Forum:CT:"Yoda's species" vs. "Unknown tridactyl species"

Forums > Consensus track archive > CT:"Yoda's species" vs. "Unknown tridactyl species"


This page is an archive of a community-wide discussion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made in the Senate Hall or new Consensus Track pages rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record.
The result of the debate was Move to "Yoda's species" Atarumaster88 Jedi Order (Talk page) 23:34, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Currently, Yoda's species is described in an article titled Unknown tridactyl species, with "Unidentified tridactyl species", "Unknown Species (Yoda, Yaddle, and Vandar Tokare)", "Yoda's race", "Yoda's species", and variants used as redirects. Talk:Unknown tridactyl species contains several requests to move the article to another title. I've suggested Yoda's species a couple of times there, for the following reasons:

  • Many people have said that describing the species as an "unknown tridactyl species" is more "encyclopedic." On the other hand, having three fingers on each hand is one of their least important and distinctive features. The only species I could think of offhand which are named for their number of toes or fingers are the three-toed and two-toed sloths, where the number of toes actually serves to distinguish the two types. Are there some four-fingered creatures who Yoda's species is distinguished from mostly by the anatomy of their hands? Are Yoda's people the only three-fingered aliens in the galaxy? (Besides, Yoda apparently has more than three toes per foot, so "tridactyl" is only half-accurate.)
  • No one seems to like the "Google hits" argument which crops up whenever there's a discussion of page titles, but casual fans unaware of Wookieepedia are probably more likely to find this article by searching for "Yoda's species" than by guessing whatever characteristic we've decided Yoda's species should be named for, and googling for that.

Note: I am putting this move request in a CT rather than on the article talk page, because so many articles refer to Yoda or Yoda's species that a move would amount to a fairly substantial change to the site as a whole. —Silly Dan (talk) 19:16, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Move to Yoda's species

  1. And who uses the word "tridactyl" anyway? —Silly Dan (talk) 19:16, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
  2. I agree with all the points mentioned above. And, if you hadn't made note of the "unidentified/unknown" thing, I would have :P JorrelWiki-shrinkableFraajic 19:20, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
  3. IU nickname > Conjectural nickname we made up ourselves. -- I need a name (Complain here) 19:30, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
  4. Per INAN.--Goodwood Redstarbird (Alliance Intelligence) 20:09, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
  5. What he said. Gonk (Gonk!) 20:10, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
  6. Per the nameless guy. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order (Talk page) 20:10, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
  7. Unit 8311 20:27, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
  8. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 21:00, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
  9. Hey, wow, something everyone agrees on. It must be one of the signs of the apocalypse. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 21:44, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
  10. Chack Jadson (Talk) 21:45, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
  11. Per Silly Dan's second bullet point. jSarek 23:52, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
  12. JMAS Hey, it's me! 23:58, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
  13. Dan's second point is what sold it to me. Greyman Jan.png (Talk) 01:59, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
  14. Toprawa and Ralltiir 02:03, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
  15. Much as I hate the name "Yoda's species"...it's used in an IU document, so should be used here. —Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 06:02, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
  16. If the NEGAS is really written In-Universe, then there is no disscusion. It must be changed. (Maybe a bit of BTS could explain the reason we choose that unencyclopedic sounding name?) Carlitos Moff 09:44, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
  17. Per Jaymach. Green Tentacle (Talk) 15:28, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
  18. Because it's what they call it in New Essential Guide... KEJ 19:13, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
  19. —Xwing328(Talk) 22:53, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
  20. Per I need a name. And per Carlitos Moff, explain it in BTS. This might prevent the article being moved back by someone that doesn't know about this and might also prevent the same question being asked over and over again on the talk page. --Jedimca0(Do or Do Not, There is No Try) 11:03, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Keep at "Unknown tridactyl species" or "Unidentified tridactyl species"

  1. Jasca Ducato Sith Council 22:43, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Comment: Forum:Unnamed, unknown, nameless will probably mean the article needs to be put at "unidentified" anyway. —Silly Dan (talk) 19:16, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Comments

How about renaming it Unidentified green species? It's a bit more encyclopedic than "Yoda's Species", and a bit more descriptive than "Unknown tridactyl species" 72.79.213.150 20:59, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

  • It's still a made up name, and like INAN said, "IU nickname > Conjectural nickname we made up ourselves." -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 21:00, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Wherever it ends up, I think we should clean up all the references on other pages so we can delete some of our fanon redirects. Those of us with bots can expedite this once this clearly one-sided CT is closed or snowball-claused. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 13:28, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Why not just use "unnamed alien species"? By Wookieepedia's own definitions, using humans as the galactic standard of race in Star Wars, this is what the race should logically be, or something to a likewise extent. 'Tridactyl' doesn't really specify a race at all as there are other species with three fingers. I don't think any other unnamed race is named after one example of the species (If I'm wrong about that please correct me), so why should the race to which Yoda belongs be "Yoda's Race" at all? Darth Xadún 13:54, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

  • The reasoning is because "Yoda's species" is used in a canon source, which was produced with an IU perspective (essentially, the book written is theoretically the equivalent of a GFFA reference book). As such, we've got to follow canon; why this vote is still running I don't know - it's been shown that "Yoda's species" is an IU title, and, since following canon is what we do (or attempt to), it should be there already. JorrelWiki-shrinkableFraajic 14:02, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but my point is that although a canon source names the race as "Yoda's Species", this is vitrtually impossible to be the race's actual name. Even from an IU perspective the writers didnt know the name of the species and were forced to use an example familiar to them. Therefore, "Unknown Alien Species" would still be canon.—Unsigned comment by Darth Xadún (talk • contribs)

  • Not if we don't have any sources where those exact words are used. Besides, there are dozens of "unknown" species out there. —Silly Dan (talk) 11:14, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made elsewhere.