Talk: Drone

This isn't a crit or anything but what are the Sentrybots?

I'm about 97% sure that they are the remote controlled robots that appear in "The Key to Vector Sigma". It's been a while since I saw that episode, so I might have gotten their name wrong. But they fit the description.--Octopus Prime- King of the Road! 01:09, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Both Seibertron.com and Transformersforever.com call them Centurion Drones.

Then it looks like I'm wrong about their name. Which is pretty well what I expected. At least I got most of the pronounciation right? High Five!

Not all mini-vehicles are Drones

What this section is for is NON-SENTIENT yet clearly to some degree intelligent "manufactured" machines. Scamper is his own living character, as is Six-Gun, so they do not go in this section. Slammer, however, is not, so in he goes. (And until we see some evidence to suggest otherwise, that holds up for the Metrotitan versions of these characters as well.)

Scrapmetals aren't listed because they're "wildlife", which we should probably make a section for as well... Cybertron has critters, after all. The Production-Type Sidewayses are also debatable, as the cartoon gives every indication they're normal full individuals outside of lazy modelling.

M "I'd Err On The Side Of Caution There And Say They're Not Drones, Myself" Sipher

I'd agrea with you(about the Noismazes) If they wern't called Production-Type the term itself implies that they are "Manufactured" P.S. Does Decepticon air Warrior refer to Seekers, cuse we know for sure that there not drones X-BoB58

In Dreamwave continuity, the Air Warriors are very much non-sentient drones. And again, the Sideways generics, it's not the BODIES that is the issue, it's the MINDS. The story sets up this idea that Planet X is more than just two guys and a ton of unliving drones. - M "Hello, Point" Sipher

Now why arn't the Breastforce's breasts considered "drones" they had the IQs of animals? P.S. What abotu Dark ligerjack, I doubt he has a spark? X-BoB58

We have no evidence that the Breast partners are not sentient. We have no evidence Nemesis Breaker is not sentient. And "spark" is not the defining characteristic, as the cartoon Dinobots, Technobots, and the Mini-Cons all lack sparks, yet we're not putting them in here. User: M Sipher

• Run-Over/Sweep is described as Semi-automonous and as a part of nemsisis Prime, would Run-Over be a canadate? If so what about the darksaber Team?

Droids?

Well, since the Kilster added "Droids" to here, we now have everything in the existing Mechanoids/Drones category mis-listed. And, uh, the only way to fix that is to edit every single page one by one. I don't want to do that. Also, I want to make sure we're decided on this before we do that. Because that's a lot of work. --ItsWalky 02:08, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

That seems ungainly and, well, ultimately pointless, honestly. I mean, we could come up with general synonyms for the category till the sun goes nova. "Mechanoids/Drones", I beliive, adequately covers the field. If we REALLY want to get picky, we can put in the description or whatever the word "droid", but otherwise... -- M Sipher

Also, SwiftEagle just noted to us that "droid" is a word that George Lucas owns. So, uh. --ItsWalky 02:27, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm. Well, the Mechanoids/Drones category itself hasn't been altered yet. Since it's my fault, I would gladly made all the needed edits myself if it were. I added Droids to the article title given it's use in "Sea Change", "Key to Vector Sigma," "War Dawn," and Orion Pax's bio. But I can see the argument for removing it from the title, if that decision were to be made. -- KilMichaelMcC

Lucas literally owns it, or figuratively owns it? 'cuz Rolelr is called a droid, not a drone, and he peeps just like artoo... -Derik

Literally owns it. Calling something a droid is up there with calling generic photo-copying "Xeroxing," using a "Band-aid" when it's just an offbrand adhesive strip, naming all gelatin "JELL-O," or dubbing your Marvel Megamorphs a "Transformer." --ItsWalky 16:34, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Since you bring it up, I should also add "Thermos," which is a name brand, but which has gotten to be so heavily identified with that type of item, that generic use of the term now holds up in court, and Thermos (the company) has little power to restrict use. I think "Kleenex" may be in a similar state. So it may be that Lucas can't do much about "droids" even if he wants to. (But I'd rather not put that to the test.)--G.B. Blackrock 17:15, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

that's facinating/appaling. However, droids Do exist as a term interal to Transformers, so where does that go/what are they? -Derik 18:54, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

I have yet to see a good description, in tf of abot ANYWHERE ELSE of what distingishes a droid from a drone. especially since TF has self-willed drones. -Derik 16:52, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

I argue that Autobot-X should NOT be on this list. Look at Binaltech Prowl. Or the Mini-cons, who came from human souls? (though are now sparks, I gather.) Well, it's something for dicussion.

Not recalling the cartoon terribly well, is there any argument to be made for Autobot-X's function besides serving as host to Spike's mind? Because as Spike, Autobot-X most definitely does NOT qualify, but separate from Spike, it might.--G.B. Blackrock 17:23, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Read This The 'Spike' part of Autobot Spike serves the same function as as Spark.-Derik 18:54, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

It's been a while since I saw the cartoon, but I'm pretty damn sure Autobot X was built BEFORE Spike had his little accident. Sparkplug made him because he wanted to make a Transformer like a big boy! -- M Sipher

This is my understanding, too. Perhaps I should have been more clear. Given the lack of screen time of "pre-Spike" Autobot-X, is there enough argument to be made for X as a "non-sentient mechanoid" that we should include it here? My guess would be that there is, but that some disclaimer needs to be placed near any mention of X in a list like this.--G.B. Blackrock 20:14, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

I see this refers to Autobot X, not Autobot Spike. I retract my complaint. And no, i dont' think there needs to be a distinction made ont he list, it'll be clear in the entry. Though maybe someoen who is not-me might want to stub it and make such a distinction now while we're thinking of it?-Derik 20:30, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

I added Full_tilt who is ID'd as a humanoid drone Trypticon extends his consciousness through in DW continuity. Interestingly- he's not his own ID in ANY continuity I could find, unless he is int he manga. (which he may be, I don't have it handy.) -Derik 16:59, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Any more thoughts on whether Droids should stay in the title, and if it does whether the Mechanoids/Drones category should be changed to match this article? They probably should be the same, either way. Like I said before, if the category title is changed, because I was the one who changed this article I'd be willing to go through the articles in the category and make the needed edits, pasting in "/Droids" on the end of category link. --KilMichaelMcC 09:31, 5 April 2006 (PDT)

• I am voting against. "Droids" are a specific kind of Mechanoid/Drone, and the category name should be as blanketing a term as possible. Adding "Droids" to it means we have to add every other non-sentient terminology to it as well, and I'm not welcoming having a Mechanoid/Drone/Droid/Mech/Scout/Spy/Pod/Ninja-Robot-Built-To-Benefit-Mankind/Decoy/Cyberbee category, when "Mechanoid/Drone" encompasses all. --ItsWalky 10:57, 5 April 2006 (PDT)

I'd like to see a subtitle on this section that basically says "Unsparked robots, self-willed and non." I'd liek this because (and trust me I looked) Roller was never identified as a Drone, despite the MANY times he's been described, he's caleld a Droid. And I'd like to avoid the appearance of imposing such a descriptor on him since the conspicuious absence of the term drone may indicate Rolelr doesnt' meet the technical requirements of it. (whatever they may be.) -150.253.70.55 18:28, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

According to some web searches, though it's an abbreviated form of "android" which is specifically human-shaped robots, "droid" means a robot of any shape that emphasizes function over form. And, yeah, the dictionary.com definition notes that the term is owned by Lucas. As such, that means there must be a generic term we should be able to use in its place, like "medical adhesive strip" instead of "Band-Aid." I nominate "mechanoid" to be this term. Roller, for instance, surely falls under mechanoid. (A drone is a machine operated by remote control. This is not Roller, who has his own limited intelligence.) --ItsWalky 18:50, 5 April 2006 (UTC)