Difference between revisions of "BIONICLEsector01 talk:Articles for Creation"

Shortcut: AFC
From BIONICLEsector01
(Solis Magna System (14 October))
Line 118: Line 118:
#--[[User:Boidoh|Boidoh]] ([[User talk:Boidoh|talk]]) 00:33, 15 October 2014 (CEST)
#--[[User:Boidoh|Boidoh]] ([[User talk:Boidoh|talk]]) 00:33, 15 October 2014 (CEST)
#[[User:Proto|<font color="black">Proto</font>]] [[User_talk:Proto|<sup><font color="black">talk</font></sup>]] 04:21, 15 October 2014 (CEST)
#[[User:Proto|<font color="black">Proto</font>]] [[User_talk:Proto|<sup><font color="black">talk</font></sup>]] 04:21, 15 October 2014 (CEST)
#04:44, 15 October 2014 (CEST)
#[[User:Lord Nektann|''<font color="darkblue" face="Century Gothic">'''Lord'''</font>'']] [[User talk:Lord Nektann|''<font color="darkblue" face="Century Gothic">'''Nektann'''</font>'']] 04:44, 15 October 2014 (CEST)
=== No ===
=== No ===

Revision as of 02:44, 15 October 2014

Battle of Ekimu and Makuta

This was deleted because Dorek thinks it could be metaphorical and might not be an actual battle. However, the animations clearly shows it as an actual battle, and not metaphorical like in 2001 with Mata Nui and Makuta, which were represented using stones.


  1. --Boidoh (talk) 23:35, 11 October 2014 (CEST)
  2. Toa Green Ninja (talk) 23:40, 11 October 2014 (CEST)
  3. While it's true that we only have one source to go by, the fact that official animation depicts Ekimu and Makuta actually doing battle suggests that we are meant to take it as having actually happened. It's a far cry from the Mata Nui and Makuta stones of '01, which were much more abstract and vague in their depictions. I'd say this is a no-brainer. --Angel Bob (talk) 00:07, 12 October 2014 (CEST)
  4. --~|RC|~ (Talk/Contribs) 00:31, 12 October 2014 (CEST)
  5. Rename it "Conflict" but yes. LockmanCapulet Crusty relics! 18:27, 14 October 2014 (CEST)


  1. It was hardly a battle from what we know of, which is Makuta was in the process of taking over, when Ekimu knocked his mask off. --Vartemp 00:14, 12 October 2014 (CEST)
  2. The "Battle" consists of Ekimu knocking the Moup off of Makuta's face. So, what battle?--Willess12 (talk) 01:13, 12 October 2014 (CEST)
  3. A little presumptuous guys Lord Nektann
  4. It's one whack of a hammer, just slap it on the Battles and Conflicts page. »Zapnox«


  • OK, If you say that it was hardly a battle, then it could be easily renamed to 'Conflict of Ekimu and Makuta'. The page already had a good amount of info, and didn't look like a stub like other pages that were deleted, like Skull Spiders and Protectors. --Boidoh (talk) 00:27, 12 October 2014 (CEST)
My thought process was mostly "that video was a minute and a half long", and also "IT'S OCTOBER OF 2014". Obviously we're taking it to be literal (since we have pages for Ekimu, Makuta, etc), but it was an intro video. It's not meant to tell a whole story, it's meant to springboard us INTO a story. -- I AM THE DOREK do not truffle with me 00:49, 12 October 2014 (CEST)

I see where you're coming from, Dorek. It might be a little premature. --Angel Bob (talk) 14:05, 13 October 2014 (CEST)

I hate this wiki's rule about subjects being too premature to do anything about. We're a wiki, and we should have information when people want it. And people want to know more about this reboot now. I sure do. It doesn't matter if they are stubs; we write what we know, and we learned a lot a few days ago. Toa Green Ninja - Bearer of the Mask of Spinjitzu (talk) 01:30, 14 October 2014 (CEST)
The general thinking is "it's better to have no information than incorrect information". We're here to record facts, not wild speculation, which a lot of this qualifies as both because it's the early days (and the website has been updating! So people can chill) and because a lot of the sources include vague or ambiguous details that are doubtless meant to be explored when we actually get to it. If this were 2009 people would be saying Tuma was a Glatorian, or that Fero was an Agori, or what have you. -- I AM THE DOREK do not truffle with me 01:48, 14 October 2014 (CEST)
There was no real incorrect info on that page. The only thing you could call "wild speculation" that was included there, was before the spelling of the name 'Ekimu' was official... Other than that, it's just plain facts from the animation that was on that page. There are no assumptions being made here. The entire page just recorded what the animation said. Makuta and Ekimu were brothers, Makuta grew jealous, broke sacred law, made the MASK OF ULTIMATE POWAH, donned the MASK OF ULTIMATE POWAH, Okoto began to shake and crumble, Ekimu realized what his brother had done, knocked off the mask, both brothers entered endless slumber, shockwave. Done... Just facts, and there is no legit reason why this page cannot exist. --Boidoh (talk) 01:53, 14 October 2014 (CEST)
He's right on Toa Green Ninja - Bearer of the Mask of Spinjitzu (talk) 02:16, 14 October 2014 (CEST)
I was speaking more broadly of the 2015 articles in general. This one in particular, there are reasons to have it and reasons not to have it. I personally think the information is redundant since it's just a snippet of The Legend animation and has no real context for what's going to happen (emphasis on going to, since again, it's October 2014) in the story. But you'll notice I'm not voting. -- I AM THE DOREK do not truffle with me 02:30, 14 October 2014 (CEST)
I'm with Dorek. I'd rather not be mislead by speculation. That's been the policy as long as I've been watching this wiki. --Vartemp 02:56, 14 October 2014 (CEST)

Ok.. Really. Do I have to say this over and over? First of all, there is NOTHING on that page that was speculation. What would be speculation would be if I added "When the two brothers shook hands in agreement over sacred law, a cloud in the form of a Kanohi Vahi appeared in the sky near Ekimu." This is all FACT. I presume nothing, I go by what LEGO has shown us in the animation. There's no way this is just some metaphorical battle, because we clearly see them doing battle, unlike the Makuta and Mata Nui stones of 01'. All the reasons for NOT having it so far are just "This is speculation", "presumptuous". Even for the folks who say this isn't a battle, it could be defined as a conflict, and I'm not against having the page called, 'Conflict of Ekimu and Makuta'. Also, this is a major event for Okoto. This should get a page. --Boidoh (talk) 00:46, 15 October 2014 (CEST)

People are allowed different opinions, Boidoh. One of my peeves is that this lacks context. We see a later picture (File:Protectors Concept Art.jpg) that shows the Protectors around a coffin of some kind. What's that about? Is Ekimu actually dead? Is that what the outcome of the battle is? This is why I'm always hesitant about adding this new information, because we don't know what it leads to, and they most certainly have plans to give that information to us later. As I mentioned in the beginning, "The Legend" video was not meant to provide us with a story, it was meant to provide us with a plot hook. -- I AM THE DOREK do not truffle with me 01:43, 15 October 2014 (CEST)
The page was about the same size as the Battle Against Umbra, Battle Against the Barraki, and Raid on Artakha pages. With the battle against umbra, Umbra was stunned in the end... This is a similar situation. You could say that the Battle of Ekimu and Makuta was just a simple hammer swing. In the Umbra one, all that happened was that Matoro created ice walls to reflect Umbra. Pretty similar in how much "battling" went on. The other two pages don't even have pictures. I'm certain there are more puny battle pages like those, and this battle seems more significant than any of those other ones above.
On the topic of that picture. As I said, the page just goes by what the animation says. The two brothers were sent into an eternal slumber. That is the info we know, so that is what should be there. Not speculation about Ekimu being dead, or whatever that coffin looking thing is. --Boidoh (talk) 01:55, 15 October 2014 (CEST)

A fair bit more happened in the Battle against Umbra than Matoro covering the walls with ice, as is apparent by reading the page. The Inika had to fight some Protodax, Umbra drove them off, attack the Inika, disarmed them, and then went into his light form to kill them all before Matoro even had the idea to coat the walls in ice. In this battle, Makuta places a mask on, and earthquake happens, and Ekimu thwacks him on the head with a hammer. They get knocked on unconscious and the masks are scattered. Much less actually happened, one or two details of which are actually aftermath of the battle, and two of which are technically prior to the battle. And while those battle pages you brought up are fairly short, you oddly chose a couple battles with pretty big story implications. Fighting Umbra got the Inika closer to Ignika, and the Barraki gave Terry the idea to take over the MU.

As to the proposed page, people do need to stop throwing out the "speculation" word. Reporting exactly what we see and are told isn't speculation, but we do have what happened covered on the page for the Animation and we can cover it on their individual pages. We have similar conflicts treated this way from the original storyline: Karz v Artakha, for instance, was a battle that had some pretty big effects down the line, but all we know what that they fought over the Mask of Creation. We need to make sure we have the events recorded, yes, but for now it doesn't have to have its own page. It may never have to have its own page. Some extra details about the end of the battle, what happened to Makuta and Ekimu's unconscious bodies, what role the Protectors played, etc. may come out and then we can have context to place the battle in. This may be the event that called the Toa to Okoto. All Dorek wants to do is wait to see what else they tell us. People want to know now? Go to the Ekimu page. Wouldn't that be one of the first places to look anyway? "Hey, what happened with this Ekimu guy?" They'll read about the battle there, and BAM. Information delivered. Later, with some more context we can create a page that discusses more of the aftermath/consequences of the battle. No, this isn't speculation, but it is something that can wait until we get into the story proper =) ζoxHistories External Image

An article is only necessary if the content related to its subject is substantial enough to be elaborated on. If there are enough details that would not be appropriate to elaborate on wherever it may be mentioned, when a simple mention is all that is necessary. So that these details could be documented somewhere and more information be gained if available.

I am of the opinion that there is not enough substantial information to warrant an article in this situation. All we know is that it happened and its outcome, all of which is relevant information to be explained when mentioned and not detailed enough to need further explanation.

I am wholeheartedly with you in that the belief it may be metaphorical is ridiculous - it most certainly happened. But the mere fact that it happened is all we know, and that's not enough to prevent an article on it from eternally being a stub. --~|RC|~ (Talk/Contribs)

When I said "metaphorical" I wasn't necessarily trying to analogize it to the Makuta v. Mata Nui battle. I was more trying to articulate that the video in which we obtain said information is called "The Legend". Legends, per the dictionary, are "a nonhistorical or unverifiable story handed down by tradition from earlier times and popularly accepted as historical."
The Mask of Creation obviously exists. There is some dark force that's likely Makuta threatening the island. The Defenders are real, Masks of Power are totally a thing. But again, we lack context for most of this. -- I AM THE DOREK do not truffle with me 02:43, 15 October 2014 (CEST)


We know a lot about them from NYCC and their descriptions, images, and heck, they are the only pages we don't have for January's sets already. Please, for the love of Mata Nui...

Also, I made an example of what the page would be here. See? Toa Green Ninja - Bearer of the Mask of Spinjitzu


  1. Toa Green Ninja - Bearer of the Mask of Spinjitzu (talk) 01:30, 14 October 2014 (CEST)
  2. Why not --Boidoh (talk) 01:33, 14 October 2014 (CEST)
  3. -Shine 01:56, 14 October 2014 (CEST)
  4. --~|RC|~ (Talk/Contribs)
  5. Might as well, but do we know for a fact they wear masks of power? --Vartemp 02:56, 14 October 2014 (CEST)
  6. --Willess12 (talk) 04:07, 14 October 2014 (CEST)
  7. »Zapnox«
  8. LockmanCapulet Crusty relics! 18:27, 14 October 2014 (CEST)
  9. During the short time the page was online, it seemed legit. I don't see why not to reinstate it. --Angel Bob (talk) 20:37, 14 October 2014 (CEST)
  10. Proto talk 04:20, 15 October 2014 (CEST)



Yes, their masks appear when the narrator says "Masks of Power" in the video. Toa Green Ninja - Bearer of the Mask of Spinjitzu (talk) 02:57, 14 October 2014 (CEST)

Skull Spiders

Same as above. We know what they do, we know their leader, we have IMAGES, and yeah. Toa Green Ninja - Bearer of the Mask of Spinjitzu


  1. Toa Green Ninja - Bearer of the Mask of Spinjitzu (talk) 01:39, 14 October 2014 (CEST)
  2. --Boidoh (talk) 01:40, 14 October 2014 (CEST)
  3. -Shine 01:56, 14 October 2014 (CEST)
  4. --~|RC|~ (Talk/Contribs)
  5. »Zapnox«
  6. LockmanCapulet Crusty relics! 18:27, 14 October 2014 (CEST)


  1. Not Yet--Willess12 (talk) 20:01, 14 October 2014 (CEST)
  2. Yeah, I'm not really feeling it. First off, I don't know what template we'd use for them, since we don't know if Creatures or Rahi exist on Okoto. On top of that, we don't know that the Lord of Skull Spiders has any connection to them; we've simply inferred that from the product name and common sense. Altogether, this doesn't really add up to enough information to merit a page. --Angel Bob (talk) 21:51, 14 October 2014 (CEST)
  3. Not very much info on them beyond "They're evil and they can replace masks". I say hold off until January/February when we have more info. Proto talk 04:23, 15 October 2014 (CEST)


I'm hesitant to vote for this one, since unlike protectors, these didn't appear in the Legend animation therefore, I think it's premature. --Vartemp 02:56, 14 October 2014 (CEST)

I agree with Vartemp.--Willess12 (talk) 20:01, 14 October 2014 (CEST)
Also, I just thought of something: by the time this vote finishes, assuming it does, we may have info on them anyway. That in mind, this vote seems pointless. It will be a page eventually; what's the rush?--Willess12 (talk) 21:35, 14 October 2014 (CEST)

Solis Magna System (14 October)

It has been agreed that Galactic Universe is kinda useless. But we may have enough images and information to give Solis Magna its own page using information from the doomed article. Go forth and vote. (If someone sandboxes an example, replace the text in these parentheses with a link.) --Master of the Rahkshi Ask, and ye shall receive. Eventually. 18:51, 14 October 2014 (CEST)


  1. --~|RC|~ (Talk/Contribs)
  2. »Zapnox«
  3. --Willess12 (talk) 20:01, 14 October 2014 (CEST)
  4. I always thought it was odd that we didn't have a page for this. I mean, it has a legal name and everything. --Angel Bob (talk) 20:14, 14 October 2014 (CEST)
  5. Toa Green Ninja - Bearer of the Mask of Spinjitzu (talk) 20:29, 14 October 2014 (CEST)
  6. --Vartemp 20:31, 14 October 2014 (CEST)
  7. This name is the worst but it makes more sense than "Galactic Universe". -- I AM THE DOREK do not truffle with me 23:33, 14 October 2014 (CEST)
  8. --Boidoh (talk) 00:33, 15 October 2014 (CEST)
  9. Proto talk 04:21, 15 October 2014 (CEST)
  10. Lord Nektann 04:44, 15 October 2014 (CEST)