54, 16 July 2023 (UTC) 2017:15:33, 26 July 2024 (UTC) 1839:22:12, 30 June 2021 (UTC) 1736:21:13, 2 March 2019 (UTC) 1722:14:12, 1 March 2019 (UTC) 1412:According to a report by 1104:least worst source so far 1061:11:01, 26 July 2024 (UTC) 1046:10:52, 26 July 2024 (UTC) 943:10:58, 26 July 2024 (UTC) 814: 747: 691: 669: 606:WikiProject United States 575: 531: 464: 428: 408:Template:WikiProject Film 345: 321: 80:Be welcoming to newcomers 3186:tiresome and meaningless 3100:The alternative titles ( 3017:Summarize sequel section 2770:series bearing the name 2653:19:39, 3 July 2021 (UTC) 2499:03:22, 4 June 2020 (UTC) 2481:02:30, 2 June 2020 (UTC) 2352:This edit removed a song 2050:23:10, 11 May 2023 (UTC) 1874:Well after recent news, 1593:about Bumblebee in China 611:United States of America 518:science fiction articles 228:appeared on Knowledge's 3102:Transformers: Bumblebee 3315:C-Class 2010s articles 2448: 2386:same edit was repeated 1943:this article from 2019 1767:We still have editors 1006:to maintain continuity 688: 656:United States articles 425: 303:This article is rated 284: 75:avoid personal attacks 3255:C-Class film articles 3077:important or relevant 2832:Maybe pageviews data 1639:and it gets reverted 687: 424: 282: 100:Neutral point of view 2537:two huey helicopters 2133:WP:IMPLICITCONSENSUS 2108:WP:IMPLICITCONSENSUS 1964:It was changed again 1949:recent bit of news. 1708:The current version 1156:Star Trek: Discovery 598:United States portal 258:will feature in his 105:No original research 2969:China clarification 2774:in the title, i.e. 2362:(and other sources 2128:InfiniteNexus wrote 1381:always make excuses 911:So very very lame. 624:Articles Requested! 381:join the discussion 2863:Rise of the Beasts 2780:Rise of the Beasts 2776:Rise of the Beasts 2685:Rise of the Beasts 2681:Rise of the Beasts 1982:Rise of the Beasts 1597:ScienceFiction.com 1568:know why. Thanks, 1414:Transformers World 689: 426: 309:content assessment 285: 86:dispute resolution 47: 2922:Talk Seventh film 2807:Knowledge:Hatnote 2722:Knowledge:Hatnote 2633:franchise article 2404:Audience response 2237: 2224:comment added by 2193: 2180:comment added by 1860:continues on. -- 1821: 1812:comment added by 866: 854:comment added by 835: 834: 831: 830: 827: 826: 778:WikiProject 2010s 726: 725: 722: 721: 548: 547: 544: 543: 443: 442: 439: 438: 383:and see lists of 289: 288: 212: 211: 66:Assume good faith 43: 3332: 2978:Tencent Pictures 2860: 2782:when they type " 2449:Charlie's Father 1793:And it continues 1509:User_talk:Drmies 1275:Support option 1 1273:So I prefer and 821:importance scale 803: 802: 799: 796: 793: 772: 767: 766: 756: 749: 748: 743: 735: 728: 705: 700: 699: 698: 658: 657: 654: 651: 648: 600: 595: 594: 593: 584: 577: 576: 571: 568: 557: 550: 520: 519: 516: 513: 510: 489: 484: 483: 473: 466: 465: 460: 452: 445: 413: 412: 409: 406: 403: 376:WikiProject Film 370: 365: 364: 363: 354: 347: 346: 341: 330: 323: 306: 300: 299: 291: 281: 226:Bumblebee (film) 221: 214: 206: 179: 178: 164: 95:Article policies 25:Bumblebee (film) 16: 3340: 3339: 3335: 3334: 3333: 3331: 3330: 3329: 3240: 3239: 3058: 3042:109.255.172.191 3027:109.255.172.191 3019: 2971: 2889:109.255.172.191 2856: 2842:109.255.172.191 2811:109.255.172.191 2731:109.255.172.191 2727:The Last Knight 2663:109.255.172.191 2614: 2558: 2533: 2451: 2406: 2360:source provided 2349: 2146:109.255.172.191 2089:109.255.172.191 2065:109.255.172.191 1749:Looking at the 1589:Scott Mendelson 1421: 1389:WP:THIRDOPINION 893:keeps happening 840: 800: 797: 794: 791: 790: 768: 761: 741: 701: 696: 694: 655: 652: 649: 646: 645: 644: 630:Become a Member 596: 591: 589: 569: 563: 517: 514: 511: 509:Science Fiction 508: 507: 500:science fiction 485: 478: 458: 456:Science Fiction 410: 407: 404: 401: 400: 366: 361: 359: 336: 307:on Knowledge's 304: 208: 207: 202: 121: 116: 115: 114: 91: 61: 12: 11: 5: 3338: 3336: 3328: 3327: 3322: 3317: 3312: 3307: 3302: 3297: 3292: 3287: 3282: 3277: 3272: 3267: 3262: 3257: 3252: 3242: 3241: 3238: 3237: 3236: 3235: 3234: 3233: 3232: 3231: 3230: 3229: 3228: 3227: 3139:109.76.133.100 3057: 3054: 3053: 3052: 3018: 3015: 3014: 3013: 2985:109.76.203.242 2970: 2967: 2966: 2965: 2964: 2963: 2962: 2961: 2960: 2959: 2958: 2957: 2933:109.76.132.159 2929:Transformers 6 2925: 2858:Transformers 6 2830: 2829: 2828: 2827: 2826: 2825: 2824: 2823: 2822: 2821: 2784:Transformers 6 2756:Transformers 6 2752:Transformers 6 2718: 2689:Transformers 7 2613: 2610: 2609: 2608: 2593: 2566:109.77.216.201 2557: 2554: 2532: 2529: 2528: 2527: 2526: 2525: 2491:109.77.192.152 2450: 2447: 2446: 2445: 2435:109.77.195.189 2419:109.77.205.163 2405: 2402: 2401: 2400: 2348: 2345: 2344: 2343: 2342: 2341: 2331:109.79.169.204 2314:109.76.200.233 2288: 2287: 2286: 2285: 2284: 2283: 2282: 2281: 2267: 2266: 2265: 2255:109.76.200.127 2241: 2215: 2171: 2126: 2076: 2075: 2026: 2025: 2024: 2023: 2022: 2021: 2020: 2019: 2003: 2002: 2001: 2000: 1999: 1998: 1997: 1996: 1901: 1900: 1899: 1898: 1897: 1896: 1883: 1882: 1881: 1862:109.76.139.213 1803:it is a sequel 1796:... what does 1781:109.79.171.171 1755:109.78.217.150 1747: 1746: 1745: 1744: 1743: 1742: 1741: 1740: 1739: 1738: 1728:109.76.144.160 1682:109.76.198.249 1617: 1585: 1584: 1583: 1582: 1581: 1580: 1497: 1496: 1495: 1494: 1477: 1476: 1460: 1459: 1458: 1457: 1456: 1455: 1454: 1453: 1411: 1410: 1409: 1408: 1407: 1406: 1405: 1404: 1403: 1396: 1317: 1271: 1270: 1267: 1260: 1257: 1254: 1250: 1249: 1248: 1247: 1246: 1245: 1244: 1243: 1242: 1241: 1237: 1229: 1216: 1215: 1214: 1213: 1212: 1211: 1210: 1209: 1179:109.79.184.195 1163: 1148: 1116:109.79.184.195 1089:109.79.184.195 1064: 1063: 1048: 1034: 1033: 1032: 1031: 1030: 1029: 1028: 1027: 1026: 1025: 1024: 946: 945: 930: 929: 928: 927: 926: 916:109.76.131.195 899:109.76.131.195 886: 885: 875:89.100.226.165 856:109.79.165.193 839: 836: 833: 832: 829: 828: 825: 824: 817:Low-importance 813: 807: 806: 804: 801:2010s articles 787:the discussion 774: 773: 757: 745: 744: 742:Low‑importance 736: 724: 723: 720: 719: 716:Low-importance 707: 706: 690: 680: 679: 672:Low-importance 668: 662: 661: 659: 643: 642: 637: 632: 627: 620: 618:Template Usage 614: 602: 601: 585: 573: 572: 570:Low‑importance 558: 546: 545: 542: 541: 534:Low-importance 530: 524: 523: 521: 504:the discussion 491: 490: 474: 462: 461: 459:Low‑importance 453: 441: 440: 437: 436: 427: 417: 416: 414: 372: 371: 355: 343: 342: 331: 319: 318: 312: 301: 287: 286: 276: 266: 265: 222: 210: 209: 200: 198: 197: 194: 193: 181: 180: 118: 117: 113: 112: 107: 102: 93: 92: 90: 89: 82: 77: 68: 62: 60: 59: 48: 39: 38: 35: 34: 28: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 3337: 3326: 3323: 3321: 3318: 3316: 3313: 3311: 3308: 3306: 3303: 3301: 3298: 3296: 3293: 3291: 3288: 3286: 3283: 3281: 3278: 3276: 3273: 3271: 3268: 3266: 3263: 3261: 3258: 3256: 3253: 3251: 3248: 3247: 3245: 3226: 3222: 3218: 3217:InfiniteNexus 3214: 3213: 3212: 3208: 3204: 3199: 3195: 3191: 3187: 3184: 3183: 3182: 3178: 3174: 3173:109.78.196.45 3170: 3165: 3164: 3163: 3159: 3155: 3154:InfiniteNexus 3150: 3149: 3148: 3144: 3140: 3136: 3132: 3129: 3125: 3121: 3120: 3119: 3115: 3111: 3110:InfiniteNexus 3107: 3103: 3099: 3098: 3097: 3096: 3092: 3088: 3087:109.79.69.222 3083: 3078: 3072: 3069: 3067: 3063: 3055: 3051: 3047: 3043: 3039: 3038: 3037: 3036: 3032: 3028: 3023: 3016: 3012: 3008: 3004: 3003:109.78.198.42 3000: 2997: 2996: 2995: 2994: 2990: 2986: 2982: 2979: 2975: 2968: 2956: 2952: 2948: 2947:InfiniteNexus 2944: 2943: 2942: 2938: 2934: 2930: 2926: 2923: 2918: 2917: 2916: 2912: 2908: 2907:InfiniteNexus 2904: 2900: 2899: 2898: 2894: 2890: 2886: 2882: 2878: 2877: 2876: 2872: 2868: 2867:InfiniteNexus 2864: 2859: 2854: 2853: 2852: 2851: 2847: 2843: 2839: 2835: 2820: 2816: 2812: 2808: 2804: 2799: 2798: 2797: 2793: 2789: 2788:InfiniteNexus 2785: 2781: 2777: 2773: 2769: 2765: 2762:series, i.e. 2761: 2757: 2753: 2749: 2745: 2742: 2741: 2740: 2736: 2732: 2728: 2723: 2719: 2715: 2711: 2707: 2704: 2703: 2702: 2698: 2694: 2693:InfiniteNexus 2690: 2686: 2682: 2678: 2674: 2673: 2672: 2668: 2664: 2660: 2657: 2656: 2655: 2654: 2650: 2646: 2641: 2638: 2634: 2630: 2627: 2623: 2619: 2618: 2611: 2607: 2603: 2599: 2598:109.77.193.18 2594: 2591: 2588: 2585: 2581: 2580:NoobMeister96 2578: 2577: 2576: 2575: 2571: 2567: 2563: 2555: 2553: 2552: 2548: 2544: 2543:109.76.212.43 2540: 2538: 2530: 2524: 2520: 2516: 2515:109.77.195.61 2512: 2510: 2506: 2502: 2501: 2500: 2496: 2492: 2488: 2485: 2484: 2483: 2482: 2478: 2474: 2473:109.76.137.43 2470: 2466: 2462: 2458: 2456: 2444: 2440: 2436: 2431: 2430: 2429: 2428: 2424: 2420: 2415: 2413: 2410: 2403: 2399: 2395: 2391: 2390:109.79.176.51 2387: 2383: 2382: 2381: 2380: 2376: 2372: 2371:109.78.219.98 2368: 2364: 2361: 2357: 2353: 2346: 2340: 2336: 2332: 2328: 2325: 2324: 2323: 2319: 2315: 2311: 2307: 2306: 2305: 2304: 2300: 2296: 2295:109.76.132.42 2292: 2280: 2276: 2272: 2271:Adam p. Hardy 2268: 2264: 2260: 2256: 2251: 2247: 2242: 2239: 2238: 2235: 2231: 2227: 2223: 2216: 2214: 2210: 2206: 2205:InfiniteNexus 2202: 2198: 2195: 2194: 2191: 2187: 2183: 2179: 2172: 2170: 2166: 2162: 2161:InfiniteNexus 2157: 2156: 2155: 2151: 2147: 2142: 2141:User:Fnlayson 2138: 2134: 2130: 2127: 2123: 2122: 2121: 2117: 2113: 2112:InfiniteNexus 2109: 2105: 2101: 2100: 2099: 2098: 2094: 2090: 2086: 2081: 2074: 2070: 2066: 2061: 2058: 2054: 2053: 2052: 2051: 2047: 2043: 2042:109.76.136.61 2038: 2034: 2031: 2018: 2014: 2010: 2005: 2004: 1995: 1991: 1987: 1986:FearfulWarpII 1983: 1979: 1975: 1971: 1970: 1965: 1962: 1961: 1960: 1956: 1952: 1951:FearfulWarpII 1948: 1944: 1940: 1937: 1936: 1935: 1931: 1927: 1926:NoobMiester96 1923: 1922: 1921: 1917: 1913: 1909: 1908: 1907: 1906: 1905: 1904: 1903: 1902: 1895: 1891: 1887: 1886:NoobMiester96 1884: 1879: 1878: 1877: 1873: 1872: 1871: 1867: 1863: 1859: 1855: 1851: 1848: 1845: 1842: 1841: 1840: 1836: 1832: 1831:109.79.171.78 1827: 1824: 1823: 1822: 1819: 1815: 1814:109.77.200.34 1811: 1804: 1799: 1795: 1791: 1790: 1786: 1782: 1778: 1774: 1770: 1765: 1764: 1760: 1756: 1752: 1751:wording again 1737: 1733: 1729: 1725: 1724: 1723: 1719: 1715: 1710: 1707: 1706: 1705: 1701: 1697: 1693: 1692: 1691: 1687: 1683: 1679: 1675: 1674: 1673: 1669: 1665: 1664:109.79.78.129 1661: 1659: 1656: 1655: 1654: 1653: 1649: 1645: 1644:109.79.91.196 1641: 1638: 1634: 1633: 1629: 1625: 1624:109.79.91.196 1621: 1615: 1610: 1606: 1602: 1598: 1594: 1590: 1579: 1575: 1571: 1566: 1565: 1564: 1560: 1556: 1555:109.79.95.247 1552: 1547: 1546: 1545: 1541: 1537: 1536:109.79.95.247 1533: 1529: 1528: 1527: 1526: 1522: 1518: 1517:109.79.95.247 1514: 1510: 1506: 1502: 1493: 1489: 1485: 1484:109.79.95.247 1481: 1480: 1479: 1478: 1475: 1471: 1467: 1462: 1461: 1452: 1448: 1444: 1443:109.79.95.247 1439: 1435: 1432: 1429: 1428: 1427: 1426: 1425: 1424: 1423: 1422: 1419: 1415: 1401: 1397: 1394: 1390: 1386: 1382: 1378: 1374: 1373: 1372: 1368: 1364: 1359: 1358: 1357: 1353: 1349: 1348:109.79.95.247 1345: 1340: 1339: 1338: 1334: 1330: 1329:109.77.213.47 1326: 1322: 1318: 1315: 1311: 1306: 1305: 1304: 1303: 1299: 1295: 1289: 1288: 1284: 1280: 1279:109.77.237.77 1276: 1268: 1265: 1261: 1258: 1255: 1252: 1251: 1238: 1234: 1230: 1226: 1225: 1224: 1223: 1222: 1221: 1220: 1219: 1218: 1217: 1208: 1204: 1200: 1195: 1190: 1189: 1188: 1184: 1180: 1176: 1172: 1167: 1164: 1161: 1157: 1153: 1149: 1145: 1144: 1143: 1139: 1135: 1131: 1127: 1126: 1125: 1121: 1117: 1113: 1109: 1105: 1101: 1100: 1099: 1098: 1094: 1090: 1086: 1081: 1077: 1076: 1071: 1070: 1062: 1058: 1054: 1053:Adam p. Hardy 1049: 1047: 1043: 1039: 1035: 1023: 1019: 1015: 1014:109.79.95.247 1011: 1007: 1003: 1002: 1001: 997: 993: 989: 988: 987: 983: 979: 974: 973: 972: 971: 970: 969: 968: 967: 966: 965: 961: 957: 956:109.79.172.66 953: 951: 944: 940: 936: 935:Adam p. Hardy 931: 925: 921: 917: 913: 910: 909: 908: 904: 900: 896: 894: 890: 889: 888: 887: 884: 880: 876: 872: 869: 868: 867: 865: 861: 857: 853: 848: 846: 844: 837: 822: 818: 812: 809: 808: 805: 788: 784: 780: 779: 771: 765: 760: 758: 755: 751: 750: 746: 740: 737: 734: 730: 717: 714:(assessed as 713: 712: 704: 693: 686: 682: 681: 677: 673: 667: 664: 663: 660: 647:United States 641: 638: 636: 633: 631: 628: 626: 625: 621: 619: 616: 615: 612: 608: 607: 599: 588: 586: 583: 579: 578: 574: 567: 562: 561:United States 559: 556: 552: 539: 535: 529: 526: 525: 522: 505: 501: 497: 496: 488: 482: 477: 475: 472: 468: 467: 463: 457: 454: 451: 447: 434: 433: 423: 419: 418: 415: 411:film articles 398: 394: 393:documentation 390: 386: 382: 378: 377: 369: 358: 356: 353: 349: 348: 344: 340: 335: 332: 329: 325: 320: 316: 310: 302: 298: 293: 292: 277: 274: 270: 263: 262: 257: 253: 252: 247: 244: 243: 241: 237: 236: 231: 227: 223: 220: 216: 215: 196: 195: 192: 189: 187: 183: 182: 177: 173: 170: 167: 163: 159: 155: 152: 149: 146: 143: 140: 137: 134: 131: 127: 124: 123:Find sources: 120: 119: 111: 110:Verifiability 108: 106: 103: 101: 98: 97: 96: 87: 83: 81: 78: 76: 72: 69: 67: 64: 63: 57: 53: 52:Learn to edit 49: 46: 41: 40: 37: 36: 32: 26: 22: 18: 17: 3203:109.79.70.49 3105: 3101: 3073: 3070: 3059: 3020: 2972: 2903:Transformers 2902: 2880: 2862: 2831: 2802: 2783: 2779: 2775: 2772:Transformers 2771: 2768:Transformers 2767: 2763: 2760:Transformers 2759: 2755: 2751: 2747: 2726: 2714:occasionally 2713: 2688: 2684: 2680: 2677:Transformers 2676: 2645:109.79.78.84 2642: 2620: 2615: 2586: 2559: 2556:Peter Cullen 2534: 2459: 2452: 2416: 2407: 2367:WP:GOODFAITH 2350: 2289: 2220:— Preceding 2176:— Preceding 2103: 2077: 2027: 1981: 1977: 1973: 1967: 1924:No problem. 1808:— Preceding 1802: 1792: 1776: 1766: 1748: 1635: 1613: 1586: 1498: 1437: 1417: 1413: 1399: 1344:wait and see 1290: 1274: 1272: 1174: 1129: 1074: 1073: 1068: 1067: 1065: 992:109.79.90.19 947: 870:And another 850:— Preceding 841: 816: 776: 770:2010s portal 709: 671: 635:Project Talk 623: 604: 533: 493: 430: 374: 315:WikiProjects 259: 251:Transformers 249: 246:Did you know 245: 235:Did you know 233: 225: 224:A fact from 184: 171: 165: 157: 150: 144: 138: 132: 122: 94: 19:This is the 3194:WP:FANCRUFT 2885:WP:FANCRUFT 2803:significant 2746:It is not " 2455:WP:FILMPLOT 1798:soft reboot 1532:User:Drmies 1501:User:Drmies 1085:speculation 703:Film portal 368:Film portal 240:check views 148:free images 31:not a forum 3244:Categories 2347:Soundtrack 2226:Cantomic66 2182:Cantomic66 1605:WP:FANSITE 1393:WP:FANSITE 1314:WP:FANSITE 1233:WP:FANSITE 1194:WP:FANSITE 1152:WP:FANSITE 1108:WP:FANSITE 397:guidelines 385:open tasks 254:character 3190:see above 3106:BumbleBee 3066:WP:VERIFY 2764:Bumblebee 2748:Bumblebee 2706:WP:NOTAMB 2356:WP:SIMPLE 1978:Bumblebee 1912:-Fnlayson 1618:It seems 1609:-Fnlayson 1466:-Fnlayson 1416:from the 283:Knowledge 256:Bumblebee 248:... that 230:Main Page 88:if needed 71:Be polite 21:talk page 3198:WP:UNDUE 3169:WP:WNCAA 2881:mainline 2679:film is 2612:Redirect 2590:contribs 2234:contribs 2222:unsigned 2190:contribs 2178:unsigned 2137:WP:UNDUE 2110:for it. 2085:WP:UNDUE 2057:WP:UNDUE 1854:emphasis 1810:unsigned 1620:WP:UNDUE 1310:WP:RUMOR 1264:MOS:LEAD 1134:Fradio71 1080:WP:UNDUE 852:unsigned 339:American 261:own film 186:Archives 56:get help 29:This is 27:article. 3135:trivial 3128:sourced 3082:WP:LEAD 2626:quibble 2531:Effects 1941:, with 1714:EkoGraf 1696:EkoGraf 1601:TFW2005 1436:at the 1385:EkoGraf 1377:EkoGraf 1363:EkoGraf 1312:from a 1294:EkoGraf 1199:EkoGraf 1112:TFW2005 1069:prequel 838:Prequel 819:on the 674:on the 536:on the 305:C-class 232:in the 154:WP refs 142:scholar 3196:being 2710:widely 2486:Again 2197:WP:VNT 1657:Again 1614:reboot 1570:Drmies 1513:WP:BRD 1499:I see 1400:Sequel 1325:WP:BRD 1175:reboot 1130:didn't 1114:). -- 1075:reboot 978:Drag-5 640:Alerts 566:Cinema 311:scale. 126:Google 3171:. -- 3137:. -- 3056:Title 2920:(see 2840:. -- 2717:here. 2471:. -- 2312:) -- 2201:WP:OR 1346:. -- 1321:WP:RS 1160:clear 1147:that. 792:2010s 783:2010s 739:2010s 169:JSTOR 130:books 84:Seek 3221:talk 3207:talk 3177:talk 3158:talk 3143:talk 3124:diff 3114:talk 3104:and 3091:talk 3062:diff 3046:talk 3031:talk 3007:talk 2989:talk 2951:talk 2937:talk 2911:talk 2893:talk 2871:talk 2846:talk 2815:talk 2792:talk 2754:". " 2735:talk 2697:talk 2667:talk 2649:talk 2602:talk 2584:talk 2570:talk 2547:talk 2519:talk 2495:talk 2477:talk 2439:talk 2423:talk 2394:talk 2384:The 2375:talk 2335:talk 2318:talk 2310:diff 2299:talk 2275:talk 2259:talk 2230:talk 2209:talk 2186:talk 2165:talk 2150:talk 2116:talk 2102:No, 2093:talk 2069:talk 2046:talk 2013:talk 1990:talk 1955:talk 1947:this 1930:talk 1916:talk 1890:talk 1866:talk 1835:talk 1818:talk 1785:talk 1759:talk 1732:talk 1718:talk 1700:talk 1686:talk 1678:typo 1668:talk 1648:talk 1628:talk 1574:talk 1559:talk 1540:talk 1521:talk 1503:has 1488:talk 1470:talk 1447:talk 1367:talk 1352:talk 1333:talk 1298:talk 1283:talk 1203:talk 1183:talk 1138:talk 1120:talk 1093:talk 1072:and 1057:talk 1042:talk 1018:talk 996:talk 982:talk 960:talk 939:talk 920:talk 903:talk 879:talk 860:talk 402:Film 387:and 334:Film 162:FENS 136:news 73:and 2564:-- 2513:-- 2329:-- 2293:-- 2139:. ( 2104:you 1974:TLK 1323:or 914:-- 891:It 873:-- 811:Low 666:Low 528:Low 176:TWL 3246:: 3223:) 3209:) 3179:) 3160:) 3145:) 3116:) 3093:) 3048:) 3033:) 3009:) 2991:) 2953:) 2939:) 2913:) 2895:) 2873:) 2848:) 2817:) 2794:) 2737:) 2699:) 2669:) 2651:) 2604:) 2572:) 2549:) 2521:) 2497:) 2479:) 2441:) 2425:) 2396:) 2377:) 2337:) 2320:) 2301:) 2277:) 2261:) 2236:) 2232:• 2211:) 2192:) 2188:• 2167:) 2152:) 2118:) 2095:) 2071:) 2048:) 2015:) 1992:) 1976:, 1957:) 1932:) 1918:) 1892:) 1868:) 1837:) 1820:) 1787:) 1761:) 1734:) 1720:) 1702:) 1688:) 1670:) 1650:) 1630:) 1616:. 1576:) 1561:) 1542:) 1523:) 1490:) 1472:) 1449:) 1369:) 1354:) 1335:) 1300:) 1285:) 1205:) 1185:) 1140:) 1122:) 1095:) 1059:) 1044:) 1020:) 998:) 984:) 962:) 941:) 922:) 905:) 881:) 862:) 718:). 564:: 337:: 156:) 54:; 3219:( 3205:( 3175:( 3156:( 3141:( 3112:( 3089:( 3044:( 3029:( 3005:( 2987:( 2980:. 2949:( 2935:( 2909:( 2891:( 2869:( 2844:( 2813:( 2790:( 2733:( 2695:( 2687:" 2665:( 2647:( 2600:( 2587:· 2582:( 2568:( 2545:( 2517:( 2493:( 2475:( 2437:( 2421:( 2392:( 2373:( 2333:( 2316:( 2297:( 2273:( 2257:( 2244:" 2228:( 2207:( 2184:( 2163:( 2148:( 2114:( 2091:( 2067:( 2044:( 2011:( 1988:( 1953:( 1928:( 1914:( 1888:( 1880:) 1864:( 1833:( 1816:( 1783:( 1757:( 1730:( 1716:( 1698:( 1684:( 1666:( 1646:( 1626:( 1572:( 1557:( 1538:( 1519:( 1486:( 1468:( 1445:( 1365:( 1350:( 1331:( 1296:( 1281:( 1201:( 1181:( 1169:" 1136:( 1118:( 1110:( 1091:( 1055:( 1040:( 1016:( 994:( 980:( 958:( 937:( 918:( 901:( 877:( 858:( 823:. 678:. 540:. 435:. 399:. 317:: 275:. 191:1 188:: 172:· 166:· 158:· 151:· 145:· 139:· 133:· 128:( 58:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index