BIONICLEsector01 talk:Articles for Creation

Approved proposals (please make these pages!)

Merchandise

Page will be made.

Regardless of exactly what we call it, I feel as though we need a single page for all the obscure merchandising items Bionicle had during it's run, such as the Toa Mahri Dart Shooter or the Sponge Morbuzakh or even the Soft Foam Takadox Mask and Twin Knives, which clearly aren't important enough to deserve pages of their own but could probably be compiled onto a single page. The only issue I can see with this is that some of these are very difficult to find reliable citations for that extend beyond photographs (Otherwise surely there would be some mention of the wearable glow-in-the-dark Piraka teeth on the wiki) --Snaptor (talk) 01:24, 25 September 2017 (CET)

Comments on Merchandise

I think this will be a good page to have - but i think we have to be very careful in drawing the line between regular sets and stuff and all the ancillary merchandise that was available. Intelligence4 (talk) 00:48, 28 September 2017 (CET)

I found a TTV topic that has a huge list of this sort of thing. It obviously wouldn't qualify as an actual source, but it could certainly help as a sort of "checklist" to see exactly what sort of things we're looking for. Are we allowed to link to TTV here? (Also, on a more amusing note, I'm not sure I've seen something gather eight votes this quickly in ages, I was expecting this to be controversial. =P) Snaptor (talk) 11:10, 28 September 2017 (CET)

I just realized this only technically counts as seven votes, oops. Snaptor (talk) 23:49, 28 September 2017 (CET)

MY VOTE COUNTS FOR EVERYTHING -- Dorek _Talk 03:39, 29 September 2017 (CET)

I've been interested in documenting Bionicle merchandise and saw that there were plans for a page to be made. However, it doesn't seem like much progress was made on it. I've drafted up a possible merchandise page in my sandbox.

https://biosector01.com/wiki/User:Endruv/sandbox

I define "Merchandise" as any officially liscensed Bionicle product that isn't a set or media (such as book, movie, game, or pretty much anything not already well documented here). I sorted my list by year and whatever partner company produced the product. It's not a perfect system, as I'm still trying to figure out how to address things like Legoland gift shop items, Shop@Home exclusives, and freebies that weren't widly available. Most of my findings have been through old BZPower articles. Currently, I made it through 2003.

If there is another way I should submit a page that's already been approved, please let me know.

Update: Moved to approved pages based on Surel's suggestion.

-- Endruv (talk) 17:11, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

I really appreciate the work you put into the topic, and since it was approved last time, I don't think we need a new poll for it. This could just go under the existing part on the top of the page, as a draft finally for the approved page. And in my opinion when you feel like it, you could make it into an actual page too! :) --Surel (Talk) 17:42, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

I meant it this way :D It's already approved, you can make the page if you want to, and then expand it later. :) --Surel (Talk) 22:52, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

HEROSector01: Add Roblox and Poptropica Sponsored Events

Pages will be made.

This one is for HEROSector01, as I tried to find an Articles for Creation page over there but couldn’t find one, so instead I felt like putting this here. Hero Factory had a Poptropica advertisement and two Roblox events where players could earn prizes. For Poptropica, it was a minigame level, and for Roblox, two games. You can look up more about them online but basically for Poptropica it was promoting the 2010 line of sets while for Roblox, they promoted 2012 (Breakout) and 2013 (Brain Attack). From what I can gather, Poptropica had a Stormer outfit and his ice blaster gear, while Roblox had quite a bit of prizes and Catalog items. -- FirespitterVakama (talk) 08:23 AM, 29 November 2021 (EST)

Meta: Community Terminology

Page will be made.

I think it might be nice to have a page with frequently used terms that crop up in the community (AFOL, MoC, that kind of stuff). I'm not beholden to the name. -- Dorek _Talk 17:19, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Comments on creating Meta:Community Terminology

We could potentially link this to redirect pages like MoL, RoS, or TMC, for example. - Toa Jala ^Converse 03:51, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

Category:Shortcuts

Whether a BIONICLEsector01 page or a Category, I think it would make sense to list all our shortcut redirects somewhere (e.g., GSR, MU, GSB, etc.). I won't vote yet, since I don't know which option would be better. - Toa Jala ^Converse 06:01, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Page will be made.

Comments on creating Shortcut page

Alternatively, we could perhaps build out Template:Shortcut as well? Might make more sense with a different functionality though... -- Dorek _Talk 23:26, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Maybe, if we made a switch function that would let us use it for the actual shortcuts. - Toa Jala ^Converse 07:17, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

"Community Reviews" Section

Okay, so here's an intricate one.

So have you ever looked at a set page (no surprise this will be a resounding yes) and seen that set of sections: "Critical Reviews" and "Community Reviews." A lot of these models have yet to have stuff said about them from either angle. Unless we elect a reviewer (dear god please not Eljay LOL) there's nothing we can do about the Critical Reviews section, but I was thinking: what's stopping us BioSector users from submitting our own reviews to the section? Here's one idea for how this could work:

Here's the existing template that exists already.

Here's a totally real and not pretend link.

[Visualization Ends Here]

So this totally, 100% genuinely real link would lead to a page dedicated to user reviews submitted by us. See my sandbox's first Level 1 heading here. This could be a subpage, like "Set:XXXXX/Reviews" just like we have Sets/Combiners, etc. Alternatively, this can have a whole category page dedicated to it.

In each set page, you'd have something like what you can see on my sandbox's second Level 1 heading here.

So there's the idea. Thoughts? 𝙗𝙮 𝙒𝙖𝙙𝙙𝙡𝙚𝙯 03:12, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Page will be made.

Comments on this topic

1. Hi this comment was made totally by the real Swert and 100% genuine. This is the coolest idea ever and we should immediately implement this. (NOT written 𝙗𝙮 𝙒𝙖𝙙𝙙𝙡𝙚𝙯 03:12, 26 December 2022 (UTC))

Hold up. I think this one will take further discussion as to how we're going to go about doing this... ~ Wolk (talk) 04:27, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Create Meta:Capitalization Conventions

This falls under a similar vein as our Meta:Shortcuts and Meta:Community Terminology, and as a reference for in-universe terminology, it also complements the Lexicon. I and some others have been sporadically doing research on different expressions, phrases, or names in the BIONICLE canon and getting a sense of whether they were originally intended as given/proper names, or if they were just became that for convenience over time by the community. In many cases, we've made some very fascinating discoveries, and quite often Greg is very consistent one way, even in his Q&A topics, despite fans frequently going the other way.

Much of the research so far has been collected on one of Morris' talk pages, but the more we discover, the more it makes sense to just give this its own page. Though the fan lexicon is unlikely to ever change, this tool would be extremely helpful for writing fanfiction or other in-universe texts, to maintain consistency with the existing canonical body of work. It would also be helpful if we ever updated the wiki to reflect these conventions (as has been suggested on Talk:Main Page--see below comment). --Gonel (talk) 21:54, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Page will be made.

Comments on creating Meta:Capitalization Conventions

On a side note, there's been some discussion on the BS01 Main Page talk page about the Nickname template with some of these, if anyone wants to weigh in. --Gonel (talk) 21:54, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Gallery:Sapient Beings

Page will be made.

While many sapient beings either have their own dedicated pages or not enough images to justify a special gallery page, having an overall page for beings like Kestora, Vortixx, the city-building creatures, The Shadowed One's Species, Sidorak's species, and possibly others would allow for people to easily be able to find images, and would make it so pages can have a "See Also" page with a gallery link. Like Gallery:Matoran, it would just have links for entries that have their own gallery pages. Firespitter Lhii (talk) 17:29, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Create AMEET Activity Books

Some years back, we knew very little about many of the books on Books/Other Books. However, this is beginning to change, and I am confident that for many of these books, we are now far more able to create pages on par with those for other books (which aren't that big in themselves), so I think it's about due that these are given their own pages, starting with the AMEET books. I see this encompassing two different tasks: An overall series page, like BIONICLE Chronicles, as well as individual pages for each book, like BIONICLE Chronicles 1: Tale of the Toa.~ Wolk (talk) 13:05, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Page will be made.

Comments on creating AMEET Activity Books

I think we should also split out the two Scholastic books as well, though not having the Generation 2 activity book, I'm not able to describe its contents. ~ Wolk (talk) 13:05, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

I also have the G2 activity book. There are actually two slightly different versions, but the differences amount to few words and formulations being different.--ToaKebaka (talk) 13:23, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Cool! Information like that should be available on the page. :) ~ Wolk (talk) 15:39, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Something to keep in mind, we'll probably need to do "BIONICLE: Piraka (AMEET)" due to the HarperCollins book of the same name. Same for BIONICLE: Voya Nui. ~ Wolk (talk) 15:51, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

True, although the 4 pocket-sized HarperCollins books are officially called "Mini-Guides" (it says so in the books themselves), so that could be a way to differentiate them.--ToaKebaka (talk) 16:16, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Fair. I thought I'd seen the AMEET ones called "BIONICLE Activity Books" somewhere, but now I'm not finding it. ~ Wolk (talk) 16:30, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Not sure if this counts, but BIONICLE: Voya Nui has this written among the publishing information on the back: Collection: BIONICLE Jeux et activités (Games and activities).--ToaKebaka (talk) 16:35, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

There we go. Yeah, I saw it on the Mahri Nui one. I'd count that, it's better than nothing. ~ Wolk (talk) 16:38, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Have there been any English translations of the AMEET books? I should like to read them, but the only ones I have been able to find online are in Russian or Polish. TuragaHordika (talk) 18:02, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

I am in the process of translating all of the books in languages other than english including all of the AMEET books, though I am unsure how to best provide it to the public eye. I was thinking maybe scans of the originals edited with translation textboxes to be archived on BMP along with raw originals? Maybe I will post text translations on my user page here for a start. Any thoughts?--ToaKebaka (talk) 18:26, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

These would be immensely handy. A couple years ago, I was talking for a while with an AMEET representative about getting original English manuscripts (namely Greg's original The Crossing text), and he seemed optimistic that it could happen. Sadly, I haven't heard back from him in some time.

One way to speed things up a bit may be to use an image/pdf scanner to detect text and then correcting any inaccuracies that may have popped up. But however you do it, I'm sure both BMP and Wall of History would love to be able to archive text versions of these books. BMP doesn't even have scans of all the AMEET books, much less the non-Scholastic, non-AMEET books. --Gonel (talk) 01:44, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the input! As a matter of fact, I am already using text recognition tools to speed things up, although depending on the scan, it often requires quite a lot of manual adjustment anyways. But I have done a lot of work already and I should have a hefty list of translations ready in the following days. Maybe I will even post something today to test out some formating. Aside from translations of already archived AMEET publications, I am also tracking down new ones and other non-AMEET stuff (hence the recent additions). Once I have it all translated I certainly plan to make contributions to BMP/Wall of History.--ToaKebaka (talk) 17:19, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Alright the first one is out.--ToaKebaka (talk) 21:02, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Create HarperCollins Books

I'll raise you one. --Gonel (talk) 01:44, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Page will be made.

Comments on creating HarperCollins Books

I guess an important question to be asked -- are the five activity books (the ones not part of the Mini-Guide series) a series of their own, or standalone? If the former, what do we call that series? ~ Wolk (talk) 11:09, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Well, all of them are cross-advertised on the inside with a caption "don't miss other great Bionicle books". But I think it is their contents that make it more clear. Imagine it like this: there is a pool of written material containing elements A-J, and each of the books pulls some combination of elements from this pool. So let's say FaF has elements A, B, C, D, while the Annual contains C, D, E, F, or GtS G, H, I, J. Each one has its own original content, found only in that publication, but there is some overlap between them. Activity Booklet is the only one with no original content and instead has a portion of each of the other four publications, effectivelly (not officially) acting like a sampler for these books.--ToaKebaka (talk) 18:47, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Create BIONICLE: Collector's Sticker Book

Self-explanatory. See Books/Other Books#BIONICLE: Collector's Sticker Book. ~ Wolk (talk) 07:30, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Page will be made.

Create BIONICLE: Quest for the Masks of Power

Self-explanatory. See Books/Other Books#BIONICLE: Quest for the Masks of Power. ~ Wolk (talk) 07:30, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Page will be made.

Create Game Stats sections

Similar to the BIONICLE.com stats, I think it would be nice to have a similar visual display for game stats for various characters, maybe as a header under Trivia. This would apply to Piraka Attack (in place of the clunky version present in the Trivia of the Piraka) and the Mata Nui Online Game. Glatorian Arena uses the same stats as BIONICLE.com. I'm sure there's other games as well this could be applied to. This would require new templates though, in similar vein to the website stats. ~ Wolk (talk) 13:41, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Page will be made.

Comments on creating Game Stats sections

Noticing now that the original Glatorian Arena did not have the same stat numbers as the Bios, wow! Gotta double check the other two games. ~ Wolk (talk) 05:12, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Create Buildings and/or Structures and/or Infrastructure Page

This would be a page(or subsection) or a set of new pages that lists major and minor buildings, structures, and/or Infrastructure, as well as things like monuments or the Great Telescope system. Buildings and structures include things like the the Great Temple, The Kini-Nui, the Amaja-Nui, Matoran Houses, Ga-Metru Schools, Furnaces, the Mahri Nui Temple, etc. Infrastructure would include things like the Moto Hub, the Le-Metru Chute System, the Underwater Chutes of Ga-Metru, the liquid protodermis canals of Ga Metru, (arguably) the Great Collesium, the arenas of Bara Magna, the highways of the island of Mata Nui, etc. Minor Structures or Structures/Other could also be made to include and seperate out structures, buildings, or pieces of infrastructure with no names and/or very little significance to the story, like the alternate, non-canon towers that are seen as alternate builds or combiners of the playsets, or the unamed buildings and monuments seen in images of islands in Bionicle: World. There is also an alternate option below for voting that this should be a new subsections or set of subsectionsFirespitter Lhii (talk) 17:24, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Votes for creating Buildings, Structures and/or Infrastructure Page(s) (specify)

1. I want a page for major and minor locations to be made. Firespitter Lhii (talk) 17:24, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
2. I'm curious to see where this goes. - Toa Jala ^Converse 18:22, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
3. ~ Wolk (talk) 02:37, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
4. TuragaHordika (talk) 03:44, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
5. Sounds interesting.--SurelNuva (Talk) 21:13, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Comments on creating Buildings, Structures and/or Infrastructure Page(s) or section(s)

I am not entirely sure how the voting should be counted on this, but if it wasn't done this way, it would have had 64 or 84 options. Firespitter Lhii (talk) 17:24, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure what is being proposed here, but there is probably room for discussion here. Are you proposing a page akin to Objects? That could be useful. In that case, I would make all of these categories into one page, maybe just call the page "Structures". This, however, raises the question of what should belong on Locations/Other Locations, though, which things like the Barraki Fortresses... I guess it's not too bad to have them double-listed, as we would have that either way with locations in each Metru/Wahi anyway. Coinciding this, I think there's a discrepency between how structures/sub-locations are handled between different locations. The Metru's list is more descriptive, where as the Wahi lists only list names (including some that probably should be moved into sub-pages, especially locations inside Koros). In my opinion, the former approach is preferable. ~ Wolk (talk) 18:23, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

I like this idea, but I have to admit I'm a bit confused. We already have pages for the Moto-Hub and Chutes, as well as the Great Temple, Kini-Nui, and Amaja-Nui. The Chute page already has a section for underwater cutes. I can see pages being made for Matoran homes and schools (what little we know about them) and other nonspecific locations. I think that would be very interesting. - Toa Jala ^Converse 18:33, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

This would be like the Objects or Location page. I think it should probably only be either 1 page or a page for significant ones and minor ones. It would be like a list page, though not quite just a category page. I can try to make a sandbox at some point, though it will take a while as it will be my first one. It wouldn't necessarily have to be on the front page either, as it could be relegated to the navigation format for locations, but those more general topic pages are what I am proposing. Things like a forest or mountain range wouldn't be there, as they are natural(or appear natural when it comes to the islands inside the MU). I did think I made it clear enough, but clearly I didn't do a great job, seeing as both of you are saying that you were confused. Firespitter Lhii (talk) 19:03, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

I see, thanks for clarifying. I'd be inclined to say that the major locations should stay as they are and the minor ones should be assimilated into Infrastructure, but let's see how this develops. - Toa Jala ^Converse 20:08, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Create Ghost Studios

While this may not get the most care, like similar pages such as ADVANCE's, Ghost was a pretty important part of Bionicle, creating many animations that Bionicle has become well remembered for. It is a little hard to find a full list, but they are responsible for the Toa Hagah Commercial, the Mistika Commercial, the 2008 Vehicle Commercial, the Phantoka Commercial, the 2006 Playset Commercial, the Visorak Commercial, and at least half a dozen more. Firespitter Lhii (talk) 15:34, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Votes for creating Ghost Studios

1. Firespitter Lhii (talk) 15:34, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
2. ~ Wolk (talk) 02:41, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
3. TuragaHordika (talk) 03:44, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
4. --SurelNuva (Talk) 21:11, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
5. Dag (talk) 17:32, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Comments on creating Ghost Studios

Isn't Ghost Studios just a department of Advance? I'm pretty sure all of the CG animation is made by them.--ToaKebaka (talk) 13:26, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

I could find no mention of this anywhere through searches nor on any section of Advance's website, including their extensive page on their partnership and work with Lego, starting with Bionicle. It is almost impossible to find anything about Ghost though, as their are many companies who do that kind of work by that name, including on in Calcuhta, India, one in South America(Argentinian and Brazilian), and one tiny one in Utah. Once a website and/or business records can be found or established, we can know for sure, but they seem like an independent group, possibly having been contracted through Advance or by Lego directly. Firespitter Lhii (talk) 18:24, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Here is Ghost VFX's website; the first listed studio is in Copenhagen, so it's most likely the one we're looking for. Their URL used to be www.ghost.dk (which now redirects to the current URL), and by going to Wayback Machine, we can find Ghost's LEGO Bionicle Arkiv in 2007. And there we have it:

"Kunde: Advance
Ghost: 3D / Compositing"

So Ghost did "3D / Compositing" work on the animations, while Advance was the client. Worth noting is that at least one animation attributed to Ghost Studios, Toa Hagah Commercial, is uploaded on Advance Copenhagen's YouTube channel. Illustration artist Klavs Ferdinand lists some artwork for Advance and other artwork for Ghost VFX on their ArtStation page, and 3D artist CG animator Gill Frank lists both Ghost A/S and Advance A/S on his resume, so there's been people who've worked with/for both companies. So I suppose the question becomes how much work did Advance vs. Ghost do on these animations? --PeabodySam (talk) 02:05, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Proposal to rename Great Spirit Robot to Mata Nui Robot

Same as we've done for several pages by now; current name is a fanon nickname, a different name is provided in the story. Mata Nui Robot is cited on the page. ~ Wolk (talk) 07:58, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Votes for renaming Great Spirit Robot to Mata Nui Robot

1. ~ Wolk (talk) 07:58, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
2. TuragaHordika (talk) 14:35, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
3. --SurelNuva (Talk) 15:56, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
4. --ToaKebaka (talk) 17:07, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
5. Dag (talk) 17:32, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Create Memoirs of the Dead

While the Memoirs for the Dead contest is mentioned on Meta:Fan Community#Incomplete_Contests, it was brought up here on the Main Page's Talk Page that Greg said that the winners would become official(it isn't clear if that means canon or not though), and that they did not need to get his approval so long as they didn't contradict the existing story. With the contest for the Mangai's tools and Kanohi, I don't believe these were rejected from canon either, so I don't believe that its status is applicable here. We could also make the decision if the winning stories would also get their own pages, probably coming down to whether we consider them canon, but this is about an overall page. Firespitter Lhii (talk) 19:50, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Votes for creating Memoirs of the Dead

1. Firespitter Lhii (talk) 19:50, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
2. TuragaHordika (talk) 23:45, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
3. Willess12 (talk) 10:10, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Comments on creating Memoirs of the Dead

As far as I remember Greg never canonized them as official, neither has he read them to decide if the winners, by his point of view, can be canonized. Even if we make the page/pages, we should put the non canon banner up on them.--SurelNuva (Talk) 12:18, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Since they're not exactly non-canon, but not exactly canon either, would it be possible to make a new banner for them, an "uncanonized" banner? Otherwise, I agree, they should have pages.--Willess12 (talk) 19:25, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Well, technically speaking, as long as they are not canonized by somebody who still works for/at the Lego company, they are not considered part of the official canon.--SurelNuva (Talk) 05:04, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

I agree that until we decide on the implications of the quote provided by Jam Pot, it would probably be best to list them as non-canon. TuragaHordika (talk) 05:22, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Create Pages For Ancient Protectors (G2)

I don't know exactly how much is known about the old protectors from 1,000 years ago, but it certainly isn't nothing. One option I propose is that we just create pages for them(Agarak, Uganu(formerly Udapo), Owaki(formerly Owa), Etoku(formerly Epolim), Kerato, Mamuk, and maybe even Bumonda, Buzkayo, Droton, Flammik, Jagiri, and Rokreng). Alternatively, we could either have some or all of these other protectors on a Protectors/Other Protectors page. Finally, we can just make a page for Protector of [Element] for each element, and that will be the page for all of them. Firespitter Lhii (talk) 01:46, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Votes for creating Agarak, Uganu, Owaki, Etoku, Kerato, Mamuk, and and 'Others' page(for either Okotans in general or specifically one for Protectors [specify] )

1. Firespitter Lhii (talk) 01:46, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

I think that Okotans/Other Okotans should be made in addition to these 6, though I would also be fine if we just make Characters/Other Charcters (Generation 2) with category #Okotans Firespitter Lhii (talk) 15:38, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Votes for creating Agarak, Uganu, Owaki, Etoku, Kerato, Mamuk

1. Don't see a need for an 'other protectors' page or for the six that are simply name-dropped, but Agarak & Mamuk's group, yes. ~ Wolk (talk) 07:19, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
2. --SurelNuva (Talk) 10:24, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
3. TuragaHordika (talk) 14:44, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Comments on creating pages for Ancient Protectors(G2)

With only three groups, I think they can all be adequately listed on the Protectors page. ~ Wolk (talk) 07:21, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

We have so many Toa and Matoran that don't even have a name given nor associated action, yet they still find themselves on an 'Others' page. I don't really oppose either just making Okotans/Other Okotans (which would include the unnamed Okotans currently listed on the main Okotans page, and is what I would like if we don't feel we have enough for an 'Others' page just for protecters), or even just at least add them to Okotans#Ancient. I know they may be of questionable canonicity if they truly do only appear as background inscriptions in one illustration, but I don't know that they should be relegated to a triva point and potentially lost to time (in the real world, though that seems to be the case on Okoto as well :p). I will just add my vote to both sections and explain, but if you think we should just merge those vote categories, I am alright with that. Firespitter Lhii (talk) 15:38, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Bumonda & co. should be listed *somewhere*, that much I agree with, just not having a page only for the sake of listing them and them alone. Whether a separate page is warrented for the list is a question of how many entries we are dealing with. Personally, I'd list them on both the Okotans and Protectors pages. ~ Wolk (talk) 16:18, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Generally all the unnamed matoran are either listed on their respective matoran page, like Ta-Matoran#Known Ta-Matoran or on the main Matoran#Other Matoran, the same thing goes for the Agori#Known Agori too, so I don't see why we would need a separate page just to list them, simply adding them to the Okotans page, if they aren't already there, would be enough for those we wouldn't make individual pages imo.--SurelNuva (Talk) 15:51, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Proposal to rename Power Swords to Power Sword

These weapons are not unique and are not paired by functionality. They are more in line with Electro-Blade and should not be pluralized. ~ Wolk (talk) 18:17, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Votes for renaming Power Swords to Power Sword

1. ~ Wolk (talk) 18:17, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
2. --SurelNuva (Talk) 16:41, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
3. TuragaHordika (talk) 20:04, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
4. --Gonel (talk) 17:51, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
5. - Toa Jala ^Converse 17:30, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
6. Dag (talk) 17:32, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Restructure the Phantoka and Mistika

So currently if one searches for either, they will recieve a disambiguation where they can choose between three things: 1) a specific form of adaptive armor, 2) a Toa nuva page worded as "toa team that used adaptive armor", 3) product line from 2008. Out of these only the third option is without problems. So what is the problem with the other two?

1) Phantoka/Mistika has nothing to do with adaptive armor, so this link should not be present (should be removed).

2) Phantoka/Mistika describes specific combinations of three members of a particular toa team, not a team as a whole (rewording necessary), but the fact they used adaptive armor is irrelevant to them being called that (armor mention should be removed). In addition to the Toa, they also describe specific combinations of three Makuta (should be added).

So why am I saying this? The word Phantoka in matoran means "spirits of air" and it comes from an Av-Matoran legend. The Matoran began calling those specific characters Phantoka because they reminded them of the legend and they believed it was realized in physical world, projecting the Phantoka legend onto Toa and Makuta. There apparently was no pre-existing "Mistika legend", but Av-Matoran derived this term from the Phantoka to describe Toa and Makuta in the swamp. Here are the releveant passages from the book sources:

The Matoran of Karda Nui nicknamed both their allies and foes the "Phantoka". Decipher the meaning of this word in the Matoran language and the content of the legend that is associated with it.

Air Spirits. The Phantoka live in the clouds where they fight endlessly. In daylight, the good Phantoka win. The evil ones triumph when darkness falls. The Matoran believe that the Phantoka took the physical form of the Toa Nuva and Makuta so that their battle could continue...

The Toa Nuva fighting in the skies of Karda Nui were nicknamed "Phantoka" - "The Spirits of Air". The Av-Matoran named the Toa Nuva struggling with the evil forces in the misty swamps "Mistika" - "The Spirits of Mist".

Therefore, in addition to afformentioned changes, I propose to add a link to Society page where the Legend of Phantoka is mentioned, to Phantoka and Mistika disambiguation pages. The Matoran Society portion should probably be improved in structure as well, dividing the myths into sections dependinfg on the region.--ToaKebaka (talk) 19:58, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. I think it's worth noting that in some sources, the Av-Matoran, Icarax, Mutran, and Toa Ignika were also part of the "Phantoka" subtheme (though Mistika seemed to be more restricted to just the six canister sets). I'm not sure how to address that... I suppose that is sort of in the same vein that Nocturn is a "Barraki" though, which he obviously is not in the story. ~ Wolk (talk) 21:10, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

I have been thinking about how to best handle the Toa Nuva/Makuta point. I think the link to Toa Nuva page is good, but the description of the link needs to be reworded to make it clear which three Toa Nuva it concerns.

As to the Makuta, I propose to add a link to another disambiguation page, which would contain links to the individual Makuta pages - one such page for Phantoka Makuta and another for Mistika Makuta. So the flow would look something like this: a user searches for the term Mistika → they arrive on a disambiguation page that has 1) link to Society page, 2) link to Toa Nuva page specifying it concerns Tahu, Gali and Onua, 3) link to Mistika Makuta disambiguation page containing links to Krika, Gorast and Bitil pages, 4) link to 2008 set line page.

What are the thoughts on this solution?--ToaKebaka (talk) 14:45, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

I think it would be easier to just have the initial Phantoka/Mistika page say "The three Makuta sent into the swamp - Gorast, Krika, and Bitil." etc. and have "Mistika Makuta" redirect to Mistika. Although, perhaps we should have section on the Brotherhood of Makuta page, or something, regarding the Karda Nui strike team... ~ Wolk (talk) 13:45, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Ok, then. I do feel like for the Makuta, we need something a little bit more specific to be trageted by the disambiguation link. If the extra page seems too much then the section on the brotherhood page should suffice.--ToaKebaka (talk) 16:11, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

A page for the strike team could work too, but I don't feel like there should be separate "Mistika Makuta" and "Phantoka Makuta" pages, or redirection to further disambigs. ~ Wolk (talk) 16:13, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

I guess if we have a page for FoF, we can have a page for this Makuta team. So that would include Antroz, Vamprah, Chirox, Mutran, Icarax (Phantoka), and Krika, Gorast, Bitil (Mistika).--ToaKebaka (talk) 16:18, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Create Meta:Influences on BIONICLE

Someone in a BZP topic I've been scouring for etymology infor brought up this prior topic which digs into a lot of the influences that formed BIONICLE. Some notable ones include Faber's cancer, Polynesian mythology, Gladiator matches, Xenomorph aliens for Bohrok (and Rahkshi), Pokemon collectibles, etc, and it wouldn't hurt to have a single page that explores this subject.

I'd also be keen to feature instances where BIONICLE or its media alludes to real-world stuff ("Ride of the Valkyries" theme in MNOG, reference to Star Wars in Time Trap, Jaws in FoF, stuff from the TV Trope list, etc). We have a section for the reverse--references to BIONICLE in other media--on the Franchise page, but nowhere exploring these. --Gonel (talk) 16:43, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Votes for Meta:Influences on BIONICLE

1. --Gonel (talk) 16:43, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
2. TuragaHordika (talk) 21:36, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Comments Meta:Influences on BIONICLE

I feel like such a page would become way too speculative way too quickly. But I am all for a page where the references to other things in Bionicle are listed.--ToaKebaka (talk) 16:58, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Agreed--to be sure, every inspiration that does make it onto the page would have to be backed up by official sources. Xenomorphs, for example, may or may not have actually been confirmed, and a lot in the BZP thread is just fan speculation. I mainly list these as things that, if confirmed, could make it onto the page.

But we'd start with Polynesian influences, Faber's cancer, and other things we can concretely cite. The BTS material on the movie DVDs and the old and new Director's commentaries would be good to dig through, the book Brick by Brick is another, and iirc the G2 materials also listed some influences. There are a lot of potential sources that could be dug into, but currently no one page where all this information can be accrued. --Gonel (talk) 19:12, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

The confirmed inspirations are fine of course, but what about the very obvious ones that may not have explicit confirmation from someone involved with the piece of media containing it? Let's say the xenomorph influence was never confirmed (which may be the case) - this is a prime example of one thing very clearly influencing the design of Bohrok and Krana, but if no one said so outright do we ignore it? That seems wrong. There will be many cases such as this. There are several instances of Greg alone, making a reference to other authors in the books and sometimes people asked him about it on the forums and he confirmed it. Let's say he didn't -- then would the blatant author's tip of the hat be disregarded? And then there will be even more of stuff that is not at all obvious and people will debate whether it is relevant or not. Some of them will no doubt be a big stretch or leap in logic, yet some will be truly in the gray area with good arguments for and against, but with no way to ever get a confirmation from anyone who may have put it there in the first place. That is what I am pointing out - whatever "rules" are established for inclusion on the page must not be too rigid, otherwise we are willfully ignorant to many references and influences of other works in Bionicle, but then we have no cut-off or treshold and the transition from obvious to unlikely is more diffuse, which is where most of discussion will take place. How do we handle the outcome of such discussion? I think these are important aspects to consider way in advance.--ToaKebaka (talk) 08:27, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

What I think is most important is that the article makes clear distinction in what is *speculation* and what is *confirmed*, if any speculation is present at all. I think with these Meta pages in general, we may need to be more lenient on speculation (much like with the one on appropriated words) but it still needs to be kept clear what is confirmed fact. Personally, I think for this one it may be best to stick with what is confirmed, however. ~ Wolk (talk) 09:26, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Revise Infobox Image Policy

I previously brought this up on Surel-Nuva's talk page, but basically several other users and I think that we should change the policy of prioritizing comic images in infoboxes. The current policy works well on some pages, such as Dekar-Hydraxon and Krika, while others, such as Vorox and Bitil use poorly cropped comic frames which make it difficult to easily discern the character's appearance. Because of this, I think that we should switch to CGI images for pages which we deem to have poor quality infobox images. I think this would greatly improve the quality of the wiki, and am curious to hear others' perspectives on this. TuragaHordika (talk) 04:41, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Votes for revising Infobox Image Policy

1. TuragaHordika (talk) 04:41, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
2. ChroniclerTakanuva (talk) 18:21, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
3. PeabodySam (talk) 16:59, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
4. Not sure this topic really fits under "Articles for Creation," but I'm not complaining. Dag (talk) 17:10, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Comments on revising Infobox Image Policy

Agree with this 100%. Some articles are indeed using inferior images because of the comics-first policy. 06-07 characters are prone to this, because of Sayger's style not usually giving a lot of detail to characters in the background of panels. ChroniclerTakanuva (talk) 18:21, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

As I said on Surel-Nuva's talk page: I know the current image policy has been standing for over a decade, but I was weighing whether to bring this up in AfD/AfC. So yes, I'd also like to voice my support for using CGI instead of comic images. Especially since the comic pictures are hardly consistent across BS01 (Defilak has set CGI, Teridax has a movie screenshot, Muaka has a Flash sprite, Kane-Ra has a trading card, Visorak Battle Ram has a book illustration, etc. despite all of these appearing in comics) and there are many more characters who appear in sets (and therefore have high-quality CGI art) and not comics than there are vice versa. And as far as the comic images themselves are concerned... for every Krika with fantastic art, there's a bunch of Bitil who are lacking any comic panels better than their set CGI. Furthermore, there are instances such as the Toa Metru where the comic artwork does not represent the final sets or how the characters canonically look in the story. I know replacing this many images will be a huge undertaking, but I think it improve BS01's image (pun intended) overall. --PeabodySam (talk) 16:59, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Proposal to rename Skull Scorpios to Skull Scorpio

Same as with Power Swords and Zamor Spheres. Skull Scorpio is a species, so singular, like Frost Beetle. ~ Wolk (talk) 18:17, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Votes for renaming Skull Scorpios to Skull Scorpio

1. ~ Wolk (talk) 17:51, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
2. TuragaHordika (talk) 18:36, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
3. --Gonel (talk) 22:21, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
4. Dag (talk) 01:03, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Comments on renaming Skull Scorpios to Skull Scorpio

I'm still admittedly unclear on the policy for singular versus plural titles, so I'll abstain from voting. A bunch of other Gen 2 articles (Okotans, Masks of Power, Elemental Crystals, Skull Spiders, Skull Warriors, Elemental Creatures, Shadow Traps, Elemental Beasts, Lava Beasts, Storm Beasts, Quake Beasts, etc.) have plural titles that don't necessarily describe a specific group or organization (like Protectors, Mask Makers, or Masters/Uniters), so where would these fall on the "plural/not plural title" policy if (or rather, when) this AfC passes? --PeabodySam (talk) 02:22, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

• Elemental Creatures I would consider akin to a faction or to Crystal Serpents - There's a definitive number - the 7 elemental creatures.
• Okotans should probably remain plural, much like wikipedia:Germans or wikipedia:Italians.
• Skull Spiders and Shadow Traps should definitely be renamed; Masks of Power, Elemental Crystals, and Razor Sharp Hook Blades probably should be singular?
• Skull Warriors, Lava Beasts, Storm Beasts, Quake Beasts could be singular as well. However, my worry there is that, much like with City-Building Creatures, they end up sounding like individuals.
• Elemental Beasts I could go either way on. The page presents it as a faction. I actually wonder if it should not be renamed to Shadow Horde.

~ Wolk (talk) 17:24, 22 April 2024 (UTC)