2016 Competitors Edit

I thought we weren't going to add 2016 competitors to the wiki just yet because of spoilers? I hate to say it but this article goes against our guidelines of adding article about robots entering the new series. Diotoir the son of nemesis (talk) 07:14, March 13, 2016 (UTC)

Apollo was at the pilot, so we're talking about its appearance at the pilot only. And everyone else on the wiki would be none-the-wiser if you didn't keep trying to enforce the spoilers you love so much onto us. ToastUltimatum 13:05, March 13, 2016 (UTC)
I have to ask, if a robot from the pilot actually fights in an episode of Robot Wars, does the wiki only refer to the pilot or do they just remove the page entirely? If this is worded wrong or sounds a lot weirder than normal, its because I am dealing with a pretty bad injury to my foot and sanity. Also Diotoir, as much as we like you for all of the information you provide and all that, don't try and force us to learn about whats actually going to happen in the new series because most of us don't want it to be spoiled. Perhaps refer to the events of the new series in code or in a cipher...--WolfwingandSlaveLeia (talk) 17:21, March 13, 2016 (UTC)
We would keep the article with all of its pilot content, withholding all TV episode info until it's aired. ToastUltimatum 17:53, March 13, 2016 (UTC)

AHA! Even the team have an issue about this page! "Hi there,

I've noticed you've created a page for our robot Apollo, just to let you know there is a lot on incorrect information, some of which could pose legal issues regarding our contracts with TV production companies. I've tried to alter this, but it appears it keeps getting changed back, for now I have just been deleting the incorrect info, for obvious reason I can't add anymore information until we are able to.

If you need any bits clarifying or need anymore information, then feel free to get in touch (You can email me from an address off the Robots Live website, or message through Facebook on the RL page).

Many Thanks

Alan Young 20:21, March 16, 2016 (UTC)" Diotoir the son of nemesis (talk) 20:25, March 16, 2016 (UTC)

That's for a different reason, though. CrashBash (talk) 20:31, March 16, 2016 (UTC)

Problems and Proposals Edit

OK, right now, we've got a few little issues that need clearing up. As of right now, Alan Young (of Team MAD) wants to delete every reference to Apollo's appearance as Chronic, including the image we have, as well as information about its appearance in the 2016 pilot. However, I see some issues with this, which I'm hoping we can work our way around.

  • As of right now, the evidence points to the fact that Apollo did appear in the 2016 pilot, or at the very least was meant to. As this is an encyclopedia, we need to have information like this posted, but since we're also being completely anti-spoiler, we don't want to post reveals like, as a hypothetical example, Apollo actually qualified and won the 2016 series. But if the fact that it was meant to appear in the pilot and yet it didn't, then this is information we do need to point out. If this information alone can be clarified, then I think we can find a way to work around it.
  • Likewise, if the Chronic image needs to be removed, fine....but we still need a picture of Apollo to fill the gap otherwise it just looks empty. Again, as far as we have been lead to aware, Apollo's only appearance was the 2016 pilot and even then it never competed, so again, I don't feel this should be a problem. If perhaps, Alan, you could point us in the direction of a good photo of Apollo we could use instead?
  • Alternatively, if this is all going to be too big of an issue, I can only otherwise propose that Apollo's article is completely deleted until we know better or you can tell us otherwise, or we alternatively learn otherwise. I'd rather not let things get more complicated than they need be. CrashBash (talk) 20:44, March 16, 2016 (UTC)
For the time being, I think we should temporarily delete the article. We've been given the information that Apollo has applied for the series, so we can remove the page for now, and then once the series has aired, we'll possibly have some TV participation details and an image to fill in, meaning we wouldn't need to focus on the pilot so much, and even if Apollo has not qualified, the article can be turned into a failed to qualify article like Bullfrog. As for the business with Chronic, if it is the case that Apollo is a separate machine, or legally it cannot be addressed as the same machine, then we've no good reason to keep it on Apollo's page when we bring it back, as Chronic's participation at BattleBots will still be mentioned on Team BlazerBotics, treating it as a separate robot.
Obviously I'll wait a day to hear thoughts from the rest of the wiki and Alan Young, otherwise Apollo's article can take a hiatus from being online. This talk page will stay online throughout that time. ToastUltimatum 21:15, March 16, 2016 (UTC)
OK, having spoken it over with Alan, he can only tell us that Apollo did not in fact take part in the pilot episode in any form. Therefore, I think our best option would be to simply delete the Apollo article entirely, until we're in a position to know better. CrashBash (talk) 21:16, March 16, 2016 (UTC)

Proof of deliberate draw. Edit

Right now, the Rivalry section for Apollo (and by extension Carbide) states the following.

"In Series 9, much like Ironside3 and Pulsar, the two rivals were deliberately drawn together by the producers."
— Apollo and Carbide's rivalry page

However, I have not yet seen a single piece of evidence that confirms this as absolute fact. As it stands, it feels like too much of a theory - yes, we know that Pulsar and Ironside3 were deliberately drawn together, since we have official confirmation by those teams, but I don't think I've seen one yet from Apollo and Carbide. I've tried to have it worded a little more neutrally, saying "This has lead to speculation amongst fans that this was done deliberately by the producers to continue the rivalry", but seemingly being neutral about a theory isn't allowed.

Am I missing something that clearly states that Apollo and Carbide in particular were, without a shadow of a doubt, drawn together just for the sake of continuing a rivalry? I just feel like every other time there's been something we think is true but we don't have 100% proof of it, we always treat it as just a theory. CrashBash (talk) 13:36, April 8, 2017 (UTC)

"In Series 9, much like Ironside3 and Pulsar, the two rivals were deliberately drawn together by the producers."
— Apollo and Carbide's rivalry page
Ha xD, even the justification it provides is false. Ironside 3 and Pulsar were not drawn together, but its hilarious for some members to decide its a rivalry and thus will ignore facts in order to strengthen their viewpoint. With regards to Carbide and Apollo, theres no fact at all. It is obviously however a heavy rumour which was even generally agreed to be the case by roboteers at filming. Garfie489 15:00, April 8, 2017
Ah, I see. Thanks for the information. I wonder if perhaps that would be OK to mention in the section itself (the fact about the rumour)? CrashBash (talk) 13:59, April 8, 2017 (UTC)
Id rather not, but simple fact of the matter is the producers havnt come out to explicitly state they deliberately put Apollo and Carbide together on record. In the same sense they never came out on record to say they gave Razer easier draws to avoid spinners on the way to the final - that was just a heavy rumour of the time. Is it true? - probably. However it could also be a randomised draw as we have no evidence to suggest otherwise. Half the rivalries stated on the wiki relating to the new series are written blindly by someone looking for evidence that only agrees with their theory. It was actually mentioned somewhere (i think a Reddit AMA) for example that Pulsar and Ironside were not originally drawn against each other, but rather got moved together because of all the other movements that were going on (for example, of the origional 8 robots in Heat E - only 3 were actually mobile and in their intended melee come activate). Garfie489 15:10, April 8, 2017
Ah, I see. Well, that in itself is certainly worth noting. Thanks for the information. CrashBash (talk) 14:11, April 8, 2017 (UTC)

With all this in mind, I'm beginning to wonder if we should remove the rivalry sections from Apollo, Carbide, Ironside and Pulsar's pages. I'll see what other people think we can do with this. CrashBash (talk) 15:35, April 8, 2017 (UTC)

Rivalry sections have never seemed necessary to me on any articles. It just feels like reused content to me, and especially in the cases of the reboot "rivalries", they're all just coincidental draws, which the teams even blatantly stated. TOAST 21:02, April 8, 2017 (UTC)
Okay, here's the thing. I wrote the rivalry sections with Pulsar and Ironside's permission and after they proof read them. Apollo confirmed that the producers put them together. We are not removing the sections because they are based on confirmed fact and observable fact. Toast, you are incorrect to say the teams are coincidental, because the teams are confirming the opposite. We will never get the producers to confirm anything and we are not going to hold out for it. Kane Aston has already told me he won't talk about behind the scenes stuff because it spoils TV magic. This is absolutely no different to us confirming the Gemini heat was moved to fight Chaos 2, because there is less evidence there. Garfie, your input is great, but I'm not going to override the actual roboteers. These sections stay, no debate. Toon Ganondorf (t c) 22:09, April 8, 2017 (UTC)
But you are overriding an actual roboteer. Garfie was there at the time. I'm pretty sure he knows exactly what he's talking about too. CrashBash (talk) 22:20, April 8, 2017 (UTC)
Trolley Rage, Dystopia... Jimlaad43(talk) 22:22, April 8, 2017 (UTC)
I know that he is. I said the actual roboteers - Apollo, Ironside and Pulsar. The ones who we are actually talking about. Toon Ganondorf (t c) 22:28, April 8, 2017 (UTC)
So far, you've posted nothing that proves that the Apollo/Carbide line-up was deliberately done by the producers to continue the rivalry. Team MAD merely stated they didn't ask for that set-up, from what you told me on my talk page. Gareth, who was there, has said that there's no proof in your claims, and even pointed out that Ironside and Pulsar were not meant to be drawn together initially at all. And Toast says he doesn't feel these are necessary. CrashBash (talk) 22:32, April 8, 2017 (UTC)
We have 100% proof the producers put them together, because no one else had any deciding factor on it. The fact that it dominated the marketing also supports the case. On the theory that the teams requested to be together, there is explicit evidence against, which is what actually started all of this. If you want to hold out until the producers confirm, be my guest, but it'll never happen. I'm happy with how the pages read now. If you are too, let's leave it at that. But if I have to give up my Sunday to keep reverting your edits, I'll be very displeased. I'm operating on a one-strike, I lock all the pages for a week. Toon Ganondorf (t c) 22:37, April 8, 2017 (UTC)

Okay that's it. I'm fine with meeting you in the middle and saying "producers drew them together" but omitting the "to deliberately continue the rivalry", but you're not even satisfied with that so I'm locking the pages for a week. I'm not spending my day going over this with you. Toon Ganondorf (t c) 22:41, April 8, 2017 (UTC)

Dude, I didn't even get the chance to do anything. You wrote this comment on the talk page after I had already edited it, so I couldn't possibly have seen it. Thats not fair, and you know it - you didn't even give me a chance. I've been trying to meet you in the middle for some time, and yet you can't even do that. You said, on my talk page, that I'm "just being stubborn" and yet you deliberately lock the page just to get your way. If that's not being stubborn, I don't know what is. And I don't even see the difference between saying "the producers drew Apollo and Carbide in the same heat" and "Apollo and Carbide were drawn in the same heat"'s exactly the same thing and you full well know it means exactly the same thing. So what if we don't mention the producers directly? We don't mention them in every other scenario where it's obvious they did, for example, swap Gemini's heat positioning, or draw Hypno-Disc and Atomic together one round earlier than they should be. CrashBash (talk) 22:46, April 8, 2017 (UTC)

No, no way TG. Put your pride away for god's sakes. You claim that Team MAD saying "yeah the producers did it" is 100% proof of an intentional draw, and you're treating it as gospel, when that sentence doesn't suggest anything! All it means is "we didn't ask specifically to fight Carbide". Did they say "the producers wanted to reignite our rivalry with Carbide"? No. If the producers ran a random draw as to who fights who, that would still mean the producers drew Carbide against Apollo. You're being a typical journalist, making an entire news story out of a single quote taken out of context. Don't make facts out of such vague sentences, especially when (and this is the kicker)... none of this even matters!! Who gives a damn why Carbide and Apollo were in the same heat? It could've been the roboteers wishes, it wasn't. It could've been a manual set-up by the producers and maybe it is. It could've been random, and maybe it is. What difference does it even make? Just don't bother trying to form unimportant facts born from speculation.

You're also trying to single out Crash just because he has an opinion opposite to yours, when in fact nobody has agreed with you. This includes the other bureaucrat of the wiki (who can override your ridiculous week-long lock), a genuine roboteer who was in that heat (do not think less of him just because his robot went out in the first round, the roboteering community is tight-knit and they know everything that goes on between them because they're MATES), and the person who rightfully brought this problem up. The roboteers gave you permission to write these sections, but do you truly believe they did so happily?

The pages will not be locked. We're not mentioning the how or why these "rivalries" were put together, particularly in the case of Pulsar and Ironside3 who were definitely drawn into different heats. This has been stated by roboteers on Reddit, while Ellis Ware has avoided mentioning it, suggesting that we should just leave the matter alone. The community stance currently suggests we remove the rivalry sections altogether, and they can only be saved by an upsurge in support, but even if that were to happen, there will be no wild guesses as to why two robots ended in the same heat (out of a grand total of five heats!!) TOAST 23:44, April 8, 2017 (UTC)

If a actual roboteer has stated that Team MAD's statement is false cause he was there as well himself, you believe the other roboteer and not Team MAD. I support the removal of the rivalries of the new series as they are merely put together by circumstance. The Team 101/Team King B, Team Razer/Team Tornado, Team Firestorm/Panic Attack rivalries should stay however as they fought each other in at least 3 each pair and they was interesting to observe. Sam (BAZINGA) 00:00, April 9, 2017 (UTC)
Im not saying the statement is false, however if you asked most roboteers wether the producers put the robots together deliberately they would say yes. Its an extremely heavy rumour - but its notable no ones said "Fred from Mentorn told me so". Theres no primary sources, and thus you have to realise roboteers on the whole dont care, thus being told it was deliberate is not a statement of fact until a source is provided. To give an example, many veteran roboteers believe Razer was given draws to deliberately avoid spinners to allow it to progress. Its something ive been told by several of the time as fact, however they admit itll never be proven because theres no primary sources. Garfie489 01:15, April 9, 2017

Okay this appears to have been more highly contentious that I first realised. I will now turn this issue over to the community and take a back seat. Just a few things:

  • I have been grossly misrepresented in my comments about Garfie. My meaning was that only the producers could contradict whether Apollo was selected for Heat E, and that Garfie was neither Apollo nor the producers, we should not necessarily let an opinion of another cloud the issue, lest we have too many cooks in the kitchen. To me, the debate was always "producers put them there" vs "they requested/some other reason". Proven to be correct by first hand account of the relevant team, I dug in my heels. Now that I have explained, Toast has conceded the misunderstanding (he believed I was disparaging a roboteers for losing in round one for some reason) and I hope everyone else can forget the nonsensical comments that I somehow disparage the views of a roboteer based purely on his robot's performance.
  • There have been other, more pressing issues presented on the issue of these rivalries. I am of the firm opinion that they are written neutrally and do not cause bad press. Toast differs on that opinion. The community can vote on this issue, but I'm firmly of the opinion that they stay. If some users need to temper language down to be satisfied with them staying, that's fine by me too.
    • I want it clearly noted that Ellis and Trevor's permission was more than "sure whatever". They were actively involved, their concerns noted and the sections explicitly mentioning friendship documented as a condition. To remove the rivalries when there's plenty to say is, to me, tantamount to burying head in the sand.
  • I think that tensions are particularly running high at the moment, and so I'll take a few days to give people some space.

Let's consider this issue resolved, however things go. Toon Ganondorf (t c) 00:50, April 9, 2017 (UTC)

OK, let me just explain exactly why I reverted the statement "the producers drew Apollo and Carbide" to "Apollo and Carbide were drawn". The fact of the matter is, it's redundant. As you yourself found out, the Apollo and Carbide team had nothing to do with the draw. It was all the producers work. But with that being the case, that's exactly the same for 99% of the draws, odd decisions or not. It was almost certainly the producers who moved Gemini's heat in Series 4, but they're not directly mentioned in our article. I'm guessing it was the producers who paired up Hypno-Disc and Atomic a round earlier than they should have been in Series 5, but they're still not directly mentioned in our article.
Humour me for a moment here - lets assume that it was a deliberate ploy to continue the rivalry. What then? Well, I'd still argue mentioning the producers directly would not be needed. Consider these two statements if you will -
Statement 1: "In Series 9, the producers deliberately drew Apollo and Carbide in the same heat to continue the rivalry."
Statement 2: "In Series 9, Apollo and Carbide were deliberately drawn in the same heat to continue the rivalry"
— Two ways of wording the same thing
They both mean the same thing at the end of the day. Just because we don't mention the producers does not mean they didn't have anything to do with it. Heck, at the end of the day, I'd even say it was them who drew 101 and King Buxton in the same heat in Series 3, and it could easily be said that was also to continue the rivalry (although based on what Garfie says, probably not), but even then the producers aren't mentioned. It's pots or pottery, at the end of the day. CrashBash (talk) 05:26, April 9, 2017 (UTC)

I have fixed both pages so it is unambiguous and just states the fact of the draw. Do not change it in any way as nothing of content is happening now. We do not need this mass of bad text on the talk page of a Grand Champion at all, and I apologise to Garfie on behalf of the wiki for anything TG may have said against you that you didn't like. This argument needs to stop now. I've said it before, and I'll say it again, can TG and Crash back off each other. Stop scrutinising each other's edits, there are enough other members of the wiki who check each others' edits to do the job. We really do not need crap like this happening again. Jimlaad43(talk) 05:42, April 9, 2017 (UTC)


Keep Rivalry SectionEdit

  • I personally like having rivalry sections, so I will back it, but I fully understand removing it at the same time and completely accept if they're removed. Nweston8 (talk) 22:07, April 11, 2017 (UTC)

Delete Rivalry SectionEdit

  1. To avoid claims of exaggeration and displaying arguably fictional information. To me this also applies to Pulsar/Ironside3. TOAST 18:10, April 11, 2017 (UTC)
  2. At the moment it is just an even more compressed version of the information we have later. The ambiguity has been removed, so if it stays, it's clean(-ish) enough to stay, but I want it gone. Jimlaad43(talk) 19:01, April 11, 2017 (UTC)
  3. I think the rivalry section on Apollo, Carbide, Pulsar and Ironside3 page should be deleted. The other rivalry sections should stay though. Sam (BAZINGA) 21:19, April 11, 2017 (UTC)
  4. I'm not a fan of the rivalry section, given that most of them are only continued by the wishes of the producers. S256 21:31, April 11, 2017 (UTC)
  5. I think for a rivalry to be mentioned, it needs to have something really going for it rather than just a random happenstance. In both the case of Apollo vs Carbide and Pulsar vs Ironside, they've only really fought across two episodes and the reality is that we simply don't know what or why they were drawn together. In Pulsar and Ironside's case especially, though, we have evidence suggesting that it wasn't deliberate, it just happened due to robots being swapped around. Who's to say Apollo and Carbide weren't the same? But arguably the bigger issue I see is simply the fact that it's only gone on for two episodes (with a chance for three given both Pulsar and Apollo are in a position for a wildcard), which doesn't feel long enough to establish a proper grudge. When you take into consideration the likes of Firestorm vs Panic Attack, Razer vs Tornado or even just King B vs 101, their rivalries took place across several episodes and series by comparison. CrashBash (talk) 05:47, April 12, 2017 (UTC)

New Apollo Edit

Here is the new Apollo - --WolfwingandSlaveLeia (talk) 16:00, April 17, 2017 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.