torb and sloar Edit

What is a torb? And what is a sloar? 22:54, 3 February 2009 (UTC) Oliver.

Devilmanozzy 23:11, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
It is assumed that a Torb and a Sloar are creatures of some kind that existed during the points in time that Gozer was brought to a world. -Miller meteor 17:10, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

More powerful ghostsEdit

What other ghosts in the Ghostbusters universe are as powerful as Gozer, other than Cathulhu? --Liberal Noob 04:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

History section Edit

In the History section, the first paragraph mentions Gozer's conflict with Tiamat. Where was that from? Did I miss something from The Video Game? Mrmichaelt 05:48, November 11, 2010 (UTC)

The Edit was performed by Blind Wolf and he wrote the following for summary of edit "→History of Gozer: - added VG info from the museum exhibits". So I'll go look this puppy up. Been meaning to look around there. Lets not jump the gun with this edit yet, Blind Wolf wasn't a bad editor. Devilmanozzy (Talk Page) 11:37, November 11, 2010 (UTC)

The following text is being removed for discussion:
"An obscure deity, Gozer the Destroyer's earliest known appearance was in Mesopotamia around 6000 BC. By the 4th millennium BC the Gozer worshipers, or "Gozerians" consisted of a large Sumerian sub-culture and was engaged in a long, protracted war with the followers of Tiamat. Eventually Gozer and its followers were defeated and Tiamat banished Gozer from this world."
I can't find where Tiamat was brought up in the vg either. I conclude this information was assumed or guessed out. This looks bad to the wiki when we "guess" like this. I am also wanting to know if anyone can confirm the date of 6000 bc being the earlyest date of gozer. The oldest dates confirmed in Tobin's Spirit Guide (RPG) on page 59-60 are 2040 bc. A serious rewrite looks to be needed. I went ahead and did the same on Cult of Gozer since it uses the same content. Devilmanozzy (Talk Page) 16:14, November 11, 2010 (UTC)

I didn't find anything in the Natural History Museum, neither. Didn't one of the Cursed Artifacts refer to a Tiamat Island? I think this info might be in one of the later levels. Mrmichaelt 03:08, November 12, 2010 (UTC)
Yes it did "Fox Hunt on Tiamat Island". Doubt that has anything to do with this almost Fanon edit tho. Lets assume the information given in question is not true, and rewrite it. Devilmanozzy (Talk Page) 05:33, November 12, 2010 (UTC)
Alright, done. I used relevant data from TVG/Tobin's Spirit Guide entries of Ivo Shandor and Stay Puft (which seems culled from The Movie, anyway) along with the data you presented to recreate the first paragraph. I have to dig up my copy of the RPG book to see if there's anything else to add. Mrmichaelt 09:01, November 12, 2010 (UTC)
If you can't find the RPG in your collection, go to article Tobin's Spirit Guide (RPG) and below is a link to Ghostbusters International which have a pdf form of Tobin. Devilmanozzy (Talk Page) 09:44, November 12, 2010 (UTC)
I found it (Whew), and yeah, I'll be adding more stuff.
I think I want to add the Cult of Gozer to the Wiki's page, is that kosher if I just put it in the History or should I have a separate header like "Tobin's Spirit Guide/GBI RPG Version"Mrmichaelt 01:15, November 13, 2010 (UTC)
I am guessing that viewers will see the page and assume that all pieces of canon were calculated into it if not noted otherwise. Does some of the RPG Tobin contradict the VG? Devilmanozzy (Talk Page) 21:51, November 13, 2010 (UTC)
Yes, that's what I hope. No, we were lucky in this case. The Gozer and Cult of Gozer entries in the RPG Tobin do not contradict the VG. Rather it adds to its origins on both counts. The only issues were that the RPG misspelled Shandor's and Vinz Clortho's names but a rather easy fix there. I wish that Tiamat thing were true, it sounded pretty awesome and legit for awhile until I put the 'admin glasses' on. Mrmichaelt 00:24, November 14, 2010 (UTC)
I still can't believe I let that one slip by me. Personally being more of a RGB fan, I don't read to deep into the movie/video game pages as much as I should. I know they are important tho.
In regards to the Video Game, I was told it they researched the ghostbusters franchise quite heavy before getting to adding the content. I think they treated the RPG as canon. Mistakes in the class system were due to changes during production. Devilmanozzy (Talk Page) 00:43, November 14, 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, it's impossible to not find that when there's a zillion pages to watch and even more to make. ;)
I like RGB and EGB more than the Movies and The Video Game but I figured since TVG as a finite amount of content compared to the animation, it'd be a good short term project for me.
There's actual interviews with the TVG staff? I didn't have that much of a problem with the class system in the Realistic Version, which I played only, except for a few of the boss characters like The Chairman. I think even the Possessor Ghost's classification was too high in my opinion. Sometimes I think like the class system is my Moby Dick.Mrmichaelt 00:52, November 14, 2010 (UTC)
Check out then the link on Talk:Paranormal Database to Ghostbusters Forum. It's a interesting read. Devilmanozzy (Talk Page) 01:37, November 14, 2010 (UTC)

Everything I put into the history section was taken practically verbatim from the museum level of the video game, so it's all totally kosher. It's easy to miss though since the only way to get the info is to interact with each exhibit and listen to a little audio clip, each explaining a little bit. There are no subtitles for it and it's pretty quiet, so I literally had to play the level with the volume cranked up on my PC while I typed up the article on my laptop. I listened to each clip repeatedly so I promise it was all accurate. IIRC the stuff about Tiamet crops up around the Egyptian exhibits (obviously.) So if you could just restore everything that was taken out, that'd be great as it took a fair bit of work. Blind Wolf 02:35, November 14, 2010 (UTC)

Oh, awesome. I can barely hear it on my TV but I don't have a badass stereo system, but it's there. That's what I love about his game. It's endless fun. I'll put the info back in. Thanks so much for finding this stuff and taking the time to transcribe it. I'm sorry for the confusion. Mrmichaelt 02:46, November 14, 2010 (UTC)
Ok I'm not sure what to say now but sorry. I didn't notice that audio in the game in that level. I thought that meant in the actual level design. Devilmanozzy (Talk Page) 03:45, November 14, 2010 (UTC)

Proof of the Tiamat Verus Gozer is canon. As Seen in Ghostbusters: The Video Game (DS)

While playing Ghostbusters: The Video Game (DS) I found this interesting story for a side mission. It looks to explain much was on the tapes in the museum level. Devilmanozzy (Talk Page) 18:32, December 1, 2010 (UTC)
Wow. So there's actually 3 different versions of The Video Game. Interesting stuff. Mrmichaelt 23:40, December 1, 2010 (UTC)

User: B1bl1kal's Edit Edit

"And Gozer was the first and creator of an extinct ancient race of creatures called the Gozerians who bore the same powers from her before they were all entirely wiped out."

Please state where you found this information. From what has been explained before in Ghostbusters: The Video Game, the "Gozerians" was a term for humans who were members of the Cult of Gozer, not a race of creatures. Mrmichaelt 01:13, January 19, 2011 (UTC)

Speculation in "Ghostbusters: The Video Game"Edit

This was in the section before todays edit by a IP(revealed to be user ‎VinzClortho):
"This may mean that Gozer, after his second defeat, is completely destroyed or at least severely diminished."

The IP/‎VinzClortho instead put this in:
"This, because Gozer was such a powerful being, most likely only means that it is banished forever from Earth's plane of existance, or atlease barred until it regains enough strength."

Both to me feel like Speculation. Any thoughts/references to back either up?  Devilmanozzy (Talk Page)  16:45, May 14, 2013 (UTC)

Both are pretty much speculation. "Diminished" and "banished" are good to use. In the Times Square level, before entering the Gamble Architecture lobby, Ray said, "Just a level 5 thought-form Crossrip!" and after the level, Egon told the Mayor, "Gozer manifested in a familiar form; one he had used before: The Stay Puft Marshmallow Man. But this event was weaker than his first encounter with us." And in the scene after the library level, they talk about how the Mandala is tied to Sumerian ritual magic and a feeder system for the Destructor Form like with the Shandor Building's temple. And after the museum, they talk about how Ilyssa setting off the Psi Energy Pulse was the catalyst. Then at the start of the cemetery level, Ray notes to Rookie how "In the Gozerian Codex, it's written that a blood sacrifice and a tremendous amount of spiritual energy are needed to generate the Supreme Destructor Form." Then later on in the level, Ray sums it when he says, "When the necromantic shockwave summoned Gozer back to our plane, why didn't he assume a more effective Destructor form immediately?" So basically, every time he gets blown up - Gozer's essence is banished from the physical plane back to the Gozerian dimension. But if enough P.K.E. is generated to summon Gozer like with the Psi Energy Pulse, another crossrip can occur that allows it to cross over. Then of course, all of Shandor's inventions like the Temple or the Mandala or the River of Slime would provide enough energy to sustain Gozer until it finishes with the destroying part. It'll keep coming back to Earth until it destroys Earth's dimension then it will move on the next dimension then the next and so on (as Louis/Vinz Clortho implies in the first movie when he talks to Egon and Janine towards the end). In secondary canon, IDW Comics ran with the concept on how Gozer keeps remanifesting but between TVG and Infestation, they used several Traps to capture enough of Gozer's essence so it wouldn't manifest again but then the Containment Unit leaked and Gozer was back to square one. But luckily in the first arc, they captured him again for good with the Megatrap. Mrmichaelt (talk) 04:06, May 15, 2013 (UTC)
I don't see why we can't just leave it the way it is now. After re-reading it today, It feels like solid writing and why must this be addressed? It is a guess on our part anyways. Lets let the reader draw the conclusion they feel is best.
User ‎VinzClortho Re-added the text above again. While I'm glad we know who is doing the edits, they have chose to try to force the opinion instead of coming here to the talk page to defend the text. I'm noting this.  Devilmanozzy (Talk Page)  20:04, May 23, 2013 (UTC)