Forum:CT:Media titles: Reloaded

Forums > Consensus track archive > CT:Media titles: Reloaded

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 no consensus between support inclusion of all parts of media titles and support something in-between. jSarek 02:20, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

First off, see Forum:CT Archive/Remove "Star Wars" from media titles?. The issue, which never reached a consensus, is whether we should:

  • A. Remove "Star Wars" and everything but the most basic title from media titles.
  • B. Include all parts of media titles.
  • C. Something in-between.

The issue has been bugging me for quite a while; if we are to keep full titles, we can cut down on use of parenthesis, which is currently used to distinguish conflicting titles of real-world media and an in-universe element (Ex. Shatterpoint (novel) and Shatterpoint). However, if we are to remove "Star Wars" and everything but the basic title, some article titles are going to look strange and incomplete (Ex. Star Wars: Bounty Hunter and Bounty hunter).

So, what do we do with media titles?

Voting

Support inclusion of all parts of media titles

  1. Adamwankenobi 22:12, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
  2. Havac 05:28, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
  3. Guh. This should have happened in the first place. Thefourdotelipsis 08:51, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
  4. Chack Jadson 23:53, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
  5. Commander Daal Imperial Emblem 09:05, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
  6. Jedimca0 (Do or Do Not, There is No Try) 09:49, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Support removal of "Star Wars" and everything but the most basic title

Support something in-between

  1. Like I said in the previous thread, some titles are clearly incomplete without "Star Wars" in front, (e.g. The Star Wars Holiday Special) but I don't think adding it to every single source is going to help matters any. We'd have to change thousands of links and repeat the phrase "Star Wars" ad nauseum on every single appearance list, which would just be ugly. Besides, in some cases, Star Wars isn't really part of the title so much as a logo on the cover. —Silly Dan (talk) 22:19, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
    • But do you have anything specific in mind? What should be named what? I actually started this wanting to see what users have in mind for this option, and I only voted for "include all" because nothing had been made specific. And in response to the last part of your comment, I agree, but with some titles (like the NJO or the LOTF), the series name is part of the title. And with other titles, keeping the "Star Wars" will, like I said above, reduce the need of the (IMO) ugly parenthesis. Adamwankenobi 22:29, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
      • I only want to register disagreement with both options. Rather than rename everything at once, I think we'd be better served if you proposed a specific source or group of sources which you think should be renamed. (If it's novels, I say don't move them.) —Silly Dan (talk) 22:34, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
  2. I agree with Dan to leave novels alone, but I wouldn't be adverse to shrinking comic names. Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic 24: Knights of Suffering, Part 3 is going to be a really long title in an appearance list, and having an issue number in the title along with an arc name is distinguishing enough as an article title. Games, however, should probably be left with Star Wars in front to distinguish them, i.e. Agree on the ambiguity of Bounty Hunter already, and some of the titles (like X-Wing would just look silly by themselves. Wildyoda 02:07, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
  3. I say follow the lead of the bibliographies of our source material; on cursory examination of some of my Essential Guides, this seems to follow the general idea of the printed word omitting Star Wars, while games and DVDs retain it. When in doubt, though, we should leave it out. jSarek 18:45, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
    • That seems like a pretty good guideline, actually, as long as by "when in doubt," you mean in "Who cares?" situations where the title is fine without the "Star Wars" in it (like the comic issue example above) as opposed to ambiguous situations like the Star Wars Bounty Hunter one (not to overuse that example). Wildyoda 18:50, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
  4. Only use "Star Wars" if needed, like if there is no colon used/implied, e.g. "Star Wars Sourcebook". Use the source material when in doubt as jSarek described. -Fnlayson 23:52, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
  5. SFH 23:59, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
  6. Ozzel 03:54, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
  7. Per Silly Dan and boo to instruction creep. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order (Talk page) 15:43, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
  8. It depends on the media in question. Bounty Hunter: should probably keep the "Star Wars" prefix. Jedi Outcast: maybe not. Dak Ryshard 01:27, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
  9. JMAS 18:35, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
  10. Bump. IMO, we should use Legacy of the Force: Betrayal, not Betrayal or Star Wars: Legacy of the Force: Betrayal as an example of our naming conventions (primarily for novels). —Xwing328(Talk) 22:18, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Comments

  • If we do end up removing Star Wars from the titles, just move the pages manually. Don't do a site wide programming change. I remember when the site changed from Star Wars Wiki to Wookieepedia. One minute I'm looking Star Wars Episode VI: Return of the Jedi, next thing I know, it's Wookieepedia Episode VI: Return of the Jedi. -- SFH 00:01, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
  • In the case of Star Wars: X-Wing not only would X-wing be weird by itself, but it creates a conflict with the article on X-wing and any redirects. -- Riffsyphon1024 02:10, 8 June 2007 (UTC)