Talk:Blentron

Question: Why do we have Elephaorpha noted as "Elephorca" here and myriad other related pages despite it being... Elephaorpha?--MCRG 05:08, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

When is a Blentron not a Blentron?

Yes, they haven't been mentioned by their group name in the comic. However, they are obviously the same characters, still serve Unicron, and are still gathering Angolmois...--Rosicrucian 23:41, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Why the heck should it matter if someone happens to use the name or not? If the all the Aerialbots showed up it wouldn't matter if anyone used the team name, it goes in the entry. Or the Battlechargers... they're never called by that group name in the Toon that I can recall but their appearences still go on that page because IT'S THEM. All of them. The IDW stuff belongs here. --ZacWilliam 23:46, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Heck, I don't think the Technobots were mentioned as an actual team in Stormbringer, but we credit them as such on this wiki. Same goes for the Constructicons in Megatron Origin.--Rosicrucian 23:49, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

So we should pretend that a faction exists when we have no evidence? The Sourcebook doesn't even use "Blentron". Drancron's just "Unicron". We're not here to assume that IDW considers Elephorca, Drancron, and Rartorata a separate group from the rest of the Unicron minions. Interrobang 23:51, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

We're not considering it as a Faction but as a team name. It *IS* the team name for these three together. As the examples above show, whether the team name is actually ever used or not, when a whole team is present somewhere that DEFINATELY belongs on the groups page. It's gotta go back in. Include a (Note) that the term Blendtron isn't mentioned, that's fine but it still really needs to be here to make the page complete. --ZacWilliam 23:59, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Again. Sourcebook doesn't put Blentron in anything. They note who's a Jointron or Insectron, but "Blendtron" is nowhere to be found. Why is it our place to assume that IDW considers them Blendtrons, despite not showing any indicator when they easily could've? Interrobang 00:13, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

I think that with the added caveat pointing out that the word hasn't been used, there is absolutely nothing wrong with including the IDW stuff here. To me, "Blentrons" means "these three characters" at least as much as it refers to a "faction". Are you denying that these are "the same guys", or is your objection purely about applying a label that wasn't used in the fiction? If the latter, I think you need to address the Technobots example given by Zac. --Steve-o 19:02, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

It's a bit dodgy- they're a faction with a faction symbol in Japan... but the faction name is a specific reference tot heir being fuzors, which is... awful specific to this trio, and not very good for a full-on faction.

And in the meantime we've gotten stuff like the Dinobots having their own faction symbol despite being a sub-group, not their own faction. It's probably safe to just treat Blendtron as a blanket term for the trio like 'Monsterbots,' while noting the term isn't used in the US. Besides- I'm loathe to restructure articles to diminish this article until The Ascending is over, the term might pop up. -Derik 22:35, 21 October 2007 (UTC)