Talk:Minotarumon

The Digimon Dictionary bio is based on his Adult form, not Perfect. Look on the "Level" tab of the bio. 12:20, June 28, 2011 (UTC)

Appearances
The way I handled this and with Whamon was that if the level was given, it was placed in the appropriate section, and if it wasn't, it goes into both. Redundant, yes, but I figured it'd be more complete that way. Lanate (talk) 18:47, June 28, 2011 (UTC)

Picture
The image on Minotaurmon perfect belongs to adult, because appear in the Digimon Dicionary. --Ignimon / Aquí deja lo que quieras decirme 16:58, March 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, but depictions of the Perfect form use the same art, so there's no reason not to just use it on both (as with the Mega- Digimon from SDT). Same thing should probably be done with Whamon. 16:50, March 23, 2013 (UTC)

Darkside Quake
This technique is only described in its old profile, which is not currently linked. However, the rest of the profile citation works. Should we cite the technique separately? 20:35, February 25, 2016 (UTC)
 * We typically don't link profiles, but a ref note explaining that it was removed from the linked profile in the wake of the tsunami/earthquake events is the kind of trivia/explanation I'm comfortable with. Lanate (talk) 03:16, February 26, 2016 (UTC)
 * So, just to clarify, instead of linking a cite to the old profile for that technique specifically, add a trivia section noting that the profile was specifically excised? If that's what you meant, yeah, I can implement that. Should we do that with Magnamon's Extreme Jihad as well? 22:24, March 3, 2016 (UTC)
 * Looks like it was added back at some point. I still added it based on your description, unless you consider it no longer note worthy.Marcusbwfc (talk) 06:16, October 6, 2018 (UTC)

Both levels at once
How come we're doing this, and not just using a ref note to say its a Ultimate in a V-Pet and a card? unlike the Whamons, I dont think there's a source where one turns into the other, and there's only one DRB profile unlike Whamon. Should this not just be treated as the situations where levels change sometimes? such as GoldNumemon being a Mega and Champion depending on media. Wikimon's profile sections are identical too, I don't really see a reason to have this page like this?Marcusbwfc (talk) 07:54, January 8, 2019 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately because of the stupid card game have a card for both levels, both wikis believe they are distinct species even though there is no reason to treat the older card as still canon since the card games are dubious as a source to begin with given the whole Justimon mess because of Collectors even though the DRB directly contradicts Justimon EX and most media explicitly doesn't treat the arm modes as separate species in the first place. There's a reason I treat card games including Collectors as Secondary Canon as in only canon if they do not conflict with a higher canon tier. Chimera-gui (talk) 08:50, January 8, 2019 (UTC)
 * Masters is also one source and has four Shoutmon etc but Shoutmon isnt treated as five species. If we're treating it as a different species shouldn't we have two pages? Also Examon is Mega in CS but Ultra in HM. Same universe. So yeah, rather than have the page listed like this, why dont have have two pages for Minotarumon, instead of one like this? Marcusbwfc (talk) 08:58, January 8, 2019 (UTC)
 * The card game doesn't just give it a different level. It also gives it a different name, which is one of the primary criteria we use (why we don't differentiate every recolor of a Digimon as a different species, why we didn't split off Miko Mode and Priest Mode until they were canonized, etc.). It goes out of its way to do this in a medium which more often combines what other media consider different species into the same name -- ex. the initial BlackWarGreymon cards being called "WarGreymon".
 * Throwing out the card game as canon won't be as clean as you suggest -- firstly, it is still being published, and secondly, if we decide it's non-canon, it gets removed from the wiki. Completely. We don't cover non-canon info, at least not in the mainspace, and we definitely wouldn't get to cite it in some instances (the win percentage cards, various card blurbs like Imperialdramon being the Royal Knights founder, Digimon who only appear in the cards, stats that only appear in the cards) but not in others. It's either canon or it's not, so if we're going to throw out a specific piece of a publication (example 1, 2), we'd need a statement specifically from Bandai, speaking in Bandai's voice, errata-ing the original info out. Until then, claiming it's the same species would be fanon.
 * Star Wars officially set up different levels of canonicity (until they later officially discarded them all), but that would, again, have to be an official designation, not one we come up with ourselves, and it applies to the publication as a whole, not just a single scene or piece. Thus, invalidating the Minotarumon card would require at least throwing out that Lotteria card set, if not the card game as a whole.
 * As far as the DRB -- yes, the Justimon situation is annoying (though I disagree with your claim that most media doesn't treat the arm modes as separate, because as far as I can tell most media doesn't actually depict more than one arm mode to begin with). The DRB is also one of the largest and most consistent sources of canon, so if we're tossing that as well then we really are throwing out most of the wiki. And, while we're at it -- most media don't treat Daemon and cloaked Daemon as different species, or Sakuyamon and Miko Mode, or MagnaAngemon and Priest Mode. Then there's cases like Beelzemon, where the Xros form is not always treated as a separate species.
 * As far as Shoutmon -- Masters does in fact seem to display them as separate species, so yeah, they should probably be split (not saying "definitely" because it's not clear that the species haven't been removed from the game, i.e., errata'd out).
 * Also, please try to be more fair about acknowledging opposing viewpoints, when we've had this conversation multiple times. I've been trying to do the same for your views on the v-pet evolutions. 15:09, January 8, 2019 (UTC)
 * The different name was probably because they couldn't just call the Adult level Minotarumon just Minotarumon because of Perfect level Minotarumon card. The card for Perfect level Whamon consistently does this even though the Adult level Whamon is the one to get parsered in the Reference Book. It is the older Minotarumon card I want rendered obsolete since the only acknowledgement of it is from a set that itself dubious in canonicity given the legal situation of species from V-Tamer. Also please don't misconstrue my statement regarding the Reference Book. I am saying that the DRB treats Justimon and Justimon Accel Arm as one and the same based on url and romanization while only Collectors treats the Blitz Arm as "Justimon" making "Justimon" seem like it's actually a collective species name shared between multiple subspecies like Trailmon and MegaKabuterimon rather than a species in and of itself.  I'm trying to be fair but at the same time, we've gone around in circles on this shit and it is getting ridiculous. Chimera-gui (talk) 17:13, January 8, 2019 (UTC)
 * Neither of the Minotarumon cards are related to V-Tamer, so I'm not sure what you're talking about. If you mean the Callismon card referencing Ultimate-level Minotarumon as an evolution, both Bo-535 and Bo-203 also reference the Ultimate-level Minotarumon, and even if they didn't, I'm confused what you're trying to imply with V-Tamer. It's canon.
 * At this point I can't parse what you're trying to argue with Justimon, then. The DRB is the only source that calls any of the Justimon anything but "Justimon", and it clearly differentiates the different arms as different modes/forms. What does Collectors have to do with this?
 * That's really not a reasonable response. I'm not asking you to agree with me, I'm asking you to acknowledge that there isn't unanimous support for your viewpoint, like I've made pains to do in situations where Marcus asks about v-pet evolutions per DW:EVOLVE -- I've made it clear to him that my position was not the clear consensus and that there were opposing arguments, and it's not accurate to tell Marcus that there's "no reason" for how the wiki currently does things, when you know very well that there have been a lot of reasons given, even if you disagree with them. I also agree that it is ridiculous that we are still having this argument, as I and the other admins had already agreed that the situation would change if there was any actual statements from Bandai supporting your desired distinctions for canonicity. At this stage, you haven't actually demonstrated why anything should be considered non-canon other than that it makes more species pages than you'd like, and it's unclear why that should be our criteria -- we already have ample precedent of visually identical Digimon explicitly belonging to separate species, or visually different Digimon being treated in a source as belonging to the same species. To my knowledge, the closest we have to statements on canonicity is various authors (ex. Konaka) saying they weren't involved with a specific film (without explicitly disavowing it), or character designers making statements on twitter under their personal accounts, claiming stuff like there being no level beyond Ultimate/Mega.
 * Collectible card games almost always have errata as a natural function. If either of the Minotarumon cards have been errata'd out, this discussion ends, because that's the source of the two different levels being distinct species rather than distinct stats. 17:41, January 8, 2019 (UTC)
 * Here's the thing, both of the cards you noted came before Minotarumon's level became Adult meaning that Minotarumon's level was still Perfect at the time these cards were made. And while V-Tamer is canon to itself, there are known legal issues that effect the canonicity of any tie-in media such as the card set to the franchise as a whole. The only reason Lanate wants to split Justimon into its own page separate from the three arm modes is because of the Justimon EX card while I've repeatedly pointed out why that doesn't work (BTW, the DRB only differentiates the arms as different modes from each other, not Justimon itself. The original Justimon profile in the DRB was changed to Accel Arm but kept its url as justimon from when the profile was for "Justimon" with no parser: http://web.archive.org/web/20091130045545/http://digimon.net:80/cat-digimon-dictionary/03-sa/justimon/index.html Chimera-gui (talk) 19:04, January 8, 2019 (UTC)
 * I didnt mean to start a war, damn. For the Shoutmons, I think making 5 pages is a bit much (this also effects more than Shoutmon), since there wont be much info on them. How would we treat Rookie Shoutmon? would it go on both pages for levelless Shoutmon, and Rookie Shoutmon - or would the Rookie Shoutmon from Next Order and Links only be counted on the Masters Rookie Shoutmon? that seems like it'd be wrong to do, since the Masters version is from Masters, which isnt in Japan. For tht reason, I think they should be left as they currently are, as it's a bit of a headache, unless I guess it goes on both pages, but then that begs the question of "what's the point of splitting?". That then brings me to what I was actually getting at for Minotarumon. I was thinking "why isn't this page split?" but then I guess that brings in, say one shows up in the new movie for Adventure... do we list it on the Champion page? the Ultimate page? both? I guess a combined page makes more sense, but I think I still prefer to have it listed as a Champion, with Ultimate as a ref note due to only one of them existing in the DRB for now, unlike Whamon.
 * As for Justimon, youre slightly wrong. Next Order refers to Justimon in the card list as Justimon: Accel Arm. That's the only Justimon who shows up, though. The "other two" don't show up. So like Zwart Defeat, I guess that implies the full name of the playable (and enemy) Justimon is Justimon: Accel Arm. If we did split them though, we'd be using the names currently on the pics of Thunderclap etc.Marcusbwfc (talk) 01:39, January 9, 2019 (UTC)