Talk:Xenomorph

Alien and.....

Isn't it also called a Xenomorph? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.231.156.163 (talk) 19:56, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

See sentence 1. Serendi^podous 19:58, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

alien (alien) listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Alien (alien). Since you had some involvement with the alien (alien) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). 76.65.128.252 (talk) 12:44, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Request to make The Alien redirect to this article instead of a film

• Talk:The_Alien#Requested_move More opinions welcomed. It affects this article so I thought I should mention it here. Dream Focus 17:44, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Creatures name

The creatures name (Xenomorph) has been solidified as canon. It is, objectively, not called 'Alien', and has not been for a long while.

I have changed the content of this page to reflect this, and would appreciate someone with the knowledge would be able to change the title to Xenomorph (creature in Alien franchise).

It has been named, it has a name, thats its name. There is no controversy, thats what canon means. Thanks.

Urammar (talk) 06:31, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

It has not been named in canon. The canon is the films; the films only use the term "xenomorph" as a descriptor. The term "xenomorph" just means "alien form" so it's not a name. Comic books may think so; video games may think so, but there's no confirmation in the canon. Serendi^podous 08:00, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

@Serendipodous:

Hi, thanks for your comment! Also thanks for the reference to BRD, I was unaware. :)

Let me begin:

Firstly, thats not how canon works. In fact, appearing on film is no guarantee of canon at all. There are many examples of film events being retconned.

Canon is 'the official tale' as told and confirmed by the creators and owners of an IP.

Second:

It was semi-named by a character in 'aliens' using the word as the word, however Ripley confirmed this as its name, using the word as a name in alien 3. Onscreen.

Alien co-writer Damon Lindelof said, quote "I felt that the punchline of Prometheus was going to be that there is human DNA in what we have come to know as the human xenomorph"

Extended, canon, content such as the games and comics have also used this term. Reminding you that they are canon sources, and canon exists beyond the screen.

James cameron in the Aliens DVD extra also refers to them as "xenomorphs"

Vincent ward and David Fincher (Writer and director of alien 3, respectively) in the Alien3 Assembly cut DVD extras also confirm their name as xenomorph.

The name as canon is pretty solid, and has been established for quite a while now. This just shouldn't be getting peoples backs up at this point.

Urammar (talk) 08:54, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Do writers and directors discuss the name in detail when they "confirm the name", or are these just casual mentions in DVD commentaries? And is there an established canon for the franchise in a book on a shelf somewhere (a la the Star Wars canon), or is this up to individual fans' tastes?

We should avoid adopting a term barely used in the films - in an article which is 99.5% about the films - simply because we can find it cropping up in conversations and spinoffs if we look. We shouldn't be swayed by it being a neat, scientific sounding name (or the fact that the current article title is horribly clunky), if it's a term that's only used briefly and ambiguously a couple of times in the many hours of the film series. --McGeddon (talk) 09:42, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

@Urammar: Just because you believe the "canon" name is xenomorph does not mean you can completely blank reliably sourced information about other names it's been called, especially when the name has always been very vague. You even erased the explanation of the term "xenomorph" because it somehow "contradicted" the term being "canon". That's why I reverted you per WP:NPOV. You can't remove content just because it disagrees with your opinion. The general consensus is that the creature is called "Alien" and "xenomorph" is the most common alternative. And McGeddon makes good points as well. ミーラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 10:06, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

@McGeddon:

In at least one of the interviews they go into a little detail, mostly its them simply using the term as the name, instead of the de facto generic 'alien', which is significant. I mean, when the director and writers of an IP primarily call it a xenomorph, you are on the wrong side of the fence. Simple as that.

Yeah, its definitely established, they are called xenomorph in a number of canon books, by both Dark horse and Bantam, the comics and 'Aliens: Colonial Marines' (Who's marketing made a big deal about the fact the story it was telling was a canon story)

This has nothing to do with fans. This is all about canon, and fans don't get to make things canon.

I think its important to recognize WHY they were ever just referred to as 'alien' in the first place. Thats simply because in the early films it just was not named.

But that changed as the story(canon) matured. They were given a name, they were named. We only ever called it an alien because it was an alien and had nothing else.

Well, thats no longer the case. Its been named, outside and inside the films from sources considered canon, it was given a name, so thats its name now. That means any statement to the contrary is simply incorrect, and thats not acceptable on a wiki, whose job it is to record and educate on the facts of a subject.

The fact that the directors took screentime from a multimillion dollar production to specifically address the name of the creature is very significant, and should not be overlooked. In fact, it alone, is sufficient. That there are a multitude of other independent verifications for it is simply overkill.

The fact it had no name, initially, is correctly addressed in the 'name' section of my edit, and perhaps should also be addressed as (previously just 'alien') or something in the opening line of the article.

The section also mentions every other name its ever been called.

@Sturmgewehr88:

I erased no such information. I removed a reference to an article that erroneously assumes the name is not canon because of its casual use in aliens, but is old and only refers to movie 1 and 2, not the 3rd in which that name was actually bestowed.

As stated earlier the general consensus is irrelevant. Fans don't get to decide canon. The only 'consensus' that matters is the canon one. You can disagree, but they own it, so they get to name it.

I don't wish to be rude, but you don't really seem to have a good grasp of what canon is/means, and you really shouldn't be editing literature articles if thats the case. I don't know, however, so thats all on you.

Look team, i've given you all there is to give now. I've backed it up with sources, clarifications and information. 'Your side' seems to basically have "In the 80's they hadn't named it yet, therefore its nameless for all time", and at worst, "Lots of people don't seem to know it was named", which is the literal function of a wiki. That doesn't fly.

I know its hard sometimes, but I have given you the information, its up to you now to accept it, and move on.

Urammar (talk) 23:59, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

@Urammar: The referenced material you erased stated that xenomorph wasn't canon at the time, and the following sentence states that it has become canon. Removing the first statement leads casual readers to the assumption that the name "xenomorph" has been canon from the beginning. That's how you violated WP:NPOV, and that's why I reverted you. With all due respect, I may not have the definition of "canon" as well memorized as you do, but I'm by far more versered in the policies in guidelines of Wikipedia, not to mention editing here. And this isn't a literature article. I should also direct you to WP:COMMONNAME, because even if "xenomorph" is the official, canonical name, we're not renaming the article if the vast majority of reliable, secondary and tertiary sources refers to them as "aliens". ミーラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 01:42, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

@Sturmgewehr88:

You are indeed much better versed in wiki guidelines than me, and I am both understanding and grateful for that. We both want what is best for this wiki.

I understand why you did what you did, and you felt you had strong reasons to do it. I respect that, and its good you are looking out for the wiki that way.

However, I believe the name section(in my edit) clearly indicates the name was changed much later, with no ambiguity. Further, neither the reference cited nor the sentence that went with it indicate a name change. In fact it simply, and incorrectly, asserts the name is non-canon, and has never been changed. Its not a matter of neutrality if its wrong.

"Ambiguous or inaccurate names for the article subject, as determined in reliable sources, are often avoided even though they may be more frequently used by reliable sources." -COMMONNAME

"Alien" is both an ambiguous and inaccurate name for an alien with a name. Further the name is at least as commonly used in discussion of the franchise, if not more common.

Therefore, I believe this revision is correct, accurate, and reflects wiki guidelines.

203.129.24.80 (talk) 02:27, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

@Urammar: Thank you. So here's what I understand so far: you want the statement removed because it indicates that the name "xenomorph" isn't canon, and I believe that the following statement (explicitly calling "xenomorph" canon, but now removed by McGeddon) justifies the inclusion of the statement. So how about we build a little consensus. I'll propose a rewording of the sentences, and if you don't accept it, you can tweak it until we find something mutually acceptable. Also, my mentioning of WP:COMMONNAME was a reference to your request for a move/rename of the article, not to your general replacement of "Alien" with "xenomorph", which was fine. WP:COMMONNAME deals with article titles, not article content. So now here's my proposed rewrite:

• The term xenomorph (lit. "alien form"—from Greek xeno- or "strange" and -morph, shape) was used by the character Lieutenant Gorman in Aliens with reference to generic extraterrestrial life. The term had been erroneously assumed by some fans to refer specifically to this creature, as has been the case with the producers of some merchandise. However, in the movie Alien 3, Ripley is asked how to refer to the creature, and replies "xenomorph", making the name canon.

References

Just copy and paste the HTML code if you want to make a counter-proposal. ミーラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 03:02, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

• The term xenomorph (lit. "alien form"—from Greek xeno- or "strange" and -morph, shape) was first used by the character Lieutenant Gorman in Aliens with reference to generic extraterrestrial life. It has been suggested the term was erroneously assumed by some fans to refer specifically to this creature, as well as the producers of some merchandise. However, in the movie Alien 3, Ripley is asked the name the creature, and replies "xenomorph", canonising the name.

References

Hows that? If you like it, can we link 'canonising' to the article on canon? I am dumb and don't know how to do that :)

Otherwise feel free to make your edits.

@Urammar: Alright:

• The term xenomorph (lit. "alien form"—from Greek xeno- or "strange" and -morph, shape) was first used by the character Lieutenant Gorman in Aliens with reference to generic extraterrestrial life. Originally, the term was erroneously assumed by some fans to refer specifically to this creature, as well as the producers of some merchandise. However, in the movie Alien 3, Ripley is asked the name the creature, and replies "xenomorph", canonising the name.

References

For future reference, whenever you want to wikilink something but replace the link with different text, you'd type two sets of outward-facing brackets, and between them you first type what you want to link to, separate it with a vertical bar, then type the desired text. So it'd look like this when you type it: [[WP:WIKIPEDIAN|a Wikipedian]]. Then after you save it, it looks like this: a Wikipedian. ミーラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 04:45, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Note that the Alien 3 quote we're using here (sourced to a script found online) seems to have been one of many deleted scenes. --McGeddon (talk) 07:31, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, its featured in the 'assembly cut' release. I think the reference mentions that, doesn't it? Perhaps that should be mentioned, if not. Regardless, it made it into the script, was shot and included in a longer release, so its not like it really changes much.

Anyway, apparently we still have not met consensus on this thing? Really, team?

@McGeddon:

What do you say, McGeddon? Consensus on this? Its a damn xenomorph, right?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Urammar (talk • contribs) 08:22, 30 October 2014‎

No, I don't think that is the consensus at all. Really you should drop this. It's been discussed and discussed and discussed. Ultimately it's about Wikipedia rules. Only a small cadre of AVP fanboys call it the Xenomorph, and there is no shred of evidence that the creators of the creature (Dan O'Bannon, Ronald Suchett, Ridley Scott, David Giler, Walter Hill, HR Giger, James Cameron) prefer the name Xenomorph. Unless you can provide such evidence, your arguments have no value. Serendi^podous 08:32, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Fucking hell, i'm not surprised universities don't accept wikipedia, and all edits are done by 2% of users, you guys are legit impossible, even when faced with overwhelming evidence.

I clearly outlined that ALL THOSE PEOPLE casually call it xenomorph, and have even done so in their dvd commentaries and interviews. You clearly just have not read my arguments, and thus are being willfully ignorant.

947,000 results in google is not 'a small cadre'.

Ridley Scott calls it a Xenomorph. There just isn't anything more to say on the subject after that. THERE. IS. NO. ARGUMENT. AFTER. THAT. POINT.

The simple FACT is this just could not get anymore objective a fact, and you are still, dishonestly, trying to play this off as an opinion. You have NOTHING supporting your statements or position, and I have EVERYTHING and have provided as such.

"a mind is like a parachute it works best when open"

Best of luck with your vaccination denial.

Urammar (talk) 09:26, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

"prefer", not "occasionally use". Unless they specifically say that the creature is named the Xenomorph and not the Alien, and that that is the correct official term that should be employed, the most commonly used name is used. That's it. Serendi^podous 11:16, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

***It is important you read this carefully, and in its entirety.

You know what, I was a bit over the top there, I owe you an apology. I'm not sure if I insulted anyone directly, but i'm sorry for that if I did. No hard feelings I hope. Now.. on the subject of your last message:
Yes, I have already told you, multiple times they say exactly that. Even the main character of the movies does so. Then, as an honest person, it must be, as you say.. 'thats it'.
Here is how it is now. You are being intellectually dishonest, intentionally or not I don't know. You are unreasonably demanding evidence and providing none of your own. You have used basically every fallacy in the book.
Your entire position(series of assertions) can be summed up in one phrase. "Citation needed"

You have provided nothing but empty assertions and baseless stubbornness in this debate, providing no references, articles, objective material or any other kind of acceptable evidence for your position. You have even, heinously, glossed over some of your oppositions most powerful evidence, by either not properly engaging, or active deception.
Even a single link to a discussion on the subject to demonstrate it is primarily referred to as 'alien' instead of a 'xenomorph', is entirely missing. You have simply failed to meet the burden of proof expected of you.
Further, my evidence based position, meets guidelines and expectations of accuracy on the wiki, and improves the article quality dramatically. It also flows from previous consensus on the canon status of the name, as added to the name section.

That fact alone pushes your position to the minority, achieving de facto consensus according to wikipedias standards, with you onboard or not.
So there it is, black and white simple as day. You had your opportunity, and you spent it chanting with your fingers in your ears. Given my limited time and experience with you, I fully expect you to revert it back again, based on nothing at all.
If you do, you will do it while simultaneously submitting this topic to independent, neutral, 3rd party dispute resolution, (arbitration) according to wiki standards on disputes. Please make it clear you have done so on my talk page, also.

Do try and remember that I simply have the best interests of this wiki in mind, as I am confident you do too, and that being open to a change of closely held opinion in the face of truth is the greatest of traits, not a sign of weakness. Thanks, and happy editing Urammar (talk) 10:46, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

I requested page protection to stop the edit warring. ミーラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 12:51, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

RfC: "Alien" or "Xenomorph"?

There has been debate about whether the common name of this creature is "Alien" or "Xenomorph", however the debate has been lacking in sources. Can anyone provide sources to definitively prove which name is the common name? Thank you. ミーラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 11:30, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Please see above discussion for a billion sources from myself. Sorry for the attitude in some places, it got a bit frustrating being skipped over, I did apologise.

Thanks for helping us break this stalemate, though, team.

Urammar (talk) 12:16, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Weyland-Yutani report (ISBN 978-1-60887-316-6) states the alien official designation as Xenomorph XX121 (Alien: XX121)

Nytemyre (talk) 12:52, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Are we more concerned with the common name or the canonically correct one here? WP:COMMONNAME says not to use "inaccurate names" even if they're commonly used (the Frankenstein's monster article is not at Frankenstein), but I don't know how much this should be applied to all fiction. --McGeddon (talk) 13:27, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Taking the Frankenstein as example. Frankenstein is not the monster, but rather the book/creator of the monster. Similarly, Alien is not the monster, but rather the movie. Due to lack of a referred name in the first movie, the monster is called "The alien". It's not his name or species, it's a reference to the being itself. Xenomorph (ironically just another term for alien) is used to reference to the specific type of alien in the alien franchise, and should be named as such. Nytemyre (talk) 15:39, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

"Xenomorph" is not a name for the Alien. It just means "alien form" in Greek. It's a descriptor, not a name. As far as common use goes, Google hits for "The Alien" +"Ripley" outnumber "the Xenomorph" +"Ripley" by more than 10 to 1. That would be enough to close any other discussion, but this one just keeps going and going. Serendi^podous 17:39, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Alien is also not a name for the Alien. Xenomorph XX121 is the OFFICIAL name for the alien. That you get more results for Alien+Ripley is because it's also the name of the movie. So OFCOURSE you get more results. 94.208.108.19 (talk) 15:00, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

The disney princess 'Jasmine' is her name, not a reference to a precious mineral.

Words can be both descriptors and names. "Aeroplane" is the name of a craft, but the actual word is from a descriptor of its mechanics of flight, what we have come to know as the wings.

The meaning of the word is therefore irrelevant in the context of its use as a name.

Common use requires the name to be accurate, even if the incorrect name is better known.

This is not like dihydrogen monoxide(Water) that is technically the correct term, but not even used in most lab settings, let alone commonly, 'xenomorph' is not used more popularly than 'alien' by the masses, but it is clearly still common.

'WP Common name' therefore instructs that xenomorph, being the correct canon name in a common usage should be the name used, much like frankenstein being overwhelmingly understood as reference to the monster, but that being wrong and commonly known as such, even in minority usage.

Urammar (talk) 23:53, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

'Show me something, anything, that says, unequivocally, that "Xenomorph" is the OFFICIAL NAME of this creature. People mentioning the name in passing doesn't mean anything. Unless there is an official name, we use the most most common name. As I noted above, that is "Alien". There is nothing in any of the citations you have given that suggests that Xenomorph is a proper name and not a descriptor, any more than "Alien" is. As far as specificity goes, there is nothing specific about "Xenomorph"; the term is already used in geology, and would still need to be disambiguated anyway. Serendi^podous 17:46, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Are you ignoring me? Weyland-Yutani report (ISBN 978-1-60887-316-6) states the alien official designation as Xenomorph XX121 (Alien: XX121). Nytemyre (talk) 15:04, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Official in what sense? We are talking about the real world, and not the fictional world of a (non-canonical) book are we? Serendi

^podous 16:22, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Did you just call a MOVIE the real world?5.39.190.61 (talk) 11:46, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

No. Real world as in "officially declared by 20th Century Fox." Serendi^podous 13:46, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

@Serendipodous: Could you please be more specific? Perhaps you could please make it clear what the problems you have with each of the 20 or so references provided, are, so that we may address those concerns. Urammar (talk) 10:39, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

1. The Aliens and Alien3 references are not names. They are simply the term the Company uses to describe them. There is nothing in the context of which they are used to suggest they are proper names.

2. The comics, video games etc are not canon. Nor are they "extended canon", because they are not authorised by the creature's original creators. As many of said creature's creators are now dead, such affirmation is impossible. If we were to accept every comic, book or movie as canon, Hicks and Newt would be both alive and dead, the founder of the Wayland Yutani Corporation was both a 20th century Bishop clone and a 21st century Guy Pierce with a God complex, and the Aliens would be both on Earth and not. Also, since the term Xenomorph originated in Aliens, it cannot be seen as a proper name for the creature, as it wasn't used by the creature's original creators.

3. There is nothing in any of the references you provide from (maybe) canonical sources to suggest they are using a proper name, and not a descriptor.

4. None of this is relevant anyway; when there are multiple possible names, we use the most commonly used one. That's Alien. Which has been used by EVERYONE involved in the project since day one.

In short, there is nothing in anything you've said that suggests Xenomorph should get preferential treatment: it is not the most commonly used; it is not the most commonly known; it is not considered official, and it is only unequivocally used as a proper name in the comics, books etc which are not canonical with the films. It isn't even any more specific, since it would still need to be disambiguated if we used it.

Look, personally, I would LOVE there to be a specific name for this creature. If 20th Century Fox came out tomorrow and said that from now on the Aliens were to be referred to as, say, "Insemitrons"^TM, I would change the title of this page in a second. But they haven't, and however much you may like to argue otherwise, this creature doesn't have a specific name. Serendi^podous 11:01, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

• Xenomorph. In almost any other case, I would say to ignore the fan name. But this is pretty much the common name, much like Star Trek: The Original Series, which is even labeled that way on the DVD and Blu-Ray releases now. Here's a sampling of reliable sources that I've found in a typical Google search:
  • The Hollywood Reporter: There May Not Be a Xenomorph in 'Prometheus' Sequel, Says Ridley Scott, Watch a Horrowshow of Claustrophobia and Xenomorphs in the 'Alien: Isolation' Trailer, 'Alien: Isolation' Director Talks About Making Ridley Scott's Xenomorph "Scary Again"
  • Pacific Standard: The Horrible Philosophy Behind the Star of ‘Alien,’ H.R. Giger’s Xenomorph
  • Ars Technica: The throwaway line in Aliens that spawned decades of confusion (this is an argument against calling them that, but it says that everyone calls them xenomorphs)
  • PBS: Surrealist, sculptor and ‘Alien’ designer H.R. Giger dies at 74
  • CNN: H.R. Giger, who designed the creature from 'Alien,' dies at 74
  • BBC: Ridley Scott: HR Giger was 'true original' ("xenomorph alien", which seems to be a compromise)
  • Entertainment Tonight: Revered 'Alien' Designer H.R. Giger Dies (all over the place: "alien", "xenomorph", and "xenomoph alien")
  • The Guardian: Alien: Isolation review – Giger's creature gets the game it deserves
  • SFX: Alien Artist HR Giger Has Died
  • Los Angeles Times: H.R. Giger dies at 74; Artist behind 'Alien' dealt in the surreal
  • Entertainment Weekly: EW's Horror Quintessentials: The 5 best extraterrestrial movies, 12 Coolest Ridley Scott Moments, Isolation' might be the 'Alien' game you've been waiting for

On the other hand, neither The New York Times nor Variety once use the term "xenomorph". So, I guess it's not universal. It seems pretty well entrenched in reliable sources, however. I could probably go on adding many other Google hits, but I don't think that's necessary. I didn't even touch Google Scholar or Google Books, and I'm sure there are more hits there. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:39, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Weak preference for xenomorph, because then the article can be titled "Xenomorph (Alien)" and not require the ungainly "(creature in Alien franchise)" title. Popcornduff (talk) 00:22, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

I like this reason. ミーラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 04:18, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

WP:NATURALDIS does support "an alternative name that the subject is also commonly called in English reliable sources, albeit not as commonly as the preferred-but-ambiguous title" to aid disambiguation. If "Alien" was the common name and "Xenomorph" the less common but unambiguous one, I assume that would give us an article titled "Xenomorph" but which introduced the creature as "Alien (also known as Xenomorph)" and continued to use the most common name of "Alien" throughout the text. --McGeddon (talk) 10:52, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

I don't know where the weak preference is coming from: "the alien" +"ripley"=394,000 Google hits. "the xenomorph" +"ripley"= 30,200 Google hits. That's a 10-1 ratio. Serendi^podous 05:29, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

That search turns up a lot of sentence fragments which aren't naming the creature ("the Alien film series", "the Alien production team"). Constraining it to something like "the alien kills" versus "the xenomorph kills" still seems to be about 10-to-1, though. --McGeddon (talk) 10:52, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

A good list, but we're trying to find which name is most commonly used by reliable sources, not to confirm whether or not the xenomorph name has ever been used by reliable sources. The LA Times ran another Giger obituary the next day that used the words "monsters" and "Alien" instead; a recent BBC article (and the Isolation developers it quotes) use "creature" and another capitalised "Alien"; three other Entertainment Weekly articles call it an "alien", etc. --McGeddon (talk) 10:52, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

No, we are trying to find which name is commonly used and accurate. This has been established, and is a clear instruction in the common name article.

Isolation is not canon, but a quick search turns up many large sites that clearly know it as xenomorph

Further, the search for alien isolation +"alien creature" brings up 32k results, while alien isolation +"xenomorph" brings up 338k results.. the exact same 10:1 ratio reversed, clearly reflecting the modern change of the creatures name in the public lexicon.

Urammar (talk) 01:53, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

In addition, the RFC has expired.

On the yay side we have
Urammar
Nytemyre
94.208.108.19 (whoever that is)
NinjaRobotPirate
Popcornduff
StG88

McGeddon appears undecided

On the nay side we have
Serendipodous

This is a consensus as of the RFC expiry. Therefore the article has rightly been changed. Further edits will need to conform to the expectations of the majority.

Serendipodous, you had your time on the floor to convince us, that time has passed. You will need to convince the majority of a reason to change it back now, and feel free to continue to do so in the talk page here.

Please do not begin another edit war. Thank you. Urammar (talk) 02:01, 9 November 2014 (UTC)