I never said that ALL of it was true -_-

 

Fully agreed.

We've obviously watched the same bonus features so it only makes sense.

And, yeah...pretty sure Cade's sliding down the Knightship as it lifts up out of the ocean and Transforms. Same "veins" and everything.

;)

 

Nice observations with the ship and connecting to that three headed beast. And I was just stating where u got my info from (some of it from Wikipedia) and it somehow turned into an argument.

 

Which means I am correct in that it is not reliable as a source, because content on it without sources can not be verified. And the fact it could be wrong is why Wikipedia should never be taken at face value of its words for content that is rapidly changing, like a page for a movie due next summer.

 

Don't take it personally, people are just tired of spurious information from places like Wiki and iMDB being presented as fact. It happens every cycle.

 

Each piece of information on wikipedia either has a footnoted citation attached to it or it doesn't.

It's pretty simple to understand the difference.

 

Once again that doesn't make you correct. YOU said WIKIPEDIA IS NOT RELIABLE. While I said SOME OR MOST OF IT IS RELIABLE. There are plenty of other websites that somewhat follow along the lines of what Wikipedia puts. Just go exploring online.

 

You know, that is the first time I actually looked at the poster up close, and I guess I'm later to figuring things out too but, is that a space station or a Quintesson ship? And I love the Decepticon symbol, looks pre-war. And the three headed dragon. ... I can see a fourth head hiding in one of the three heads, maybe a fifth. XD

 

You just don't get it do you? Just because part of something is reliable doesn't meant the whole thing is reliable. Like, let's say you had a car that was 75% reiliable while the other 25% was not reliable. If that 25% not reliability is entirely the engine, then it doesn't matter if the rest of the car never breaks down, the engine not being reliable means the entire car is considered "not reliable".

 

And you just don't get it do you? This isn't broken cars we're talking about. It's a website, and unlike cars, websites can still be somewhat reliable because even if one fact or more could be wrong, most of it would be correct.

I used Wikipedia, now get over it already.

 

Careful mate, Autobot Burnout is an "...all outta bubblegum!" kinda guy!  

 

Should be!

 

An "all outta bubblegum" kinda guy? What does that mean?

 

No one here is misunderstanding the difference except the naysaying doomsday prophets harping on the OP ad nauseum.

 

Haven't you seen the film "They Live"? Roddy Piper...

 

Never heard of it :/

 

That's ridiculous, I refuse to believe that until I see a pic of him wearing a kilt.

 

That movie is almost thirty years old.

Great as it is, most kids these days haven't even HEARD of it, let alone Roddy Piper.

 

You're the one who started this mess because I said Wikipedia wasn't reliable as a source. In the context of movie news, you can't prove me wrong in that, and unless you can get a news mod to say otherwise, Wikipedia alone is not good enough. Particularly in how this thread topic about the dragon and characters confirmed literally half a year ago was news across the internet, not just Wikipedia.

You have earned my respect, sir! Not nearly enough people have seen that film.

 

 

You have some cinema to catch up on my friend!