Shortcut: AFC

BIONICLEsector01 talk:Articles for Creation

From BIONICLEsector01
Revision as of 19:39, 15 July 2017 by Intelligence4 (talk | contribs) (Comments)
Jump to: navigation, search

BIONICLE Facebook Page

Page will be made.

This wiki should probably have some way of referencing the happenings of the Bionicle Facebook page, which often releases images and videos that are either exclusive or are not released on another source until later and hosts events such as contests. Bionicle websites have articles so it should seem logical that the facebook page should as well. Even if a page is not made, there should be some way of referencing events that unfold on the facebook page as well as images, videos, and other content. This could mean a nav template or a category of some form. Post your thoughts.

Someone wanna get cracking on a sandbox for this? --Angel Bob (talk) 19:47, 31 October 2016 (CET)
Would someone make a sandbox? -- SurelNuva (Talk) 13:06, 14 February 2017 (CET)

Tuma's Sword

So does anyone think Tuma's Sword could use its own article?--Wiriamu (talk) 06:23, 4 November 2016 (CET)

Give Tuma's Sword Its Own Article

  1. Personally don't see why not, although we don't have too much info on it. --777stairs (talk) 05:58, 12 November 2016 (CET)
  2. Might as well. -- Toa Jala Converse 07:19, 12 December 2016 (CET)
  3. Master Inika (Talk) 06:47, 1 February 2017 (CET)
  4. --- Creep 04:20, 6 March 2017 (CET)

Don't give tuma's sword its own article

  1. I don't think it merits a page, it doesn't do anything, not even what the Vahki Staffs or the Longswords could do. -- SurelNuva (Talk) 21:09, 5 March 2017 (CET)
  2. Having a page for Mata Nui's sword is handy because it contains the history of the weapon and its functionality. A hypothetical Tuma's Sword page wouldn't say anything a reader can't infer from looking at it. --Angel Bob (talk) 05:56, 6 March 2017 (CET)
  3. I don't think this is necessary
  4. As said above, it seems unnecessary --WOLKsite (talk) 23:22, 10 June 2017 (CET)
  5. I don't think this deserves a page. My comments are below.--Harsulin's Ghost (talk) 21:30, 20 June 2017 (CET)
  6. -- Morris the Mata Nui Cow (talk) 19:59, 21 June 2017 (CET)
  7. ~OnionShark 23:35, 3 July 2017 (CET)


I think Tuma's sword is just the leader class variation of the Skrall Tribal Design Blade, and the Star Skrall's sword is also a variant of the Skrall Tribal Design Blades. So why don't we reformat the Skrall Tribal Design Blades page because all the Swords/Blades of the Skrall are their Skrall Tribal Design tools. -- Surel-Nuva (Talk) 11:33, 4 November 2016 (CET)
I think STDBs refer to that weird alien pattern on the standard Skrall blades. Tuma's is something different.
Don't really think it merits a page, though. -- Dorek Talk External Image 19:11, 5 November 2016 (CET)
Literally, everything what we know about it:
A large blended black-and-lime sword carried by Tuma.
He used it to challenge Mata Nui.
It consist of 3 pieces.
Status: Destroyed (according to the book) / In use (according to the movie) (which one?).
Function: Melee combat.
User: Tuma (formerly?).
That is not enough. -- SurelNuva (Talk)
In the Legend Reborn book it was destroyed. "Summoning all his remaining strength, Mata Nui brought his blade down in a final sweeping blow, shattering Tuma's weapon to bits." I would put it on the STDBs page as Surel-nuva suggested. --WOLKsite (talk) 20:43, 24 March 2017 (CET)
It would be logical, that a leader-class Skrall have a larger type of the STDB. And in the movie the sword isn't destroyed, so we don't even know the correct status of it... — SurelNuva (Talk) 20:57, 24 March 2017 (CET)
On the status of the sword TLR Movie has hierarchy over the book adaptation due to the book being based on an earlier script. The sword is not destroyed. --WOLKsite (talk) 22:20, 7 June 2017 (CET)
I agree with Surel Nuva's comment earlier, that Tuma's sword should simply be categorized under STDB or some other page containing more general tools if we don't believe that Tuma's blade fits into Skrall specific weapons, although I would say in my opinion, Tuma's sword should be considered a Skrall weapon. After all, even if it was made out of previously utilized parts, so are many other tools just by nature of how these sets often use pieces from earlier products. Still, even being Skrall, Tuma's sword might not be STDB.--Harsulin's Ghost (talk) 21:22, 20 June 2017 (CET)
Although my current opinion still stands, I do believe it only fair to mention that a number of other weapons of similar insignificance have found their own pages. This either means maybe we should just give Tuma's Sword it's own page, or that maybe some reconfiguration is in order for lots of other tools. Perhaps we could make larger pages with a certain category, like "Toa Tools" or "Skrall Weapons".--Harsulin's Ghost (talk) 23:54, 21 June 2017 (CET)

Addition of Fansite

Given that we have BZPower on here, I feel it only right to put Mask of Destiny on as well, and perhaps even The Toa's Hideout. However, Mask of Destiny actually has a good reason, as it is actually the longest running BIONICLE fansite with a forum on the web.


Add fansite articles

  1. -- Intelligence4 (talk) 03:04, 9 January 2017 (CET) A thorough documentation of fansites isn't a bad idea IMO.
  2. Master Inika (Talk) 06:47, 1 February 2017 (CET)
  3. --WOLKsite (talk) 23:20, 10 June 2017 (CET)
  4. Planetperson 19:27, 28 June 2017 (CET)
  5. ~OnionShark 12:15, 1 July 2017 (CET)

Don't add fansite articles


Don't forget to sign your proposals, y'all. also, can we assume that, unless stated otherwise during the duration of the discussion, a proposal counts as a vote? meaning that if 6 people put their username under the yes section but one of them is the proposal writer, then there are in fact only 5 people who are voting yes. (avoiding the proposer's vote double counting.)Intelligence4 (talk) 19:34, 6 March 2017 (CET)

BioMedia Project

As it is a fairly extensive collection of Bionicle Generation 1 media, it seems like a page for BioMedia Project might be a worthwhile addition. To be honest, I'm not sure about some of their content, such as full scans of the various G1 comics-I'm not an expert but it seems like a copyright question-but what do y'all think?--Wiriamu (talk) 08:31, 17 December 2016 (CET)

Page will be made.


The only problem with copyright would be the scans of Glatorian Comics 3-7, as those were never published for free online. --OnionShark 21:19, 6 January 2017 (CET)

I'm pretty sure they were somewhere for free, considering I've read them and didn't have a comic subscription at the time they were published. I don't think it's an issue. Intelligence4 (talk) 03:06, 9 January 2017 (CET)
Maybe you read scans on brickshelf? Do you think you could find the place where you read them so we can be sure that no copyright issues will come up?
--OnionShark 23:05, 10 January 2017 (CET)
The scans could be found on BrickShelf some years ago (I don't know they're still there). I remember for I tried to translate the comic, but the scans were kind of awful ones, nearly unreadable, so I couldn't xd... By the way, they were on Brickshelf. -- Surel-Nuva (Talk) 23:14, 10 January 2017 (CET)
another point to make, we're not posting the content ourselves, but simply linking to another site that does, so i don't think it's an issue.
also, we have links to all the comics on here somewhere anyway, so... Intelligence4 (talk) 16:58, 11 January 2017 (CET)
Ok, I guess this technically wont get us into trouble. (BTW, GC3-7 are not linked )
--OnionShark 17:27, 11 January 2017 (CET)
Eh, the original saga's comics were not released on the, but we have links for them. And comics 3-5 were released 8 years ago, the last two were released 7 years ago, I don't think there would be copyright issue, if the BioMedia Project is still active. -- Surel-Nuva (Talk) 17:34, 11 January 2017 (CET)

No, the original comics were released for free on the website. So, the page got six votes for yes, it will be made, right? --OnionShark 17:40, 11 January 2017 (CET)

Before we create the page we would need a Sandbox section, to see how it'll look like, I think. -- Surel-Nuva (Talk) 17:43, 11 January 2017 (CET)
It's exciting that this project has been voted in, as I have hoped to do something similar for some time, but I would warn that the Lego Company still retains full rights to these comics, and can at any time deem this project unallowed. Here is a link to the Lego Companies info on using copyrighted material, [1].--Harsulin's Ghost (talk) 23:40, 21 June 2017 (CET)

Rename The Final Battle Animation to The Rise of Mata Nui.

Per Advance's official Youtube account, the video is called The Rise of Mata Nui [2] as seen here. I suggest we change the name accordingly, since it's an official name from the guys that actually made the short film.

Change the name to The Rise of Mata Nui

  1. --- Creep 17:45, 13 April 2017 (CET)
  2. Seems pretty cut and dry to me. --Angel Bob (talk) 21:04, 13 April 2017 (CET)
  3. SurelNuva (Talk) 21:14, 13 April 2017 (CET)
  4. ~OnionShark 18:36, 14 April 2017 (CET)
  5. --Master Inika (Talk) 01:43, 7 June 2017 (CET)
  6. --WOLKsite (talk) 23:19, 10 June 2017 (CET)
  7. -- Morris the Mata Nui Cow (talk) 19:59, 21 June 2017 (CET)

Leave the name as The Final Battle Animation


Thanks for not simply putting yes/no as the voting section titles haha. whoever nominated this should sign their name to the nomination, because that counts as a vote, and we don't want to be double counting. it needs 6 votes in addition to the nomination. As for the actual issue at hand here, i'm inclined to agree with the nomination, but do we know why we originally called it the final battle animation? was it called that on, or is that simply something we made up? On a more fun note - was that video seriously only produced in 320p??? jeez... Intelligence4 (talk) 17:50, 17 April 2017 (CET)

Oh right forgot to sign it when I made the nomination. Well I already voted so whatever. Also, remember that back in 2008 videos hardly were 1080p 4k Ultra-HD quality. They weren't the norm as they are now. I'm sure Ghost has a higher resolution and quality video when they made it but they'll probably never release it. --- Creep 03:29, 18 April 2017 (CET)
According to it was called "Mistika 2-minute movie" on on 18 January 2009 (even though it's actually almost tree minutes long). There is, however, a video on YouTube titled "BIONICLE The Final Battle Animation" uploaded on 24 November 2008, the exact same day, the video was first released. It says "BIONICLE The Final Battle video, for BS01." in the description box. So... either it was called like that originally - before it was changed for some reason - or the name comes from that YouTube video. Vezon23 (talk) 14:46, 12 June 2017 (CET)

Move all fan-created canon stories from "Saga Guides/[title] by [author]" to "[title]"

The current title format for fan-written stories (such as Saga Guides/Decadence by Dorek) is a bit strange. They're grouped under Saga Guides, but they're not saga guides, they're short stories. Stories by Greg follow the "[title]" format, so why should it be different for fan-written canon stories? -- Morris the Mata Nui Cow (talk) 02:44, 4 May 2017 (CET)

Change names to "[title]"

  1. I always thought this was strange. It makes it really unnecessarily complicated to link to them. I understand we want to make them distinct from the "official" short stories, but that information can go at the top of the page, not in the title. --Angel Bob (talk) 04:27, 4 May 2017 (CET)

Keep names as "Saga Guides/[title] by [author]"

Change names to "[title] by [author]"

  1. Intelligence4 (talk) 21:43, 10 June 2017 (CET)
  2. --Master Inika (Talk) 05:29, 11 June 2017 (CET)
  3. SurelNuva (Talk) 09:25, 21 June 2017 (CET)
  4. --WOLKsite (talk) 11:07, 10 July 2017 (CET)
  5. ~OnionShark 11:20, 10 July 2017 (CET)


Given that these are fan created stories, i think we should still note the author - i.e. [title by author] instead of simply [title]. if we removed saga guide from their title, would we also have to remove them from the saga guides' navigation box? if so, where would we put them? i know i only found those stories back in the day through those saga guides links, so i don't think we should make them harder for readers to find.

Another thing to consider, even though they're fan created, they're still official canon, right?

Aaaand one last thing on a bit of a tangent, were the images at the top of those story pages arbitrarily chosen, or were they specifically created for those pages, or what? Intelligence4 (talk) 06:25, 5 May 2017 (CET)

1) We could add them to the online story navigation box, all the official serials and short stories are there. 2) They were written for contests in which the winning stories would become canon, so yes. 3) The banners were chosen from pre-existing images, but I'm pretty sure the original versions didn't have them. Does anyone know why they were added? ~OnionShark 10:22, 6 May 2017 (CET)

Also, I noticed that among the Saga Guides are Birth of a Dark Hunter and The Crossing, should we change their titles too? They could go in the guides nav because BoaDH was in the Encyclopedia and TC was in the Glatorian mini books. ~OnionShark 14:18, 6 May 2017 (CET)

Can there be an option added for changing them to "Title by Author"? I feel like we should keep the authors' names even if we drop the cumbersome "Saga Guides," not because they're less canon, but just to acknowledge them as contest winners. --Master Inika (Talk) 01:43, 7 June 2017 (CET)

done. i think we should leave them in the same navigation place they are now, i.e. in the saga guides navigation box. Intelligence4 (talk) 21:43, 10 June 2017 (CET)
I agree, just because there's not really anywhere else to put them. --Master Inika (Talk) 05:33, 11 June 2017 (CET)


Given that it's got it's own Saga Guide, a timeline page seems appropriate. Granted, a lot of the dating in Bionicle G2...if not all of king of fuzzy, but I think we could get a general outline.--Wiriamu (talk) 20:41, 27 May 2017 (CET)

Create Timeline/Okoto

Don't create Timeline/Okoto

  1. I just don't think there's just enough info in G2's story to merit a timeline - or a saga guide. Everything we need is covered in the History section of Okoto. --Angel Bob (talk) 05:44, 28 May 2017 (CET)
  2. I tend to agree with what Bob said. G2 didn't really live very long, thankfully. Intelligence4 (talk) 05:30, 30 May 2017 (CET)
  3. Thought I wish there was enough G2 lore to justify this, there isn't. --Master Inika (Talk) 01:43, 7 June 2017 (CET)
  4. There's really not that much story. --WOLKsite (talk) 23:24, 10 June 2017 (CET)
  5. -- Morris the Mata Nui Cow (talk) 19:59, 21 June 2017 (CET)


Change Sword (Mata Nui) to Mata Nui's Sword

The sword has no real name, and it's certainly not "sword," so I think it would be better to call it "Mata Nui's Sword." The parentheses should only be used for specific names that have more uses. ~OnionShark 22:26, 6 June 2017 (CET)

Change to "Mata Nui's Sword"

  1. ~OnionShark 22:26, 6 June 2017 (CET)
  2. Intelligence4 (talk) 21:45, 10 June 2017 (CET)

Keep as "Sword (Mata Nui)"

  1. See below. --Angel Bob (talk) 04:03, 7 June 2017 (CET)
  2. --Master Inika (Talk) 05:12, 7 June 2017 (CET)
  3. SurelNuva (Talk) 07:52, 7 June 2017 (CET)
  4. --WOLKsite (talk) 23:18, 10 June 2017 (CET)
  5. --Harsulin's Ghost (talk) 22:07, 20 June 2017 (CET)
  6. -- Morris the Mata Nui Cow (talk) 19:59, 21 June 2017 (CET)

Comments (Mata Nui's Sword)

Whatever decision we make for this should also apply to Disk Launcher (Vakama), shouldn't it? --Master Inika (Talk) 01:43, 7 June 2017 (CET)

And Claws (Onua), Axe (Lewa), Blades (Gresh), and so on and so forth. Historically, for unnamed weapons like these, the wiki's practice has been to name the article Weapon (User). It might seem a little cumbersome, but I think it places the subject's most important quality first (it's an axe/blade/claw/etc) and its secondary quality next (it is/was used by X). Personally, I don't think this large of an overhaul is necessary. --Angel Bob (talk) 04:03, 7 June 2017 (CET)
Honestly we should change all of them, the current names are just unnecessarily structured in an unnatural way. Ok, it was always done this way, doesn't mean it shouldn't be changed. And if we want to put the most important quality first, then we also have to change Defilak's Submarine to Submarine (Defilak), because what the object is is more important than it's owner right? The way I suggested to name stuff is simple grammar, not this confusing thing you make it out to be :/ ~OnionShark 08:35, 7 June 2017 (CET)
I disagree - a sword is a super generalized weapon, whereas something like onua's claws or lewa's axe are something that only a couple characters have. we should change just mata nui's sword, and no others. it's a special sword, anyway. Intelligence4 (talk) 21:45, 10 June 2017 (CET)
That's a good point for most of the other tools, but if sword is to be considered general, Gresh's blades ought to as well. It's too arbitrary to determine which weapons are general enough to be formatted differently, so I think it's best to be consistent for all of them. --Master Inika (Talk) 05:35, 11 June 2017 (CET)
It seems logical to me to keep the name how it is now. If there is no more specific name for a tool, such as "energized flame sword", and the only defining factor is the person who used it, then it seems that it is general enough to name using the "tool(user)" format.--Harsulin's Ghost (talk) 22:19, 20 June 2017 (CET)

Proto Squad

I looked for information on the infamous and mysterious "Proto Squad" from the early years of Bionicle, and amazingly I couldn't find any reference to it on this wiki. What would you say to creating a Proto Squad article? This was a fairly significant part of the 2001-2003 arc, especially for collectors, since it was how the VMKKs and GPKKs were distributed IIRC. Finding info on the Proto Squad is hard to find in general (and sadly I was not a member). It would be nice to have a hub where we could collect this information. —Planetperson 04:38, 21 June 2017 (CET)

Create Proto Squad

  1. -- Morris the Mata Nui Cow (talk) 19:59, 21 June 2017 (CET)
  2. Planetperson 03:02, 22 June 2017 (CET)
  3. I'm in.--Harsulin's Ghost (talk) 01:00, 23 June 2017 (CET)
  4. I'm not really sure what this is either, so I'd like to see an article about it here. --Master Inika (Talk) 04:14, 23 June 2017 (CET)
  5. why do we need a vote for this - of course we should have a page! :) Intelligence4 (talk) 20:15, 28 June 2017 (CET)
  6. SurelNuva (Talk) 16:48, 29 June 2017 (CET)
  7. ~OnionShark 12:17, 1 July 2017 (CET)
  8. --WOLKsite (talk) 16:46, 10 July 2017 (CET)

Don't create Proto Squad


What is Proto Squad exactly. I didn't find out about Bionicle myself until the beginning of 2006, so I am unfamiliar with things that happened before that time.--Harsulin's Ghost (talk) 22:55, 22 June 2017 (CET)

It was an exclusive program where certain people got sneak previews and promotional Bionicle items in the mail from Lego. I think the idea was that they were like "beta testers" for the Bionicle line. It wasn't widely publicized at the time, so even I don't know that much. But once the initial sign-ups were done, there wasn't a way to get in later. You can probably find a lot of old BZPower news articles referencing it. Some of the more exciting things they received were the vacuum-metal Krana-Kal and grey plastic Krana-Kal, which are extremely rare collectible items worth hundreds of dollars. I believe the Proto Squad is also where the promotional B.U.G.S. video previewing the Bohrok comes from. —Planetperson 23:25, 22 June 2017 (CET)
Cool. Sounds interesting, and certainly worthy of a page if we drudge up enough info on it.--Harsulin's Ghost (talk) 01:00, 23 June 2017 (CET)
I've been a fan since late 2001 and i've never heard of the proto squad, so i would like to see as much information on this as possible :)
What does GPKK and VMKK stand for?
couple more things - can we use some of that information for citations? if that's where the "bugs" video came from, that would be a helpful source to cite things from, if we can verify them. and on those grey krana-kal - what was so special about them? b/c i have a kohrok-kal with a grey krana, but i didn't think it was anything special...? Intelligence4 (talk) 20:19, 28 June 2017 (CET)
GPKK and VMKK stand for grey plastic Krana-Kal and vacuum metal Krana-Kal. The collectibles topic at BZPower does a decent job of describing them: . The best way to get info would probably be to contact someone who was actually in the Proto Squad. The folks at MoD might not be a bad place to start, if they're still active. Old stories and posts from BZP probably contain information on it as well. Greg probably knows a thing or two about it too, since you can see him answering questions about it in the OGD back in 2003. So someone might want to ask about it on TTV. —Planetperson 06:38, 29 June 2017 (CET)

I did a little research and found quite a bit of information on the Proto Squad by looking through old BZPower stories. I didn't realize this before, but the program continued well into 2005! Also, it looks like Greg was directly involved in it, as he was the one who wrote all of the letters that came with the packages. —Planetperson 02:39, 4 July 2017 (CET)

nice work, as usual :) Could you post some sources for your research, so we can share in the nostalgia as well? haha Intelligence4 (talk) 20:39, 15 July 2017 (CET)