BIONICLEsector01 talk:Voting Center

Shortcut: VC
From BIONICLEsector01


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 Merchandise Subsections

I'm nearing the end of the Merchandise deluge. Inevitably there are things I haven't been able to find, but the bulk should be on here now. Rather than having all the information in a massive, unwieldy Merchandise page, I want to break up the information into sub-pages with just the Merchandise page as a list of each year's merch. The sub-pages would cover categories that spanned multiple years, while unique promotions (like the 2006 Battle Spinners or Burger King promos) would fall under "Other Merchandise."

Also, for all the new setlinks for these new items, we can make them redirects to these sub-pages until pages are made for them.

  • Clocks - watches, clocks
  • Pens
  • Clothing - shirts, jeans, hats
  • Costumes - costumes, foam masks, foam weapons, Hordika gauntlet
  • Toy Guns - sphere shooters, waterguns,
  • McDonald's - McDonald's figures
  • Bags - including backpacks, gym bags, luggages, wallets--many of these were released in series, so anything falling under these categories would fit here.
  • Shoes
  • Toothbrushes
  • Linens - bedsheets, towels
  • Keychains
  • Other Merchandise

Thoughts? --Gonel (talk) 06:54, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Comments on Merch subpages

Maybe as an alternative, we just do year pages for Merch? It would match the way we do Sets. Like, we don't have a page for Canister Sets, it's just an understood sub category, but we do have a page for 2006.

Also, fantastic job with the merch. It's just what I always wanted! -- Dorek Talk 03:33, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm thrilled it's meeting expectations!
Yeah, honestly I've thought about doing year too. The tricky thing about years is that things are much less rigid or clear-cut than with the sets--the Vahki toothbrushes, for example, were announced in 2004 but not spotted until 2005, and Hordika-themed linens didn't come out until 2006. And there are a number of things where we know they were official but don't know what year they came out. Certainly doable, but we'd have to be upfront with anything that's unclear.
Granted, we could also do both. What do you think? --Gonel (talk) 07:17, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't think I would mind that necessarily, the release date is the release date, even if it's not matching the year depicted, but that's the nature of the beast. How would you envision both working? -- Dorek Talk 20:16, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

That's the difficulty though; in most cases we don't have precise release dates (since merch releases were much more sporadic and random than the official set waves), and a good amount I haven't confirmed the original release years for. Sometimes we just know when something first appeared on ebay, or when fans first happened to spot something and report it to BZP/MOD. It's made more tricky when things were delayed by a year like the Hordika linens or Vahki pens which appeared the year after. According to Bricklink, the Inika bag series wasn't released until 2008, though I haven't been able to confirm this myself yet.
As for how both would work, I'd have to draw up some Sandbox articles. The pages would have complementary information, at least until individual product information can be moved to dedicated pages for each product. Once that's done, each page would just list/link products relevant to a given year or a type of product... if that makes sense. --Gonel (talk) 08:11, 31 May 2024 (UTC)


Rename "Dekar-Hydraxon" to "Hydraxon (Duplicate)" and "Hydraxon" as "Hydraxon (Original)"

Most articles covering subjects whose names changed during the story use the subject's new name. Examples include "Jaller," "Takanuva," and "Treespeak" (back when it was a full article). Renaming "Dekar-Hydraxon" to "Hydraxon" would match that convention. With this change, we could also remove the Nickname template from that article--"Dekar-Hydraxon" was a term made up for BS01.

Of course, then we'd have two "Hydraxon" articles, so we could turn "Hydraxon" into a disambiguation page and distinguish the character articles with the titles "Hydraxon (Duplicate)" and "Hydraxon (Original)." -- Morris the Mata Nui Cow (talk) 17:46, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Votes for renaming "Dekar-Hydraxon" and "Hydraxon"

  1. -- Morris the Mata Nui Cow (talk) 17:46, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
  2. - Toa Jala Converse 21:48, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
  3. TuragaHordika (talk) 13:33, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

Votes for renaming "Dekar-Hydraxon" to "Hydraxon (Dekar)"

  1. Same as the above suggestion, but Dekar rather than Duplicate. ~ Wolk (talk) 18:22, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
  2. --Surel (Talk) 18:25, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
  3. --maxim21 07:19, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
  4. This option sounds good as well. -- Morris the Mata Nui Cow (talk) 07:45, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
  5. I like this option as well, but I also agree with Dorek that Dekar and the Hydraxon duplicate should share a page. - Toa Jala Converse 22:27, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
  6. Honestly, i'm fine with either. TuragaHordika (talk) 18:10, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
  7. Dag (talk) 22:45, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Votes against renaming "Dekar-Hydraxon" and "Hydraxon"

  1. I agree with Dorek's reasoning below. --Angel Bob (talk) 20:04, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
  2. Dekar is his own character. It isn't as though he changed his name, he simply ceases to exist now. I think the page should just be called Dekar if anything. We should keep a fair but not extensive amount of info here about the "new" Hydraxon, as that is what happened to his body and it is standard, but the info about Hydraxon should be on the Hydraxon page. The Ignika brought Hydraxon back. At the very least, things should remain as-is, or Dekar-Hydraxon should be changed to Dekar. Firespitter Lhii (talk) 16:04, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

Comments on renaming "Dekar-Hydraxon" and "Hydraxon"

I vague remember we having a very similar poll already. And we've made the changes, that was the time when we merged Dekar's and the Dekar-Hydraxo pages I believe, only to Dorek rename the page back to Dekar-Hydraxon. So I'll only vote if he's okay with the changes lol --Surel (Talk) 20:19, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Here's what I found.[1][2][3] Also, if the pages do end up being renamed, we should have a "Hydraxon" disambiguation page. Dag (talk) 20:56, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Ah, I knew we'd talked about the page name a while back but had forgotten we'd actually voted on it. My bad (and thanks for bringing up that info). Also, agreed about the disambig. -- Morris the Mata Nui Cow (talk) 04:54, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

I'll be honest, I'm still not sold on it, although it is the least obtrusive solution (aside from what it is now). Functionally, he's still Dekar, and it feels remiss to have his name just be a redirect. It's too unique to compare to Takua or Treespeak.

We could also just make it Dekar =P -- Dorek Talk 02:55, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

I see what you mean. Since the article is about two identities (rather than a single identity/concept with two names, as in the other examples), there's a good argument for mentioning both identities in the title. Personally, I still lean against "Dekar-Hydraxon" since it's a nickname while "Dekar" and "Hydraxon (Duplicate)" aren't. In that case, since the new Hydraxon doesn't remember his past, I think it'd make more sense to title the article with his new identity instead of his old one. None of my opinions are strong though, and I'm curious to hear others. -- Morris the Mata Nui Cow (talk) 04:54, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
I think we should create a separate page for Dekar. Once he becomes Hydraxon, he's no longer Dekar. Dekar essentially no longer exists (RIP). Like Morris said, they're two different identities, but I agree with Dorek as well: it's too unique to use Takua/Takanuva as a model, so we need to do something else in this case. When Takua became Takanuva, he was still the same individual, so it makes sense to give him only one page. Either way, I support the name changes being proposed here. - Toa Jala Converse 21:48, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

If I'm not mistaken, that's how it originally was, waaaaaay back in the day. I think the argument for fusing them (maybe I did that? idk it's been 15 years) was because he IS still Dekar; mind readers can access those parts of his brain, and literally any time he appears in the story people go "this guy's a phony!" so being Dekar is still central to the character and his arc. It's not like we would have had two pages for amnesiac Takua and regular Takua, or Metru Nui Nuhrii and Mata Nui Nuri, etc. etc. I think having two "Hydraxon" pages doesn't really capture the complexities of it, although at some point I get that it's just semantics. -- Dorek Talk 18:07, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

I like Dorek's suggestion of just changing Dekar's page to "Dekar". I also think that Hydraxon should just have his info about his duplicate on his page, though I don't entirely oppose also keeping it on Dekar's too. The new Hydraxon is the original Hydraxon, just in a new body. After all, that is how the people revived by the Red Star are treated. He was transformed by the mask of life, has all his memories, the same behavior, the same knowledge, etc. Instead of being revived by the Red Star, he was just revived by the Ignika, and it used the body and possibly the life-force of Dekar to recreate his body and revive him. Also, if we make the content page for Dekar anything other than Dekar, it detracts from him and sets him apart from the other Matoran. Firespitter Lhii (talk) 00:28, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Uhm, no. The new Hydraxon introduced in 2007 is Dekar, transformed into Hydraxon by the Ignika. Teridax read Hydraxon's mind and realized he is/was Dekar. Pridak also deduced his pervious identity, even if the Ignika basically has overwritten is with a copy of Hydraxon's. The Dekar-Hydraxon is basically like a copy on a pendrive, the Red Star body for the original Hydraxon is lile a new SSD after the original got "damaged." We're not voting on Hydraxon after he got a new body on the Red Star after his death.--SurelNuva (Talk) 12:27, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Why not change "Dekar-Hydraxon" to "Dekar"? I mean, there is one Dekar.Lenny7092 (talk)

Merge Memory Crystal And Knowledge Crystal

A while back, I brought up on the Knowledge Crystal talkpage that there is much similarity between knowledge and memory crystals, to the point that they seem identical, and I believe it is a strong enough case to present it as such on the wiki. I'll summarize all the information here:

  • The 2004 style guide says Nuju's task was guarding knowledge and memory crystals. While it distinguishes the two, it also says that Ko-Metru is "dominated by enormously tall knowledge and memory crystals," implying that Knowledge Towers are made from both.
  • In a string of answers from Dec 2003 and Feb 2004, Greg says that knowledge and memory crystals both store information[1][2] and confirms that they both make up Knowledge Towers.[3] While he did say they were different and this difference would later be explained in the City of Legends guide,[4][5] memory crystals are not mentioned even once in the book and this difference is never explained anywhere.
  • The Rahi Beasts guide says that "Frost Beetles have been known to consume the crystals used to grow new Knowledge Towers," then says that "Matoro once proposed a theory that some of these creatures may have eaten memory crystals." While this has long been interpreted on BS01 to mean they mistake knowledge crystals for memory crystals, this actually implies what has already been confirmed, that memory crystals also make up Knowledge Towers.
  • The first encyclopedia only mentions knowledge crystals in the entry for Knowledge Towers, but does not have specific entries for either knowledge or memory crystals.
  • The updated encyclopedia includes an entry on memory crystals, but still not one for knowledge crystals.

To summarize, both knowledge and memory crystals make up Knowledge Towers and can store information. Although Greg said they are different and this distinction would be explained, this was never followed through on, and later material continued to suggest that they are the same. This leads me to believe that a later internal decision was made to consolidate them to a single object.

As to what the name of the merged page should be, Knowledge Crystal or Memory Crystal, I have no strong opinion either way. Dag (talk) 17:20, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Votes for merging Memory Crystal And Knowledge Crystal

  1. Dag (talk) 17:20, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
  2. CozyFrog (talk) 18:09, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
  3. --Surel (Talk) 19:30, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
  4. ~ Wolk (talk) 09:36, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
  5. I will vote for this as long as memory crystals are included as a section on the knowledge crystal page. TuragaHordika (talk) 18:16, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Votes against merging Memory Crystal And Knowledge Crystal

  1. The knowledge crystals are specific crystals that can seed knew knowledge towers, which it seems like distinguishes them from memory crystals. See more in the comments. Firespitter Lhii (talk) 15:15, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Comments on Memory Crystal and Knowledge Crystal

So, by merging the pages are we saying that they're the same thing, or are we simply saying one page should be predominant and both will be mentioned? I don't mind merging, but I think there's enough evidence to say that they're different objects, even if we can't necessarily delineate their specific characteristics... -- Dorek Talk 05:21, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

What's the difference, because aside from the wiki saying they are different, every aspect of them are the same. Both store data, both can be used to grow Knowledge towers, and that's the only 2 functions these two ever had.--Surel (Talk) 07:09, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
I agree with Dorek. Since everything we know about the two behave the same, but they are also distinguished objects from one another, I think we should mention both on the page, and note that they are separate objects, but as far as their known characteristics go, functionally identical. I'd probably go for Memory Crystal for the page name, since that's what got a BEU entry. ~ Wolk (talk) 09:22, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
The only sources that explicitly say they're two distinct objects is the style guide, which was never meant to be public, and Greg saying early on that the difference would be explained, but it never was, and unless Greg writes it in official media, he has the right to change his mind. But the thing I still don't understand is that Crystal Matrix was somehow aware of the Ko-Metru and Nuju bios from the style guide, or they were also in some other source. I had assumed it was from the, but apparently their bios weren't on the site till around April 2004. Dag (talk) 14:53, 16 February 2023 (UTC) The presskit used the same bios, and was given to BZPower in December 03. Where in the style guide id you find info the Metrus? NVM it's in the intro section... ~ Wolk (talk) 15:13, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
The discrepancy is in the wording of Rahi Beasts: "Matoro once proposed a theory that some of these creatures may have eaten memory crystals and somehow absorbed the knowledge inside them." This can be interpreted one of two ways: either Frost Beetles have been observed eating Memory Crystals and Matoro's theory is that they absorb their knowledge, or they have not been observed eating Memory Crystals and Matoro's theory is: a) that they do and b) that that causes their intelligence. My assumption reading it has always been the second, that the difference between the two is that Knowledge Crystals are something Frost Beetles definitely eat and may or may not make them smarter, whereas Memory Crystals are something Frost Beetles only possibly eat, and if so is what makes them smarter. Master Inika (Talk) 15:36, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

If knowledge and memory crystals are indeed two distinct objects, we can't say that Frost Beetles definitely eat knowledge crystals, only that they eat "the crystals used to grow new Knowledge Towers," and again, based on Greg and the style guide/presskit bios, memory crystals also can be used to grow Knowledge Towers. Dag (talk) 16:05, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

It seems pretty clear that, at one point, they WERE intended to be different, hence Greg's insistence that there would be some sort of clarification. Regardless of that clarification being abandoned/never forthcoming, I feel like the original intent, in this case, should apply, especially since both terms made it into publication, and we don't have anything, conversely, telling us that they are actually the same. It'll be annoying to write out no matter what ("these two things are different. how? nobody knows!") but I wouldn't necessarily feel comfortable declaring them to be the same item (I think the pages can still be merged though). -- Dorek Talk 03:46, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
^If they're not the same thing, how would you suggest the pages be merged? - Toa Jala Converse 05:10, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
The only reason I'm suggesting merging the pages is because I think the two objects should be considered one in the same. If they shouldn't be, then I'm against merging the pages. If the pages aren't merged, then they still need a serious overhaul to convey their similarities and the ambiguities of their differences, if there even are any, which would be a pain to do. It would be a lot easier for us to go with the simplest conclusion, that they are in fact the same. We would add a note or a trivia point explaining what I've explained here, that originally they were intended to be different, but because no difference was ever given and their only known functions are completely identical, we consider them the same with what little information we have as to not cause confusion. EDIT: Here's a sandbox I quickly threw together to better show what I mean. Dag (talk) 16:56, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
I'm still on the fence, since it seems we have no way of definitively determining whether they are or aren't the same object (grr!). That's a good sandbox though. If they do get merged, don't forget to include the part about Matoran storing information at will via telepathy (as stated here). - Toa Jala Converse 07:28, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Continuing on from what I said in my vote, there is reason enough to believe that if both were used for storage information, the knowledge crystal and memory crystal would specifically store knowledge/wisdom and memories, respectively. I think they could have been partially merged/mixed in the process of the story, but the story never really says anything contradictory and never ascribes memory crystals as being the same thing as knowledge crystals. While interpreting Greg's wording as infallible in any details is not generally enough of a standard and would possibly not be sufficient in-and-of itself, the fact that he specified that they were BOTH a part of the knowledge towers in conjunction with any other proof that they are the same makes me lean strongly towards them not being the same, or at least having so little evidence to the fact that it would not be in line with our policies. I would, however, be open to the idea of having a heads-up section at the top of both pages that redirect to the either, noting their similarity. Firespitter Lhii (talk) 15:15, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Create Arsenal Pages/Delete Weapon Stubs

I was adding a trivia bullet to the Elemental Trident page recently and noticed that the page was rather short, as were the other pages about the Masters' weapons. A number of Toa also have weapon pages where the article is essentially a disjointed stub, and I was wondering if we should put things together more cleanly.

I often reference RangerWiki on Fandom since there's no independent alternative I know of yet, and one of the things that they do there is making an arsenal page, where a given team's equipment is all laid out on a page - common weapons, personal items, Zords, etc. put together in a single location to prevent stub articles and it just looks good.

There would have to be some minor alterations in order to cleanly translate how things work on this wiki as opposed to over there, but I think this is a much better solution than having more than eight stubs for the Masters alone - and with the other Toa teams, it only gets worse.

This page is an example, or perhaps a rough draft, of what I want to accomplish. - Waddlez 22:30, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Vote to Replace Weapon Stubs with Team Arsenal Pages

  1. - Waddlez 22:30, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. TuragaHordika (talk) 22:52, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
  3. For character/group-specific tools within a certain group/organization, yes. I think this is a good idea. ~ Wolk (talk) 23:10, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
  4. I don't think the masks are necessary, but certainly a good idea, similarly to the Toa Hagah Spears page--SurelNuva (Talk) 17:25, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
  5. --Gonel (talk) 21:42, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
  6. Dag (talk) 22:02, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Vote to Create Arsenal Pages and Keep Existing Weapon Pages

Vote to Keep As-Is

  1. IDK, we have plenty of stub tool pages already. I don't see the harm in keeping these. - Toa Jala Converse 18:15, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
  2. This isn't that unusual, and like with a lot of G1 pages, it always has room to grow. I see no reason to do this. Firespitter Lhii (talk) 00:12, 7 February 2024 (UTC)


For adrenalin mode, it is at the very least mentioned in the set description of 70787 Tahu – Master of Fire. ~ Wolk (talk) 23:12, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree that masks don't need to be mentioned on these pages. ~ Wolk (talk) 19:51, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

I don't get how this is comparable to the Toa Hagah Spears. First off, these are all unique weapons with multiple functions, and we know pretty much the same about these as every G1 primary Toa's toa tool, if not more. I don't think this would get this kind of support if it were the Toa Nuva's original Toa Tools(the ones that came in the sets of the Nuva), and even the Toa Mata's tools get their own pages, despite not having names or pretty much anything to say. These are all different, do different things, and have different functions. Firespitter Lhii (talk) 15:38, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

I like the idea overall, although I kind of disagree that the Master's tools are ones that are stubs lol, they're as good as any other page! -- Dorek Talk 03:32, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Rename Great Spirit Robot as 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)

Votes against renaming Great Spirit Robot

Comments on renaming Great Spirit Robot to Mata Nui Robot

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)

Votes against creating Memoirs of the Dead

  1. See comment. --Gonel (talk) 04:15, 7 May 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)

We don't page pages for any other fan contest, and I can't imagine what's worth adding to it that isn't already covered in the Meta:Fan Community page. So I would actually be less inclined to do a page for the contest itself as for individual pages for the stories of the Memoirs, Thousand Years Untold 2, and Lesovikk Hiatus contests, assuming they have the non-canon banner. This would mainly be for the sake of their preservation as something that once nearly became canon, and also a piece of fan history (like the lore details of the Xian Weapons which aren't canon but preserved here). But a page for the contest itself is unnecessary imo. --Gonel (talk) 04:15, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

My preference would be that the page only contain brief info about the contest, then include each of the stories. The page's purpose should be archive the stories, and the info on the contest itself would be from Meta:Fan Community and only be seen at the top of the page, similar to how we provide background for stories such as The Many Deaths of Toa Tuyet. If this goes through, this treatment should also be applied to the other two contests. TuragaHordika (talk) 04:41, 7 May 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)

Votes for creating Agarak, Uganu, Owaki, Etoku, Kerato, Mamuk, Bumonda Buzkayo, Droton, Flammik, Jagiri, and Rokreng

Votes for creating only Protectors/Other Protectors or Okotan/Other Okotans (specify)

Votes for creating 6 "Protector of [Element]" pages

Votes for no changes

  1. It's fine the way it is.- Toa Jala Converse 04:40, 5 May 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)

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)

Votes against Meta:Influences on BIONICLE

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)

Rename Skull Scorpios as 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)
  5. - Toa Jala Converse 18:14, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Votes against renaming Skull Scorpios

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)
Do we actually know that there isn't only two of them? Which would make them to be a similar case to the Crystal Serpents.--SurelNuva (Talk) 12:52, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Rename "Bionicle Ignition 6" as "Bionicle Ignition 6: The Secret in the Depths!"

Even though the sixth Bionicle Ignition Comic was not given a name in its release on the website or in the Graphic Novel, it was given a name in its German release, which translates to "The Secret in the Depths!" While there's no precedent for an exact situation like this, there is the case of "The Crossing", which was published in Polish, and the name had to be translated. Since we don't have any other known name for this comic, I think it would be good to let the page title reflect the name the comic was given. (The preceding unsigned comment was made by Willess12)

Votes for renaming "Bionicle Ignition 6" to "Bionicle Ignition 6: The Secret in the Depths!"

  1. If this is the closest we have to an official title, I think we should have it. Maybe could the wording of the page reflect that it's the translation of the german title? Or could we just use the german title instead?--SurelNuva (Talk) 19:11, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Votes against renaming "Bionicle Ignition 6" to "Bionicle Ignition 6: The Secret in the Depths!"

Comments on renaming "Bionicle Ignition 6" to "Bionicle Ignition 6: The Secret in the Depths!"

I've updated the trivia points on BIONICLE Ignition 6 and BIONICLE: The Official Magazine to reflect some digging I did on this exact question. Tl;dr: the title of the German comics/magazines from this period differed from the official English titles, and it's currently unclear what the official English title would have been if it had been published. However, this is a documented title, and the closest thing we currently have to one--we could always change it down the line if the original English production title were discovered. --Gonel (talk) 02:26, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Seeing that the German titles could be slightly different, I think "The Secret of the Depths!" sounds better, but that's just my opinion.--SurelNuva (Talk) 19:15, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
Given that the titles don't really match for the other comics, I probably wouldn't be for it, but I enjoy the fact that they DID at least title this one in German! -- Dorek Talk 03:30, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
May I make a redirect with the German title to the page for now? As a preservation until we figure out what's going to happen with the english title?--SurelNuva (Talk) 18:11, 18 June 2024 (UTC)