How much work goes into a standard Wikipedia entry? The world may never know. But one thing’s for sure: Wikipedian’s have a thorough grasp of the finer details. The Talk page for the Wikipedia’s entry on Wall-E pulls back the curtain on their editorial process, and man is it ugly. In particular, this section (via Reddit) shows the controversy behind a phrase in the entry stating that “Wall-A units resemble giant Wall-E units”:

An editor has been removing “that resemble giant WALL-E units” from the description of WALL-A on the basis that WALL-E was based on WALL-A. We don’t actually know that, it’s not stated in the movie and appears to be an assumption, and therefore original research. The definition of “resemble” is “to be similar to somebody or something in appearance or behaviour” and this is true for both WALL-A and WALL-E. WALL-E resembles WALL-A nd WALL-A resembles WALL-E.

What follows is an in-depth discussion as to whether or not this argument is valid. Another Wikipedian chimes in:

As you said, WALL-A resembles WALL-E just as much as WALL-E resembles WALL-A. The point is that the WALL-A definition specifically says that WALL-A’s resemble giant WALL-E units. You have no proof this statement is more valid than one that says “WALL-E resembles tiny WALL-A units”. It’s a disambiguous statement either way, and since we do not know the history of which product came first, we have no way of making a definitive case of one over the other. As none of the other robot descriptions in that section discuss anything about how those robots look, it’s also inconsistent with info in that section anyway. (my edit summary was meant to imply that there was ambiguity, not that there was a supporting argument)

And so on and so on and so on. For anyone interested in the work and thought that goes into the Wall-E entry, it’s worth at least a brief read.

Some of you may be wondering, “What the hell are Wall-A robots anyway?” Wall-A stands for Waste Allocation Load Lifter AXIOM-Class. These were the gigantic devices that were compacting Axiom garbage before sending it off into space. For your benefit, I’ve included a few screencaps from Wall-E so that you can decide if it’s fair to say they “resemble giant Wall-E units.”

It’s been said that there’s two things in the world which you don’t want to see being created: Laws and sausages. To this list, I vote we add Wikipedia entries as well (But I’m still grateful for all the entries guys! Seriously).

  • wall-e obviously came first because they were made to clean up earth. then that failed so they made big ones for the axiom. there, problem solved! i dare anyone to try and disprove this statement.
  • hahahahha... Wow. I think that a Wall-A resembles a Wall-E. But that is just my two cents. na j/k
  • Andrew Aiello
    in the actual production of the movie wall-e came first. The entire second half of the film was concieved a long time after andrew stanton and his two storyboardists finished laying out the first half on earth. I'd just put that as a detail.
  • GENIUS! That is the answer ^
  • Conor
    I was pretty sure that those big fellas were "Wall-R" not "Wall-A"...
  • @snicket: why thank you, good sir (or madam?!)
  • Wall-E Enthusiast
    I dunno. Yes, Wall-E robots were created to clean up the earth. But you have to figure this was around the same time that the Axiom was being built. The Axiom was designed to last in space for a while. So i feel it is safe to say that both Wall-E and the Wall-A class robots were created, designed, and even manufactured at the same time.
  • I think its WALL-A. The E in WALL-E stands for Earth-class. So the A in WALL-E would stand for Axoim-Class.
  • Darth Nooch
    Wall E is obviously Johnny 5 in cartoon form.
  • Brian
    How stupid are these wikipedians?
    WALL-E = Waste Allocation Load Lifter EARTH class
    WALL-A = Waste Allocation Load Lifter AXIOM class
    It seems obvious to me that WALL-A came after or at the same time as WALL-E, because the whole movie is based on WALL-E not WALL-A, therefore they added WALL-A in there during that part (probably before a script was even written) What's with these people's lack of a brain? lol

    If you want to get technical...The Axiom was created so humans could leave Earth, we don't know if WALL-E bots were created before the Axiom to help cleanup Earth before they left, or after. So it's possible WALL-A could have (in the AI sense of things) been created before WALL-E. But in terms of the real world...WALL-E came first.
  • Brian
    Also...the statement made...

    "The point is that the WALL-A definition specifically says that WALL-A’s resemble giant WALL-E units. You have no proof this statement is more valid than one that says “WALL-E resembles tiny WALL-A units” "

    That was based off VISUALS, not facts...

    Think about it, what are people going to remember more about the movie...WALL-E or WALL-A? The way that quote is worded just takes into consideration that people look at WALL-A like a giant WALL-E.....because WALL-E is what you know before and more than WALL-A.
  • You guys are really having this discussion? The name of the movie is Wall-E, not Wall-A. It is not very hard to figure out which one came first.... At least I think so.
  • Danno
    "It won't make any difference"
  • buzz_clik
    The SpikeJones dude in the argument is totally missing the point. He seems bogged down in whether or not the story is saying one robot is based off the other, whereas everyone else is just asking him to use his eyes and admit that they simply look similar, regardless of the backstory behind the character.

    Sheesh. Every now and then, I think I'd like to give editing Wiki stuff a shot, and it's inanity like this that makes me think better. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go argue about moon landings for 3 hours on IMDb.
  • Wow, really?

    Why can't people just let things be?

    Why must they question everything?
  • The seriousness of the people on Wikipedia rivals the dumbassness of the people on IMDB forums.
  • Zinc
    As a Wikipedian, I can confirm arguments about things much tinier than this that span for days and months and produce probably megabytes worth for text are common. In this case, the argument is irrelevant because he cannot simply reference to the resemblance, because it would be considered original research. Perhaps of a Pixar dude said something about it and it was recorded in some way, it could be included. Otherwise, expect it to be reverted, or if you really do care, debated. You'd be shot down any way though.

    Psh, and people think Wikipedia isn't a reputable source of information...
  • I find this whole topic pretty hilarious.
  • I think we should consult the phenomenally talented underground hip-hop MC Wale (pronounced wall-ay). He's a real wordsmith and could solve this problem.
  • You had it right the first time: Sir
  • Johnny 5 came first. Dumbasses.
  • People like you need to relax. Wikipedia would be sweet if people weren't so nazi about it all the time.
  • spf
    I'm waiting for Triumph the Insult Comic Dog to come in and call everyone a bunch of losers.
  • Wow. Some people have a lot of time on their hands today.
  • @conor: a lot of people couldn't make out if it was an A or R, myself included. but if it was an R, what would it stand for? there was a whole thread about it on the imdb page of wall-e. A=axiom class!
  • Delta Assault
    This is WALL-Diculous.
  • but seriously, people have to be serious on wikipedia, it's an info site that is directly competing for people with the likes of britannica. plus people are always saying wikipedia is full of shit. so either editors be have to be super anal or they don't get taken seriously. kind of a no-win situation
  • It's pretty obvious that they are similar. I think it was done to create a similar style for the film. It's awesome how this has created such debate.
  • Rob
    Perhaps an amused Pixar employee can post a definitive statement on the development of Wall-bots, and allow these people to sleep again.

    We can only hope the same level of obsession is applied to Wikipedia articles on science, history.. factual stuff that actually matters..
  • Rich
    This entire argument has a flaw, presumably there must have been multiple WALL units designed at the same time.

    World War 1 was 'the great war' prior to the existence of World War 2, similarly, the why would the first Waste Allocation Load Lifter be designated 'Earth Class' if there was no need to distinguish it from another model?
  • that is exactly right. the class designation says it all
  • Andyrooskie
    It's implied. In the original version of the scene, WALL-E gains the WALL-A's favor so that they don't crush him. After seeing them compact trash, he compacts some as well while they watch to show he's like them, and then they pat him on the head.

    Deleted scenes on the WALL-E DVD. You're welcome!
  • 'picayune minutia'? 'oxpeckers?' are you serious? cuz if you are poking fun of the wiki folks its funny, if not, you really need to get laid.
  • Smumdax
    I'm a Wiki editor... when I feel like it. B'coz yeah, all I want to do is contribute, but when I get stuck wasting my time arguing on what THEY call "original researchs" and what I call plain, simple, OBVIOUS facts... I usually stop contributing because this is too frustrating. They want people to contribute, but when people do, they apply those zeleous & sometimes ridiculously stiff "community rules".

    I understand the difference between "original research" & "referenced facts"... But sometimes, they should be a little more flexible. In this particular case, it hurts the long-term vision common people have of WP.

    if some notorious magazine or blog, say /Film, would publish an interview in which anyone related to the film would state "the 2 robots were made to ressemble eachother (whoever came first, not the debate here)... then as stupid as you might find it, that would be considered "referenced" facts, and the entry would be kept...

    However, I find it VERY dumb that to be able to state that pale-blue ressembles dark-blue, some notorious color-expert must state it somewhere... god, that's ridiculous.
  • Smumdax
    And for the record: god damn it... it's an R, not an A!! It is quite clear when you compare the A in WALL with the last letter. They are not the same, see the indent that make the beginning of what is an R's "little feet" ?
  • DUH!
    YOURE RIGHT!
  • That scene was incredibly cute but in that scene it was Eve that gets injured and sent down the trash chute. They said that part of the show should be about Eve realizing she loves Wall-E so they changed it.

    Anyway I always figured the Wall-A came first. Technology usually always starts off big and then gets miniaturized.
  • God bless the mania that drives Wikipedians to obsess over picayune minutia. I, frankly, don't care how the entries settle out, but better them than me. They are the oxpeckers of the digital world.
  • Very useless :-)
    however, it really is Wall-R on the giant robots, not Wall-E .. unless someone has come up with a way to write an A with only one slanted leg and a round right top-side...
  • Andrew
    I always assumed it was Wall-R because that's what it looked like. It would make more sense to be Wall-A, but every time i saw them, i thought they were Wall-Rs. Also, there was Burn-E working on the Axoim, but he wasn't Burn-A... so i don't find it too far fetched there could be a Wall-R.
  • Wall•EPlaysPong
    I wonder what the folks up in Walla Walla Washington think about this. Ba-dum-chhh!

    For the record, I think Wall-As and Wall-Es do clearly resemble eachother, regardless of who came first.
  • lol, true that!
  • oh no you didn't! (in reference to that nazi thing. haha)
  • Here Here!!!
  • Which came first the Chicken or the Egg??? THAT is the TRUE question...
  • I can't believe they turned a tiny aspect of this movie into a chicken and egg argument. Regardless of who came first, they resemble each other and...


    Wait, I'm going to stop right there. It somehow doesn't seem like a smart idea to carry on this debate here. While I was reading the one on Wikipedia I was thinking it was a rather sad state of affairs for the people involved. I'd rather not be one of them.
  • J'osh
    I'm with Marco, I thought it was Wall-R. It looks like Wall-R and I was so sure that I had no idea what the headline meant.
  • Jacobi Harvard
    Yeah, all that unverifiable information being taken as literal fact would be totally sweet. It's too bad that "facts" are so much like "nazis".

    While I agree that this has been blown way out of proportion, the above poster made a very valid point about opinion and documented fact.
  • 790
    I so hate this stupid film. Wall E (wgas!)



    Ah feel better now.
  • i guess the designation is a retronym, like acoustic guitar.
blog comments powered by Disqus