Talk:List of G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero action figures

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What happened to the page?[edit]

I saw the Fridge didn't have the character's real name listed, so I added that, and had it so the name Fridge would link to the wikipedia artical on the guy at William_Perry_%28American_football%29. I didn't touch the rest of the page at all! So why did everything get all screwy?

And wasn't there a talk page here before?

Dream Focus 23:48, 23 September 2006 (UTC) Nevermind. I fixed itself, and the lines between the columns have reappeared again. What a strange bug.[reply]

It seems messed up again.[edit]

I don't see the lines between the catagories working now.

The last edit happened two days ago, and broke it.

[quote] (cur) (last) 08:17, 2 October 2006 Destron Commander (Talk | contribs) m (→G.I. Joe - Jinx link) [/quote]

Anyone know how to fix that? I'm too lazy to look up how. ;) Dream Focus 02:50, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion[edit]

I think the table format thing has got to go. It's way too clunky. Break the list up into years, give each year it's own section and give each joe a MAX of three sentences. This would also be an easy to way to see if a Joe needs a new article, if there is much more info that can be displayed in the three sentences. IMHO. Lots42 15:12, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Is there a reason some of the ranks listed use 0-2 (with a zero) and others use O-2 (with a letter oh)? I'd imagine the letter is correct, but there's an awful lot of zeroes in there. 98.210.97.56 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 19:13, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redjacket3827 (talk) 03:55, 8 March 2008 (UTC)Fixed it and the rest of the ranks.[reply]

Barrel Roll[edit]

What's up with the info for Barrell Roll? Lots42 (talk) 03:09, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sgt. Savage characters?[edit]

Should'nt the Sgt. Savage characters be included in this list? Granted, their action figures were in a different scale than all the others however they were still part of the "Real American Hero" universe. The Joe members were shown in a big group shot of all the Joes in one comic. They were also listed as members of G.I. Joe in another.

76.11.217.140 (talk) 02:02, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

???? No, the Sgt. Savage characters were never considered part of the 'Real American Hero' universe. Maybe what you saw was just neat promotional art. P.S. New comments should go on the bottom of the page. Lots42 (talk) 02:45, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In addition to the cover to America's Elite #25, Sgt Savage characters were listed as being deployed in various places around the world to fight Cobra's mass assault on a map featured in America's Elite #28. Lt Stone and other new characters created in Sigma Six are also listed on the map so they should be included. EMFreyre —Preceding undated comment added 16:16, 8 October 2009 (UTC).[reply]
Negative. This page is about ARAH, not Sigma 6, Savage, or Extreme.--Ridge Runner (talk) 16:31, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The thing is, the World War 3 event in America's Elite used the Sgt Savage and and Sigma Six characters. Lt Stone even appears in one of the issues. I can see how being included in the group shot on the cover to AE #25 would not make one a part of RAH continuity. However, the map in issue #28 showing where in the world certain Joes are deployed is part of the story itself. Therfore it should be considered canon. Since the Sgt Savage characters are mentioned on the map as well as the Sigma 6 crew, this should be enough to consider them as part of RAH. It could be mentioned that in the notes section that someone like Desert Wolf started as a S6 character but was brought into RAH continuity during the WW3 storyline in AE. EMFreyre (talk) 02:25, 9 October 2009 (UTC) [User: EMFreyre|EMFreyre]][reply]

One appearance in a comic that's not even part of the original line doesn't constitute canon. It's nothing more than a crossover. GI Joes and Transformers have appeared together many times, but Joes aren't considered part of the Transformers toy line and vice versa.--Ridge Runner (talk) 03:04, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Comic continues the continuity started by the Marvel run. The stories of Marvel and Devil's Due are treated as being part of the same continuity. The only exceptions are the TF/GIJoe cross-overs which are clearly set in a different universe. --EMFreyre —Preceding undated comment added 15:18, 15 October 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Wouldn't it be more appropriate to have a secondary list for characters from beyond the original series? BOZ (talk) 15:15, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's actually a good point. There are characters like Mayday, Big Lob, Mariner, Mangler, Colonel Sharp, Adm. Ledger, Cool Breeze, Daimon, Firewall, Shooter, and a second Sneek Peek who are part of the "classic" continuity but aren't on the list due to lack of a figure. Its seems kinda cruel to leave these guys out EMFreyre —Preceding undated comment added 20:53, 16 October 2009 (UTC).[reply]
The list is of figures produced, not characters in the cartoons and comics (see the first line on the page). EMFreyre, please start signing your comments.--Ridge Runner (talk) 22:09, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I meant a separate list page, like List of other G.I. Joe characters (with a better name, of course). BOZ (talk) 22:32, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's actually a good idea. On another note I apologize if I'm not posting these little talk ing points properly but I just started posting at Wikipedia and I'm still trying to get the hang f a few things. EMFreyre (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:19, 16 October 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Sorting of ranks is broken[edit]

For some reason, they won't sort anymore. I even went back to an old version and it won't sort either. It has to do with the letter 'E' in the pay grades. Wonder if Wiki changed their code on sorting. Redjacket3827 (talk) 12:51, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Move?[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved per BOZ (talk · contribs). —Ed (talk • majestic titan) 08:02, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of G.I. Joe characters → List of G.I. Joe ARAH characters —

That's fine with me.--Ridge Runner (talk) 07:01, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Boz's suggestions, using acronyms is best avoided unless their usage is bullet proof, and a disambiguation would be a good idea as well. Someoneanother 01:31, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:G.I. Joe characters[edit]

Lots of the articles with no notability and often even no content at all. Over 90% should be merged here. 83.18.127.154 (talk) 11:05, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I did some, but I'm "identified as potentially inconstructive" by bots. 83.18.127.154 (talk) 11:09, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Which articles ended up with no content? Seeing as I am the one who added content to so many I am deeply curious. Lots42 (talk) 02:03, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ace was among the ones the IP redirected - check their contribution history; I restored Ace. The Ninja Force articles were underdeveloped and they got redirected too; those guys had dozens of appearances in the last few years of the Marvel Comic run, and appeared in the second cartoon series as well; those just needed more content and they would have been fine. 24.148.0.83 (talk) 04:27, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vol.2 Notes[edit]

As the Devil's Due Continuity is now Disavowed, should notes about KIA in vol.2 be removed? Sgetz (talk) 15:58, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I guess they could be, but I don't think leaving them there really hurts anything - what do you think? --Cerebellum (talk) 01:14, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I could just drop a line in the introduction to explain that Vol. 2 is now considered non-canon. Readers can use the KIA info as they like. Reasonable? Jake fuersturm (talk) 17:53, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Grades[edit]

There seems to be some inconsistency between the grades listed here, and the grades given in various characters' individual articles. For example, this list has Beach Head as E-6 and Stalker as E-5, but their own articles both have them at E-9. Are these just typos, or due to changes in their respective action figures' file cards over time? If that's the case, then does Wikipedia have a rule as to which takes precedence (e.g. original version vs. latest version)? Jake fuersturm (talk) 00:00, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, going from filecards, Beach Head was originally an E-6, was listed as an E-7 from 2002 to 2007, and is back to E-6 in recent filecards. Stalker started as an E-5 but has also been listed as an E-7 and an E-8 on various cards. The E-9 idea comes from Devil's Due's Battle Files comics, where both Beachhead and Stalker, as well as Scarlett and some others, all had their ranks adjusted. I don't know that we should still be using ranks from DDP, considering that it's been disavowed and all. In general I kind of prefer the original ranks, but I don't feel real strongly about it - what do you think? We have some Conventions, but they don't address the issue. --Cerebellum (talk) 01:14, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Then again, if the changes in rank are meant to indicate promotions, maybe we could use the highest rank? --Cerebellum (talk) 01:18, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder if it's worth listing both "Original Grade" and "Final Grade Achieved"? For example, it's pretty clear Hawk's original grade of O-6 and subsequent promotion to O-7 (in the ARAH continuity, anyways .... I try to ignore The Rise of Cobra). Jake fuersturm (talk) 01:27, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That would make sense, at least for those have had rank changes - most probably have not, though. Maybe for this list do the highest rank, with a footnote, and then in the character articles put the highest rank in the infobox and explain in the fictional character biography. --Cerebellum (talk) 15:16, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hm, actually I was thinking that since this table lists the action figures in order of their date of first introduction, it might make sense to use the original file card rank, and in the description add a note for their most recent or highest rank?
Regarding the individual character articles, I've noticed a few (such as Hawk) where their (partial) rank history is in the infobox, so we could try that as well.
yojoe.com is great for it's file card archive!
Jake fuersturm (talk) 17:51, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That sounds completely reasonable, as does your suggestion about the vol 2 KIAs above. And yojoe is indispensible!  : ) --Cerebellum (talk) 20:31, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Service Branch[edit]

As the table is currently designed, non-Army service branches are added as a note in the Grade column. This looks a bit cludgy. Would it be worth adding a separate service branch column instead? Jake fuersturm (talk) 22:06, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Two new columns, one for service branch, and one for sub-team affiliation, have been added. Service branch is based on version 1 file card information. If no branch is specified, then Army has been used as the default. -- Jake fuersturm (talk) 06:47, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What about Rise of Cobra (2009), Pursuit of Cobra (2010) and the Adventure Team Exclusive (2010)?[edit]

Should this page include the figures from the Rise of Cobra movie line, the Pursuit of Cobra line which is not related to the movie but follows and the 4 members of the Convention Exlsive Adventure Team? Redjacket3827 (talk) 14:17, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are these figures actually released as part of the ARAH toyline? I'm not really all that familiar with the line once it hit the 1990s; I'm content to leave the list as it is unless someone wants to go to the effort of vetting each and every one of the post-1994 figures. On the other hand, I don't think we should be including figures from other toylines, even if they are ostensibly G.I. Joe, unless they are solidly linked to ARAH (as opposed to "inspired by", for example Rise of Cobra, which I try to ignore as much as possible ...). -- Jake fuersturm (talk) 14:36, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Consider Continutity -- Jake fuersturm (talk) 15:35, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The Rise of Cobra and Adventure Team figures are not part of ARAH, so I would agree as to not list them. The Pursuit of Cobra might possibly be included, as they aren't movie related and some are resculpts of ARAH figures (i.e. Crazy Legs)Redjacket3827 (talk) 17:31, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Judging from these promos, the Pursuit of Cobra definitely looks like it's intended to fit into the Movie continuity, as do the file cards. http://generalsjoes.com/g-i-joe-the-pursuit-of-cobra-superpage/ -- Jake fuersturm (talk) 17:42, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sub-teams[edit]

The table for the G.I. Joe team currently defaults to listing the figures in order of the year that they were first issued. Even so, I think we should still include information in the Sub-team column, for those characters who were re-issued with different coloring, as part of Tiger Force, Night Force, etc. Any reason this hasn't been done? Fortdj33 (talk) 23:37, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Because it's a lot of work. Just compare the current version to a week ago, and we didn't even have a sub-team column. Also this List isn't meant to be comprehensive. IMO, a better solution is to make sure that the YOJOE file card links are included for all the figures - anyone who's interested in subsequent versions of the action figures can get to that information via those links. If you do decide to include information in the sub-team column relating to re-issues (for example, Clutch's re-issue as a Mega-Marine) then need to be very clear that the sub-team affiliation relates to the re-issue and not to the original release. -- Jake fuersturm (talk) 23:52, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Jake. Since this table really deals with first issues (and not rereleases), it is best to link those originals to YOJOE and then the person can look for subsequent sub-team releases there, otherwise this table is going to get very unyeilding.Redjacket3827 (talk) 12:34, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notes Section[edit]

In regards to the notes section, exactly what should be posted there? I thought it should include things unique about the figures (not the character), like if it was an exclusive figure or if it didn't have a rank, etc. I didn't think we should state things like being a generic soldier (Cobra Soldier or Cobra Officer) or details about the character (Cobra Commander) or even if the character was KIA. What do you think? Should those non-figure related items be on their individual pages? Redjacket3827 (talk) 16:10, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your point of view. I had a bit of a think about it as well. The thing about "Notes" is that they tend to be generic by nature, to catch stuff that isn't included elsewhere. Part of the problem is that many of the figures (especially the Cobras, but also the later Joes) don't have individual character articles, and rightly so (if you've seen some of the AfD fights over the existing articles, can you imagine what would happen if another 50+ G.I. Joe-related individual character pages suddenly popped up on wikipedia?). Strictly speaking, we should be deleting anything that doesn't directly relate to the toys, especially when you consider that canonicity of the in-universe stuff is so contentious (what with multiple animated and comic book series all contradicting each other to some extent, especially the DDP vs. IDW thing), but I don't know if I want to go to such an extreme at this point. I'm wondering what the others (Cerebellum, Ford, BOZ etc.) have to think about this? -- Jake fuersturm (talk) 16:31, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. although technically, if this is an article focused on the action figures, as opposed to the characters, then shouldn't the article be renamed as well? -- Jake fuersturm (talk) 16:49, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As Jake has pointed out, this article primarily focuses on the toyline, therefore the toyline info should take precedence. The Notes section is useful to cross-reference important facts, especially for those characters that don't have their own articles, or information about the comics, even though the Devil's Due continuity is now considered non-canon. Leaving it there doesn't really hurt anything, and readers can use the info as they like. Fortdj33 (talk) 17:00, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Good points both of you. And good job of modifying the article. I went through and fixed a lot of things on it a while back, and have been making sure it is up to date with figures as they are added to yojoe.com. Keep up the good work! Redjacket3827 (talk) 17:36, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Movie-character infoboxes[edit]

I think it's time the separate infoboxes of GI Joe characters from the two movies are removed, and the information and images therein integrated into the article. They are completely unnecessary and serve no purpose but copy material found in the introductory infoboxes (real name, etc.), they squash text (which is an issue for character pages that have little content to begin with) and contain useless in-universe material (are the movie characters' serial numbers really noteworthy?). I am a regular editor of Mortal Kombat character articles, and everything - actors, voice portrayals, etc. - is restricted to a single infobox, which makes the material therein flow much better (some examples here, here, and here).

Also, the Joes who have their own articles need some kind of third-party reception. Most of these pages read like something off the GI Joe wikia. sixtynine • spill it • 02:43, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I would be reluctant to lose the movie character infoboxes, as some of that information would be lost if it was integrated into the article, or merged with another infobox. There's more than just the real name and serial number that's different for these characters. As for the Joes who have their own articles, the G.I. Joe wikia has already been removed from all articles as of October. Most of those articles already have third-party sources for their profile and toy information. What other sections do you feel are under sourced? Fortdj33 (talk) 15:33, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Which lines should be included in the list?[edit]

If you break down the 3 3/4 inch GI Joe action figure releases, it looks something like this: A Real American Hero (1982–1994), Stars & Stripes Forever – TRU Exclusives (1997–1998), A Real American Hero Collection (2000–2002), G.I. Joe vs Cobra (2002–2005), Direct to Consumer (DTC) (2005–2006), 25th Anniversary (2007–2009), The Rise of Cobra (2009), The Pursuit of Cobra (2010–2011), 30th Anniversary (2011–2012), Retaliation (2013).

In this list, which should be included? Should it be broken into sub-sections?Redjacket3827 (talk) 16:33, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A Real American Hero covers most of the 3 3/4 inch toylines that don't have their own articles (the toylines for G.I. Joe Extreme and G.I. Joe: Sigma 6 should be considered separate). All of the lines released since the 25th Anniversary, are essentially a continuation of the A Real American Hero line, since most of them are just updates of the same characters. Therefore, I think that any unique characters from The Rise of Cobra, The Pursuit of Cobra, Retaliation, etc. should be listed here in the 25th Anniversary-style sections, until such time that separate articles are created for those lines. Fortdj33 (talk) 17:44, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Notice[edit]

As a result of clear consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero characters (A–C) Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject G.I. Joe#maintenance and a discussion at Talk:List of G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero characters (A–C)#Article issues -- Otr500 (talk) 16:13, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_G.I._Joe:_A_Real_American_Hero_action_figures&oldid=1208239572"