Forum:CT:New Databank

Forums > Consensus track archive > CT:New Databank

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 Support proposal. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 00:50, July 17, 2014 (UTC)

New databank CT

As of July 1, 2014, the official StarWars.com site has undergone another redesign. It has taken away the Encyclopedia entries and replaced it with a new Databank. This discussion will create a new layout guide format to reflect the changes and the following will be added to the Layout Guide under the Sources header.

Part 1: Encyclopedia entries: Given that they have been closely associated with canon sources but were published before the establishment of the new continuity, information from Encyclopedia entries is considered to be canon as well as Legends. Since they will no longer be updated, treat them as if they were published on July 1, 2014 in an article's Sources list.

Part 2: New Databank entries: For Canon articles, the new Databank will be listed in an article's Sources list. As it will continue to be updated, list it as the most recent source. The Databank entries are to be organized by official entry name (without titles or ranks for characters, and by surname if applicable).

Part 3: A new Databank citation template will be created, in lieu of the old {{DB}} template: 

{{Databank|entry|title}}

Note that this will overwrite the redirect which currently points to the DB Template.

Support

  1. This is the best option. The new Databank is completely separate from the Encyclopedia. Corellian PremierJedi symbolThe Force will be with you always 20:03, July 3, 2014 (UTC)
  2. Here's a mockup of the template. Cade GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 20:04, July 3, 2014 (UTC)
  3. Yeah, they definitely need to be separate templates.--Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 20:06, July 3, 2014 (UTC)
  4. The most sensible way of handling things. --Lelal Mekha Old Republic military symbol (Audience Room) 20:22, July 3, 2014 (UTC)
  5. Absolutely. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 20:33, July 3, 2014 (UTC)
  6. I find this option to be better suited for status articles as well. With respect to MJ's comment in the SH thread, I'm just not fond of redirects. JangFett (Talk) 21:12, July 3, 2014 (UTC)
  7. Meh, though I stand by my assertion that {{DB2014}} would be the better template name, otherwise everything will have to be changed again three years from now when they overhaul the site again. —MJ— Training Room 01:12, July 4, 2014 (UTC)
  8. Winterz (talk) 19:26, July 4, 2014 (UTC)
  9. 501st dogma(talk) 20:29, July 4, 2014 (UTC)
  10. Coruscantfan (Talk) 01:09, July 5, 2014 (UTC)
  11. JorrelWiki-shrinkableFraajic 09:02, July 5, 2014 (UTC)
  12. Stake black msg 10:27, July 5, 2014 (UTC)
  13. Green Tentacle (Talk) 11:27, July 5, 2014 (UTC)
  14. Grand Moff Tranner Imperial Department of Military Research (Comlink) 16:10, July 5, 2014 (UTC)
  15. Supreme Emperor (talk) 11:42, July 6, 2014 (UTC)
  16. CC7567 (talk) 00:51, July 8, 2014 (UTC)
  17. --praguepride (Talk) 13:39, July 9, 2014 (UTC)
  18. 1358 (Talk) 14:53, July 16, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose

You mean I'm prohibited from adding updated information from Blaster pistol in the Databank to the Blaster pistol article or Lightsaber crystal in the Databank to the Lightsaber crystal article because they are not Canon articles? I can't update the Twi'lek article with new info from Twi'lek in the Databank? I have to wait for all these Canon articles to be created before updating?--Richterbelmont10 R2 sig(come in R2!) 17:32, July 4, 2014 (UTC)
  • Are you serious? Richter, there's no point in even trying to argue this. Legends articles will not be updated with canon sources. Period. Your reason for objecting holds absolutely no water. Cade GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 17:35, July 4, 2014 (UTC)
    • Part 1 says: "Information from Encyclopedia entries is considered to be canon." Yet hundreds of "Legends" articles list this "Canon" resource in "Sources". How do you reconcile this?--Richterbelmont10 R2 sig(come in R2!) 18:04, July 4, 2014 (UTC)
      • Encyclopedia entries are both canon and Legends. Your initial objection, however, is about using Databank entries on Legends articles, which is completely moot because they're different continuities. Cade GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 18:14, July 4, 2014 (UTC)
        • The CT was contradictory until you changed some of the wording just now.--Richterbelmont10 R2 sig(come in R2!) 18:30, July 4, 2014 (UTC)
          • Yes, about the Encyclopedia. Your objection about the Databank is still flawed; the Databank is a canon-only source and will not be applied to Legends articles. Cade GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 18:33, July 4, 2014 (UTC)
            • So let's say the dozen or so Fantasy Flight role-playing books are confirmed as Canon. Does this mean we will delete all their information from Legends articles?--Richterbelmont10 R2 sig(come in R2!) 20:28, July 4, 2014 (UTC)
              • I would assume not, since they were released originally when the EU existed. For example, Alliance to Restore the Republic was never named as such in the movies, only EU sources. The Encyclopedia (and now Databank) recanonized this piece of EU, thereby making it NeuCanon. This doesn't mean it doesn't apply to Legends articles anymore, it only means that the Legends info applies to Canon articles. The Encyclopedia was released before the NeuCanon decree, but also existed as an official source after the decree; because it existed before, it's Legends, and because it existed after, it's also Canon. The new Databank was released only after the NeuCanon decree, so it's Canon-exclusive. JorrelWiki-shrinkableFraajic 09:02, July 5, 2014 (UTC)

Discussion

  • Let me know if there will be anything else. Corellian PremierJedi symbolThe Force will be with you always 20:03, July 3, 2014 (UTC)
  • The overall proposal here is fine, but there are two little things I think should be clarified. First, there's really no reason to stipulate a cutoff date of July 1, 2014 for the Encyclopedia. AFAIK, the Encyclopedia, unlike the Databank, never underwent any modifications from the time it was first created several years ago. So it would be safe to just say generally that the Encyclopedia applies equally now to both Canon and Legends articles. Secondly, "Part 2" in this proposal should clarify that the new Databank applies only to Canon articles, not Legends articles, just to avoid any potential confusion in the future. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 01:39, July 4, 2014 (UTC)
  • I wish we could have the word "DATABANK" in addition to that picture StarWars-DatabankII, similar to the StarWars.com Encyclopedia.--Richterbelmont10 R2 sig(come in R2!) 04:02, July 4, 2014 (UTC)
  • Note that I have slightly adjusted Part 2 to mention that it is only for Canon articles. Corellian PremierJedi symbolThe Force will be with you always 14:40, July 4, 2014 (UTC)