User talk:Surel-nuva

BS01Logo2012.png Welcome!

Hello, Surel-nuva, and welcome to the BS01 Wiki! Thank you for your contributions. We hope you like the place and decide to stay. As you can see, the BS01 Wiki is a place where you can type out all of the things you know about BIONICLE. If you don't know how to fully use the features of this Wiki, these will be some great links to look through:

We hope you enjoy editing and contributing to the biggest BIONICLE encyclopedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Try to remember, the Wiki Staff monitor the articles, and articles are edited constantly, so if any of your edits are reverted, or another edit is placed, don't worry about it. If you need help, just ask the existing members and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Also, in order to improve this Wiki, your feedback is very much appreciated. To provide feedback, please place it on the Member Opinion Hub. If you have any questions regarding the Wiki in general, they can be placed on the Help Desk. If you have any criticisms to make regarding the BS01 Wiki staff, they can be placed onto the Complaint Center.

(After you have read and understood everything above and the notices below, feel free to remove this template.)


Looking for a project? Check out BIONICLEsector01: Maintenance. It lists many pages that need content, rewrites, etc. Check out what needs to be done and help make the BS01 Wiki perfect!

Please do not upload any of your personal images to the Wiki. Instead, use an image hosting site like Flickr for all of your image hosting needs.

-- Dorek Talk External Image 23:18, 17 July 2015 (CEST)


I'm glad someone was awake enough to try to handle this :) You have my thanks. --External Image Owner (talk|contribs)

Again, great job about reverting that vandals edits! I'm PMing some staff members about this. --Vartemp Talk 15:21, 31 January 2016 (CET)

And again you helped out with a vandal attack. Thanks again for being around and being willing to help =) ζoxHistories External Image

Set Pages

Are you in charge of them? -- Toa Jala The AFC needs your help! 06:37, 19 March 2016 (CET)

Not really, I just edit them, because some pages are lacking in content :) -- Surel-nuva (talk) 09:04, 19 March 2016 (CET)
Oh haha okay. Well, anyway, good work. I was wondering how you would feel about incorporating some of these images into the set pages. For example, this image would be an early version of Set:8729. Do you think they should be put right on the pages, or if we should stick a link in a "See Also" section? The latter was what ET recommended. -- Toa Jala The AFC needs your help! 07:48, 20 March 2016 (CET)
Something like this? -- Surel-nuva (talk) 13:12, 20 March 2016 (CET)

Actually, the idea was that once Gallery:Prototypes gets passed in AfC, that section would lead the visitor to the gallery. If they clicked on that link, their screen would look something like this. I kinda like yours better, though. Maybe we should do both, so once the gallery gets passed, it'll look like this:

See Also

So yeah, why don't we do what you did with 8729? When the gallery gets passed, we'll add a link there. :D -- Toa Jala The AFC needs your help! 05:16, 21 March 2016 (CET)

Help with Canister Sets

Can I ask you for a favor? I've been kinda busy in Real Life moving. Zo;tomana says we should add [[Category:Medium Sets]] to all the Canister Set pages EXCEPT the Stars. Would you mind helping me with that please? Maybe you could do 2006-2009? I've already done 2001 and 2002 and I'm working on 2003 right now. -- Toa Jala Order a Sig! 04:52, 7 April 2016 (CET)

I'll do it -- Surel-Nuva (Talk) 10:20, 7 April 2016 (CET)
Thank you so much. Love the new sig. -- Toa Jala Converse 06:52, 11 April 2016 (CET)

Matau's Quote

That's my fav, too! :D -- Toa Jala Converse 18:38, 5 June 2016 (CET)


can you pass the adventures PDF sweetie? --- Creep 17:54, 25 November 2016 (CET)

You can find them there. These are pictures of them, I used a program to convert them into PDFs :) I'd pass them to you, but I know no way to do it
-- Surel-Nuva (Talk) 18:12, 25 November 2016 (CET)

Oh hey I remember this, from good old /biog/ in 4chan. Forgot this existed. Thanks brother --- Creep 18:14, 25 November 2016 (CET)

Krana-Kal telepathy


I read everywhere, that the Bohrok-Kal (meaning all Bohrok-Kal) could communicate telepathically, so I assume that all Krana-Kal had telepathical abilities. Is this right? (If so, this information should be added to Krana-Kal and to Bohrok-Kal.) Krana-Za-Kals additional abilities are reading non-communicative minds and sensing strong emotions.

(The telepathy could also go out from an other area of the Bohrok-Kals body, if not from the Krana.)

--- MKW (talk)

The information about the Krana-Kal are came from the Comic 11: A Matter of Time... comic description, so we don't need to change it. Can you see? -- Surel-Nuva (Talk) 19:19, 26 November 2016 (CET)
So, do all Krana-Kal have telepathical abilities? The Bohrok-Kal article says: "[...] They [the Bohrok-Kal] also gained the ability to communicate telepathically and speak the Matoran language. [...] They were powered by Krana-Kal and could telepathically communicate in the Matoran Language. [...]"
This sounds like all the Bohrok-/Krana-Kal had telepathical abilities! Is this just bad formulated?

--- MKW (talk)

No. The Krana-Kal could communicate in Matoran language via the Bohrok-Kal. And All Bohrok-Kal have the ability to communicate in matoran telepathically. But that kind of Krana-Kal [Krana Za-Kal] have telepathical ability without any Bohrok-Kal. -- Surel-Nuva (Talk) 19:35, 26 November 2016 (CET)
Oops, right, sry. I was unsure, now I scrolled and read the Krana article in the magazine. Thx, now I understand
--- MKW (talk) 19:41, 26 November 2016 (CET)

FaRotS Scans

Could you tell me where you found those scans? Thanks =) --OnionShark 20:10, 18 January 2017 (CET)

There, but it's russian. -- Surel-Nuva (Talk) 20:20, 18 January 2017 (CET)
isn't that comic on the bmp? Intelligence4 (talk) 14:54, 20 January 2017 (CET)
Actually, it isn't. -- Surel-Nuva (Talk) 15:13, 20 January 2017 (CET)
huh, would have thought they'd have archived it. is there an english version anywhere? (can i assume you can read russian?) Intelligence4 (talk) 15:21, 20 January 2017 (CET)
I'v just found it, but I can't read it for I haven't learnt russian. The FaRotS, the AOSR, and the TET were exclusive comics, only available in their Graphic Novels. Just like the Hydraxon's Tale, so I'm glad that the Hydraxon's Tale was uploaded in 2009 to a site, but it has been removed. (Fortunately, it was translated into hungarian by a fan, so I could read it in my language, and maybe it hasn't been removed from BrickShelf.) Maybe I could try to translate it, but it won't be a perfect-masterpiece translation :D -- Surel-Nuva (Talk) 16:26, 20 January 2017 (CET)
since when are you hungarian. I thought you were american. --- Creep 07:26, 21 January 2017 (CET)
I've been learning english since I got interested in the BIONICLE's story (via the MNOG and MNOG2 in 2006, later the story serials & podcasts in 2007. I've become a fan in 2004, my first set was a Bordakh, but I was just 7 years old), and I wanted to read it in enlgish and understand what was written there (BS01). I know I make mistakes when I'm editing the pages but I'm trying not to make them, but sometimes I just mistype and didn't notice it in the "show preview." -- Surel-Nuva (Talk) 08:34, 21 January 2017 (CET)

do you ever use english in your day to day life? your english is quite good, actually... i would have never guessed it wasn't your first language. Is hydraxon's tale up on the internet anywhere? that was another one i never got to read. Intelligence4 (talk) 00:20, 22 January 2017 (CET)

Yes, I use it everyday. First place, I learn english in school, on the other hand I use english while I'm here. And there's the comic in hungarian. -- Surel-Nuva (Talk) 09:34, 22 January 2017 (CET)
i knew someone linked me to that comic from this site haha - thanks!. (it's much shorter than i thought it would be lol.) Intelligence4 (talk) 20:38, 23 January 2017 (CET)

your set collection

your bio notes that you've been a fan since 2004 - how'd you collect the 2001 sets like the turaga after they weren't on sale anymore? are they recent internet finds? Intelligence4 (talk) 20:39, 23 January 2017 (CET)

Yes, they are. The my pre-2004 sets were bought after 2010 from various sites. :) And as I said, the HT was uploaded online, but it has been removed. -- SurelNuva (Talk) 21:29, 23 January 2017 (CET)

Re: Spaces

Sorry, I was trying to cut down on the bytes used per page (and by extension, the site as a whole). I didn't mean to cause a problem. :/ -- Toa Jala Converse 21:28, 31 January 2017 (CET)

Originally, I did the same thing, but I realized that almost every page have these, so removing them would take more time than I have. And When I edited the pages I hardly could see how many "=" wrote before and after the names/words. -- SurelNuva (Talk) 21:39, 31 January 2017 (CET)

Recent addition to your bio

What's LDD? Intelligence4 (talk) 22:07, 26 February 2017 (CET)

Lego Digital Designer. =) Well, I would need a Vahki head, Visorak foot pieces, Rahkshi heads, and a couple of more thing for Lariska, what the program doesn't have...-- SurelNuva (Talk) 22:18, 26 February 2017 (CET)
huh, cool, i didn't know such a thing was available. :) Intelligence4 (talk) 23:27, 26 February 2017 (CET)


I never used Tohunga - that one's pretty obvious - but could I have a source for "Koronan" not being canon? Among other places, it still exists in the post-lawsuit revision of MNOG alongside "Matoran", and I don't see how it would fall under the purview of the lawsuit without "Koro" also being deemed unacceptable. Also, is it just me or are these Koro pages kinda bare on detail and images? The Aimless Wanderer1 (talk) 23:04, 18 March 2017 (CET)

I mean, is there an official source for that? --The Aimless Wanderer1 (talk) 00:18, 19 March 2017 (CET)

Here's the thing, though: In all of the examples you stated, they're only non-canon because they contradict the existing versions of those events in mainstream media. For example, it was already stated that there were only two Manas, so the depiction of multiple Manas in MNOG is non-canon, fair enough. However, there is nothing outside of MNOG stating that "Koronan" is an illegitimate term. For that matter, "-Koronan" technically means something entirely different from "-Matoran" - a Ta-Matoran is a type of Matoran who is imbued with the element of Fire; a Ta-Koronan is just someone who lives in Ta-Koro. For example, Vakama isn't a Ta-Matoran, but he is a Ta-Koronan.

The fact of the matter is, though, we cannot deem something non-canon just because Greg didn't mention it - it can only be considered noncanon if Greg or later writings EXPLICITLY say it is. As things stand, there is zero information supporting the claim that Koronan is non-canon. And frankly, to assume it's non-canon without any evidence is not how a Wiki should operate. --The Aimless Wanderer1 (talk) 15:59, 19 March 2017 (CET)

Except, that's TOTALLY how a Wiki works. It is not canon, therefore it doesn't belong on the Wiki except in passing mention in Trivia sections only. It's like pointing at a Nintendo system, and calling it a Sega. Sure, someone probably CALLED it a Sega, but it isn't a Sega so it's therefore incorrect. Matoran were briefly called both Tohunga and Koronans, but those terms are obsolete and to continue to use that term in pages causes confusion. Therefore, we reflect the Wiki pages to say that. --External Image Owner (talk|contribs)
With all due respect, you keep insisting that it's not canon, but there's still nothing to support that. As previously stated, "Koronan" is NOT the same thing as "Matoran" - "Koronan" applies to anyone or anyTHING that hails from a given village - it's the Mata Nui equivalent of "Metruan". This is not to be equated with Tohunga, which is obsolete because it was explicitly replaced by the word Matoran, which means the exact same thing. However, since there exists no other word that means the same thing as "Koronan", I urge you to reconsider your position on this matter. --The Aimless Wanderer1 (talk) 07:01, 20 March 2017 (CET)
Can someone search the old Greg documents for any questions involving the term "Koronan"? That should clear this up. If he said the term is non canon, then it's no canon. But if he never said anything one way or the other, it's used in an official storyline source, so there's no reason not to accept it. --Angel Bob (talk) 17:40, 20 March 2017 (CET)
The "Koronan" was ONLY used in the MNOG and its walktrough... and by the fans. but every time a fan asked Greg about the "koronan" (eg.: Le-Koronan) Greg answered with "matoran." (eg.: Le-Matoran) And since the maori thing the "koronan" word, along with the tohunga, are omitted from any media, except the MNOG. But no (non-semi canon) books, no comics, no Templar online animations use the "koronan" word. It is long forgotten with the tohunga, as I re-read the OGD stuff. And Swert is the owner, if he says the Koronan should not be here (except MNOG stuff), it must not be here. — SurelNuva (Talk) 18:06, 20 March 2017 (CET)
That still doesn't qualify as Greg decanonizing it - he could just be more accustomed to saying "Matoran", or be referring exclusively to them. But unless he contradicts its existence, there's no reason for us to assume it doesn't exist. And while it is no longer possible for us to ask him if the term "Koronan" is canon, I don't see why he would say no - after all, the term could not have been part of the Maori lawsuit without the base word "Koro" also going the way of "Tohunga". Furthermore, since it has no other true equivalent in canon, the term is very much not obsolete.

The fact remains that there is no solid evidence for us to regard the term non-canon - at the very most, it is canonically ambiguous. But unless someone here was officially given creative control over BIONICLE's story, none of us have the right to entirely omit established material from the recorded canon without concrete evidence that contradicts its existence. And frankly, such a "when in doubt, not canon" attitude can only be detrimental to the quality of this Wiki's content. --The Aimless Wanderer1 (talk) 21:22, 20 March 2017 (CET)

I'm just reading all this, so i'm a little late to the party (and it seems that some of the comments were deleted anyway haha) but i'd like to chime in and say that the bionicle chronicles books did refer to some of the matoran as koronans. that said, i remember reading something that said that cathy hapka used that term in error, since she didn't have all the info on all the nuances of the diction to be used. Intelligence4 (talk) 19:40, 22 March 2017 (CET)
You can find the other half on The Aimless Wanderer1's talk-page. — SurelNuva (Talk) 19:46, 22 March 2017 (CET)
Yes, I've already read that. Unfortunately, Wiki material still doesn't qualify as an official source, since anyone can edit it. For that matter, the cited sentence could use some rewording: The way it's written, it seems to suggest that ALL instances of "Matoran" in MNOG were replaced by "Koronan" - which is far from the case in any version of MNOG. -- The Aimless Wanderer1 (talk) 10:10, 28 March 2017 (CET)


Surel-nuva could you please visit the chat? I want to discuss reasoning behind my few edits I did. Delete this if you need so.--BionicleMax (talk) 16:37, 22 March 2017 (CET)

It's better for me, because if you write something there, I'll get a notification on the top of the page(s), so I can answer, and usually, I don't check the chat. — SurelNuva (Talk) 17:01, 22 March 2017 (CET)

(Formerly) Format

I think the reason you may have experienced "X (formerly), Y (formerly)" being changed to "X, Y (both formerly)" is because we used to list things all in one line, as opposed to using the <br> tabs. For a horizontal list like that, it makes more sense to have the (formerly) tag after both of them. For a vertical list, though, it really doesn't sit right with me. Does that makes sense to you? Think we ought to change it? --Angel Bob (talk) 22:50, 23 March 2017 (CET)

No, I experienced after I started to list the things horizontally on the pages, because placing everything in 1 line made No sense for me, and this horizontal listing make the pages clearer (okay, also makes the infobox larger, but it worthy). It was either you or Morris, who removed the (formerly) tags after the different things and replaced them with a single (all/both formerly) tag having said that it should be like this. — SurelNuva (Talk) 23:21, 23 March 2017 (CET)
Ha, really? I'd forgotten. My bad. Well, I've changed my mind: I would prefer to use the "X (formerly) <br> Y (formerly)" format that you tried to implement. Does that sound like a good idea? --Angel Bob (talk) 23:31, 23 March 2017 (CET)
I'm not 100% sure that it was you, It could be Morris, I don't remember exactly. For me the "x (formerly)<br>y (formerly)<br>z (formerly)" makes more sense than "x<br>y<br>z (all formerly)." — SurelNuva (Talk) 23:42, 23 March 2017 (CET)
Yeah that may have been me, heh. If so I was just doing it to be consistent with other pages. Honestly I think that the current (both formerly) setup is more confusing than it needs to be, and that having (formerly) on each line is generally better. That said, if we adopt this new system, we should iron out some more details first. For example, let's say someone wielded two weapons (A and B), got rid of both at the same time, and then picked out a new weapon (C). Saying A {{C|formerly}} <br> B {{C|formerly}} <br> C {{C|formerly}} suggests the character had A, then had B, then had C. In this case the following system conveys more information: A and B{{C|both formerly}} <br> C {{C|formerly}} suggests A and B were wielded together but were replaced with C. How do you think we should deal with edge cases like this? -- Morris the Mata Nui Cow (talk) 23:51, 23 March 2017 (CET)

The Hagah's formation II and Kanoka

After lots and lots of research, I haven't found anything about the time of the creation of the Hagah. Still, I may lack proof for saying that some of their formations were made separately, but it's the same for you to say that they were all formed at the same time, so how about this:

Currently the timeline page puts the events from NOGLB in the "Sometime before 75,000 years ago" section, and they are followed by the creation of the Hagah as if it was one event. Since we are not certain that their creations happened all at once we could put the events from NOGLB in a new "Sometime between before 75,000 years ago (which is the creation of Spiriah's team) and at least 7,000 years ago (which is when TSO is shown having Varian in stasis in BL4)" section, and change the Hagah formation event to "The Brotherhood of Makuta starts selecting Toa from various teams to serve as bodyguards for its members, calling them Toa Hagah."

What do you think? ~OnionShark 18:48, 29 March 2017 (CET)

Or Ancient didn't have the Levitation-kanoka boots yet when the NOGLB happened. The short story doesn't mention Ancient having them, so it isn't a reason to change it. Leave it like that, until we find a way to ask Greg to clarify it. — SurelNuva (Talk) 19:05, 29 March 2017 (CET)
The DH attack the Toa with them in NOGLB, I was going to change that thing but fortunately I saw a link leading to the Kanoka page while skimming through the page. Untill we have that clarification, which I think we won't ever get, stating that that fact is confirmed is technically wrong, isn't it? ~OnionShark 19:18, 29 March 2017 (CET)
Technically, we should remove the whole Toa Hagah and NOGLB story from the Timeline, because we don't have real specific time periods for them. But for Spiriah had a Toa Hagah team, the formation of them should be before his self-exile what happened according to the BIONICLE: World 75-70,000 years ago. And maybe the Metru Nui style Kanoka was invented on Metru Nui 4,000 years ago, but they used normal ones (like Lurker, Gatherer and Ancient) before the invention. Remember, each Metru had a special ability for their Kanoka. — SurelNuva (Talk) 19:28, 29 March 2017 (CET)
That's kinda the point I was trying to make on the Hagah's fromation, we don't have a precise time period, so let's put it in an approximative one, like basically almost every other section in that Timeline. Is there any problem or can we do like I proposed? ~OnionShark 19:31, 29 March 2017 (CET)
Why wouldn't we wait until someone else say something about this? Like @Morris the Mata Nui Cow, or @Angel Bob, or @Dorek? — SurelNuva (Talk) 19:37, 29 March 2017 (CET)
Why should we? ~OnionShark 19:39, 29 March 2017 (CET)
Because we're just 2 users, and they have more right to decide. — SurelNuva (Talk) 20:01, 29 March 2017 (CET)
I unserstand Dorek and Morris, but why Angel Bob too? As far as I know he isn't among the staff. But still, if they have a problem with this they can always change it. I mean, one of the help pages says we shouldn't be afraid of making an edit, or something like that. As far as I know, Dorek and Morris haven't said anything against this, and leaving out info sounds like a bad idea in a place where people come to find info. I decided to see if you were fine with this since we previously strongly disagreed, but if it wasn't for this I would have simply made the edit immediately. ~OnionShark 21:22, 29 March 2017 (CET)
I'm definitely not one of the staff, but I'm happy to lend my opinion if it will help reach a conclusion. I have to admit, this is really a nebulous zone. It seems extremely counterintuitive to me that the Toa Hagah would be formed at different times, but we can't really assume anything one way or the other without evidence. I think OnionShark's suggestion, of giving an approximate time span (of 63,000 years - wow) for when NOGLB takes place, might be the most accurate thing we can do. Maybe we could add some notes on the NOGLB or timeline page clarifying the various theories, for readers to come to their own conclusions. --Angel Bob (talk) 22:30, 29 March 2017 (CET)
Return to the user page of "Surel-nuva".