Talk:Transformers: Rescue Bots

Why aren't the Decepticons on Rescue Bots?

Why aren't the Decepticons (Megatron, Starscream, Soundwave, etc.) on Rescue Bots? AdamDeanHall (talk) 20:45, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't think they made plans for their appearances yet. But then it would have to be a team-up with the Rescue Bots and the Autobots. --Rtkat3 (talk) 18:30, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

We have yet to see the dog Sparkplug on the upcoming second season of "Transformers: Rescue Bots".

We have yet to see the dog Sparkplug on the upcoming second season of Transformers: Rescue Bots. Why haven't we seen him yet? And when will he make his first appearance? AdamDeanHall (talk) 17:55, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

We also have not seen Medix nor Hoist. Obviously the cartoon has created its own timeline and ignored the designs of the earlier toys and the storybooks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.232.234.53 (talk) 17:05, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

I don't know if I expect Blurr or Salvage to show up either, even though there are toys of them.

Occasional noise occurring (not bad)

I've noticed that when Blades is in "scary" situations, he sometimes makes a loud "haaaa!" noise that just cracks me up! Did anyone else notice this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.182.70.246 (talk) 15:14, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

The Rescue Bots are now Dinobots.

I got a good look at the teaser trailer for season 3 of Transformers: Rescue Bots. Here's how I saw it from my point of view: Blades becomes Swoop, Boulder becomes Slag, Chase becomes Snarl, Heatwave becomes Sludge and Optimus Prime becomes Grimlock. And not only that; Optimus Prime is becoming a lot like Godzilla, king of the monsters. AdamDeanHall (talk) 23:05, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

US-centric content with no clear significance or purpose

I have a problem with the following content, added by IP @61.21.102.129: twice here and here: "A third season was also the first Hasbro Studios and DHX Media co-production not to have an TV-Y rating." My two objections are as follows: Wikipedia is a global encyclopedia, not an encyclopedia for the United States. Content should be presented in a way that is meaningful to all readers, not only the ones in the United States. This is explained at MOS:TV#Parental ratings and is the reason why we do not add parental ratings to articles. The second objection I have, is that the content seems trivial, as it doesn't expand our understanding of the series because it lacks any context to explain the significance of this information, or the reason for the new ratings. Thus, when I read it, my first question is, "so what?" IP, please explain why this content should be included, otherwise it will be removed again. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:41, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Likewise why are no voice actors allowed other than the US English voice actors? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.232.234.48 (talk) 21:32, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Slight difference. The series is a US production, but it should be presented in a way that a global audience can understand. Global audiences don't know what the US TV ratings mean, but they are capable of understanding that voice actor A voiced character B. If you are talking about including voice actors in non-English speaking nations, that's not within the scope of this article, as this is the English Wikipedia. For instance, we don't list international broadcast information for non-English-speaking nations (see WP:TVINTL), nor do we list airdates for every English-speaking nation. Also there are probably dozens of languages that this series could have been translated into, and it is not our job to indiscriminately include every possible permutation this series can take internationally, as this would just attract cruft. Can you imagine an article that contains every major and minor character in a series, and then goes on to mirror that content for every language a series is dubbed into? Mind-boggling and pointless. Knowing who voiced the series in Japan is more appropriate for inclusion in the Japanese-language Wikipedia. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:12, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Splitting?

Should this article be split in to 3? One section for the toys, one for the storybooks, and one of rthe TV show with a main page pointing to all 3 articles? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.232.234.48 (talk) 16:25, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

I think the toyline and the book series should be split into their own articles. Any objections? --Rtkat3 (talk) 04:10, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

As it currently stands, this article is loaded with WP:OR, WP:INUNIVERSE and unsourced trivia waiting to be cleaned out. Splitting into several articles will only compound those problems. - SummerPhD (talk) 00:53, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

In agreement with SummerPhD. Content for these niche articles gets so bloated with in-universe cruft, multiple rehashings of plot points in character summaries: "then she did this, then she did that, which means that she was XYZ, as demonstrated when she did this one thing" in one character's summary with a parallel explanation in another character's summary: "after she did this, he did that, but then she did this, but then he did that, which made him ABC." And so on. What makes more sense is that the articles are pared down to the bare bones, removing all the cruft before we break off into a new cruft-attracting article. What many editors keep forgetting (perhaps because they've never opened a real encyclopedia?) is that encyclopedias SUMMARIZE content. They don't dwell on minutia unless the minutia is crucial to understanding the subject. Contributors have to be able to discriminate between poignant and insignificant events. If the article can be brought up to a good standard (dare say GA?) then maybe the extra info can be moved if appropriate. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:27, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

I changed the storybooks to a summary and moved that comment to the toys, as these are the storybooks that came with the toys and tie in with the toys but not the tv series. As such all of the suggestions by talk and Cyphoidbomb above have been completed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.232.234.53 (talk) 18:59, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Names of the boys with pictures

It would be helpful to put a picture next to the name of the bot so parents like me can figure out what bot is what without having to watch the dumb show 108.26.161.43 (talk) 16:38, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Peter Cullen not listed on voice credits

Forgive me for pointing out the obvi, buuuuut, if he is not added to the credits, I'll go ahead an do it myself in a few days.

I'm sure this is just an over-sight; mostly because Optimus doesn't appear until later seasons of R.B., but still, credit where it's due... Rekuzan (talk) 13:23, 9 July 2023 (UTC)