Jump to content

Talk:BotCon

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Repaints

[edit]

Repaints vs. Redecos: Not all of the BotCon exclusives are straight repaints, as they often include some minor remolding (starting with BotCon Arcee, at least one toy each year has had at least one new-sculpt piece). Also, a repaint implies that the paint masks from the original toy have not been changed except for the actual paint colors, whereas in a redeco, the paint masks are altered to create new paint patterns. The majority of BotCon toys have been redecos, starting with Nightracer, who had different paint applications than Bumblebee, as noted in the article. Hooper_X 21:49, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Noted and appreciated. Thanks. — JIP | Talk 08:49, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OTFCC versus BotCon

[edit]

Should these two entities be seperated since OTFCC really had nothing to do with BotCon and was put on because of the seperation between Hallit and the Hartmans. They even ran "opposing" shows in '04. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.14.200.142 (talk) 04:43, September 19, 2006

I think they need to be together, as one started because of the other, and one of them would remain a stub. Better to keep them together. On another note, even through I have colected Transformers for 22 years, tomorrow will be my first BotCon, and I plan to take pictures to use on this page. Should be fun.--Bedford 21:24, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I also agree that they should be kept together. Though seperate and partially due to a fallout, the conventions were closely related. If not for some disagreements, OTFCC would have been called BotCon 2003. (O.C., "Sidecutter") — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.28.224.91 (talk • contribs) 18:14, August 13, 2008

2006 Exclusive Figure "Controversy"

[edit]

I have had to repeatedly remove this entire section because it is selective and misleading. I have asked the person who keeps putting it here if he can justify it--let's see if he can.

The first announcement of the prices of the exclusives came from Brian Savage, in public before a huge audience, and he gave the correct price. The order form attendees had to fill out to purchase these toys had the correct price. The lower, incorrect price only appears in the convention pamphlet, which was made available after Savage's in-person announcement and at the same time as the corrected order sheet.

Since the incorrect numbers came out LAST, they cannot by any stretch of the imagination be said to have been an advertisement, let alone a false advertisement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.178.243.105 (talk) 13:15, October 4, 2006

I agree with the above. I was never quoted a price lower than what I paid. I only discovered the "lower" price printed in the comic later, well after I paid for the toys.--G.B. Blackrock 18:32, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In fact, registered attendees participating in a Wednesday or Thursday tour or seminar, such as the customizing class, were able to pick up their registration packages Wednesday night. We did receive our convention booklet/comic at that time, with the lower price in it. As such, the lower price was indeed given first, with no indication given that evening that the price had been raised.
However, most of us are reasonable people, and we can understand that there is a fairly large time lag involved in preparing all the materials that go into the conventions. This includes various time lags between when the booklets are sent for printing and when the toys are finalized and received. As such, I think most people understand that the discrepancy was not intentional, and was not created with any intent to defraud. Costs undoubtedly exceeded Fun Publication's expectations, and they had to raise the price slightly to compensate. This is an unfortunate reality of buisness. (O.C, "Sidecutter") —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.28.224.91 (talk) 01:20, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Botcons in 2006 and 2007?

[edit]

I don't think there was, it didn't even say on the website, those should be removed! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.7.204.215 (talk) 01:01, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong. What do you call these, then?
BotCon Updates 2006
BotCon 2007
Next time, look at the official website carefully before creating a discussion. - Areaseven (talk) 02:39, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Toy list should be removed

[edit]

Content seems rather unencyclopedic. I don't see the point in listing all that stuff here. NotARealWord (talk) 17:27, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you !vote-ing? This isn't an AfD. Also, relevant does not equal encyclopedic. Also see Wikipedia:INDISCRIMINATE. NotARealWord (talk) 16:13, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
We are showing out disagreement with the proposal. Mathewignash (talk) 19:54, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Seriously, listing every single BotCon figure would be fancruft. This article was copied wholesale into Wikia's Transfromers site at some point. That show how fancruft-y it was. NotARealWord (talk) 12:13, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What someone does with this article, which is freely copyable, is not my concern. I could understand a cut to the length of this article though. Perhaps a much smaller section, just saying what the name of the set released each year was and one sentence describing it? Better than just blanking it. If you agree I could start on it Saturday, on my day off. Mathewignash (talk) 20:15, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could we hide/show the toy list and the guest list? It would make the article shorter unless more detail is desired.--King Bedford I Seek his grace 00:33, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually just one sentence describing every year's set could work, considering they didn't have actual sets until 2005. Also, Ignash there's no reason other people can't carry out your suggestions. The point of a wiki is so other people can edit, se Wikipedia:OWN. NotARealWord (talk) 02:30, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, why even think that you can get your way by starting some one sided vote. Wikipedia is not a democracy. The truth is that bunch of toys in an article about themed convention is pure fancruft, plain simple. It has no place here so why fight for some that going to get removed regardless. A lot of these conventions give all kinds of exclusive SWAG all the time. So what make what they give any more important than all the other stuff from Comicon or E3? Lets just get rid of it and be done with it. In the paragraph describing the convention just state that the show has been known for featuring exclusive toy and other collectibles for the attendees.

So, BOLD remove and if anybody reverts, report them to the admins? NotARealWord (talk) 16:21, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It seem to be the best COA, since everybody in this work project is holding fools ownership on these articles. Sarujo (talk) 12:47, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I wanted to remove the toy list, not the entire section. I'm pretty sure a section mentioning the toys is okay since Transformers is generally a toy-based brand. NotARealWord (talk) 17:06, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know the honorable mentions is enough for a full section though. All you're saying is that the convention feature exclusive figures for the attendees and patrons every year. Such as recolors and remolds of older toys to make new ones or special editions. Sarujo (talk) 17:11, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I'm pretty sure that somewhere on the article, there should be a mention of the toys. Toys are a core aspect of Transformers. NotARealWord (talk) 17:18, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm guessing you added that information regarding the toys. Are there any sources for all that? Also maybe there should be made mention of whether they are sold or given and who they are limited to. That kind of stuff is important to anybody wanting to learn the perks of attending. Sarujo (talk) 17:26, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For the conventions hosted by Fun Publications, the box sets are limited to those who have booked a stay at the appropriate hotel. The bagged sets are available for anyone who attends. I don't know about the exclusives during the 3H years, though. NotARealWord (talk) 23:24, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced details

[edit]

The article says this:

Note: Many unreferenced details in this article originated from the organizers' discussion panels during the conventions, which are currently unavailable in a publicly-viewable format.

I'm not sure what "details" this refers to. Convention guest lists , locations and schedules are available at the BotCon website. NotARealWord (talk) 21:18, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on BotCon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:21, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on BotCon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:32, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on BotCon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:54, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Toy list really should be removed

[edit]

The toy list takes up two thirds of the entire article. It really should be removed, or at least seriously trimmed. JIP | Talk 09:57, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There had been no replies to this, so I just went and removed the entire toy list. It cut the article length in half. The first proposal to remove the toy list was already nine years ago. No one had even edited the toy list in two years. JIP | Talk 11:08, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of lists?

[edit]

Two-thirds of the article consists of lists: locations, special guests and Transformers Hall of Fame. Before the list of exclusive toys was removed, it was even worse: five-sixths of the article was lists. I just tested in a text editor what the article would look like without lists, and it read much better. Should the lists be removed? JIP | Talk 13:21, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There had been no objections or other comments for almost a year, so I went ahead and removed all the lists. If anyone thinks this was wrong, the lists can simply be brought back. JIP | Talk 15:19, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:BotCon&oldid=1206389195"