Forum:CT:The Palpatine-Bossk Law, Expanded

Forums > Consensus track archive > CT:The Palpatine-Bossk Law, Expanded
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 overall vote, oppose subvotes. Cade GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 16:23, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

So, following up Forum:SH:Expanding the Palpatine-Bossk Law, here's a CT to change the following lines from the naming policy:

Alternatively, a Legends subject may use as its article title a name that would otherwise be a redirect to its Canon counterpart (example: Lightsaber crystal is the title of the Legends article rather than redirecting to Kyber crystal). One exception to this rule is film characters. Applicable Legends film-character articles shall utilize the /Legends suffix to allow all relevant alternate names and name variations to redirect to their Canon versions (example: Palpatine redirects to Darth Sidious, while Palpatine/Legends is the Legends article title).

My proposal is to replace the above lines with the following, with the bolded parts each the subject of a subvote.

Redirects to Canon pages also take priority over Legends subjects with that name (example: lightsaber crystal redirects to kyber crystal and the Legends article is at Lightsaber crystal/Legends) A) when the name has been used as an alternate name in a current Canon source.
B) When a Canon and Legends title differ only in capitalization, plurality, spaces, dashes or other special characters, but the Legends spelling has not been used in a current Canon source, the Legends article should still include the /Legends suffix in its title while the main title should redirect to the Legends article. (example: Commerce Guild Bomber should redirect to the Legends article Commerce Guild Bomber/Legends, to denote the differently-titled Canon article Commerce Guild bomber)

I personally feel like only the first part of the above text is necessary, but I have subvotes on parts A) and B) if people feel further exceptions are necessary.

Vote #1: Expand the Lawwww (to officially-used redirects)

This vote is to add the following text to the Naming Policy; votes #2 and #3 will modify it if they pass.

Redirects to Canon pages also take priority over Legends subjects with that name (example: lightsaber crystal redirects to kyber crystal and the Legends article is at Lightsaber crystal/Legends) when the name has been used as an alternate name in a current Canon source.

Support

  1. I think it's time. It's been 10 years since the Canon/Legends split, and this is a necessary step to fully commit us to serving canon content to our readers. And it'll help us as editors, too, by making the Legends pages instantly recognizable via autosuggest, instead of having confusion caused by partial names and other redirects. Cade GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 14:48, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  2. 01miki10 Open comlink 15:19, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  3. This'll save so much time for editing. Bonzane10 Bonzane10-Sig 15:21, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  4. As long as the redirect has been used in canon and can be verified as having been used in such a manner. - Sir Cavalier of OneFarStar(Squadron channel) 16:29, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  5. CometSmudge (talk) 16:33, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  6. Lewisr (talk) 16:45, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  7. Imperators II(Talk) 16:46, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  8. OOM 224 (he/him/they) 17:41, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  9. Rsand 30 (talk) 18:11, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  10. Ayrehead02 (talk) 18:15, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  11. JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 19:25, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  12. Per Cav Fan26 (Talk) 20:16, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  13. Xd1358 (Talk) 21:13, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  14. NanoLuukeCloning Facility 22:43, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
    BearInsanity 05:01, 23 December 2024 (UTC) (Vote struck, reason: Per policy: Users must contribute 50 edits within the last 6 months under their registered Wookieepedia account to become voting-eligible. Edits to userpages and talk pages and any reverted and deleted edits do not count toward this total. -- NBDani TeamFireballLogo-Collider(they/them)Yeager's Repairs 00:28, 4 January 2025 (UTC))
  15. ThePedantry (talk) 05:52, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
  16. Wok142 (talk) 17:18, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

Vote #2: Prioritize all redirects or just those used in sources

(requires vote #1 passing) This vote is on whether or not to adopt the A) line - or rather, whether or not to restrict this rule only to explicitly-used redirect terms, or to enforce it for all possible redirects. This is for cases like AV-21 Landspeeder (Legends) and AV-21 (Canon), where "AV-21 Landspeeder" hasn't been used in a Canon source. If this vote passes, we will Zremove "when the name has been used as an alternate name in a current Canon source", so the wording will just be:

Redirects to Canon pages also take priority over Legends subjects with that name (example: lightsaber crystal redirects to kyber crystal and the Legends article is at Lightsaber crystal/Legends)

Support

  1. I think it's cleaner and more helpful to both readers and editors to allow for all possible redirects to take precedence, even if they're not explicitly used in a source. Cade GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 14:48, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  2. A cleaner and consistent approach overall for both editors and readers imo. Bonzane10 Bonzane10-Sig 15:27, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  3. CometSmudge (talk) 16:33, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  4. As a reader, if if I search for something I've seen mentioned in a source and search suggestions show me two very similar titles, I want to know as fast and easily as possible which one is the one I'm actually interested in. As an editor, I'm using link autosuggest and I want to know as fast and easily as possible which of the two similar titles is the one I'm actually looking to link to. The presentation of the Legends articles' titles on their pages is remaining unchanged; redirects (and disambigs, if needed) exist. So I'm not sure I see what the problem here is. Imperators II(Talk) 16:46, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  5. OOM 224 (he/him/they) 17:41, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Oppose (require name to be used in source)

  1. We shouldn't relegate canonical Legends titles to subpages just to make space for conjectural Canon redirects. I see the point here, but one can reach the Canon article easily via tabs. 01miki10 Open comlink 15:19, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
    • Except that this doesn't solve the actual problem, which is similar names popping up in autosuggest and editors having no idea which one is which. Cases like Arrow-23 and Arrow-23 landspeeder should immediately tell editors and readers which one is Legends and which one is canon, and right now, they don't. There are almost a 850 of these cases. Cade GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 15:25, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  2. Per Miki. The name in the actual Legends source should be prioritised if it hasn't been used in a Canon source regardless of how similar they are. This is the name given in the source (or majority of sources) itself, and accuracy from the source should be respected at all times. It is a simple manner to change article redirects if and when a particular name is canonised. - Sir Cavalier of OneFarStar(Squadron channel) 16:33, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  3. Lewisr (talk) 16:45, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  4. Personally I disagree. I get that it's more useful for autosuggest, but there's also a downside that there's a bunch more pages that Legends editors have to pipelink. Also having these titles redirect to the Canon pages could confuse editors into thinking that it's an official name, even though they haven't been used in any Canon sources. Rsand 30 (talk) 18:11, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  5. We should not be fanfictioning in terms that haven’t been used in Canon. We need to wait until a source uses that term before claiming that it is an alternate name for a subject in any continuity.SaintSirNicholas (talk) 18:27, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
    • SaintSirNicholas, for the sake of clarity and avoiding any confusion, can I ask that you please use the term "fan fiction" where it's more in line with its actual semantic meaning? This discussion is about finding a balance between what's more practical for Wookieepedia's editors and what helps its readers find what they are likely to be searching for. It is not about works of original fiction. Imperators II(Talk) 18:38, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
      • How would suggesting that Canon uses terminology that it never does be anything other than a fan’s creation?SaintSirNicholas (talk) 18:52, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  6. I believe the /Legends subpages should be used as little as possible. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 19:26, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  7. Fan26 (Talk) 20:17, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  8. Xd1358 (Talk) 21:13, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  9. Per Cav. NanoLuukeCloning Facility 22:50, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  10. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 16:23, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
  11. ThePedantry (talk) 05:53, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

Vote #3: Case-Sensitive Exception

This vote is a further exception to vote #1, but if vote #2 succeeds, this vote is rendered moot as we will allow any redirect to take precedence. This would append "When a Canon and Legends title differ only in capitalization, plurality, spaces, dashes or other special characters, but the Legends spelling has not been used in a current Canon source, the Legends article should still include the /Legends suffix in its title while the main title should redirect to the Legends article." to the text, and would apply to everything in Category:Differing article titles/Exact.

Support

  1. If we have to restrict it to explicitly-used redirects, I think this is a valid exception to that rule. Cade GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 14:48, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  2. 01miki10 Open comlink 15:19, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  3. Bonzane10 Bonzane10-Sig 15:28, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  4. CometSmudge (talk) 16:33, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  5. Imperators II(Talk) 16:46, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  6. Even if we don't redirect to the Legends pages I'd support avoiding the link-suggestion errors these lead to. Ayrehead02 (talk) 18:15, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  7. ThePedantry (talk) 05:54, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Again, accuracy from the source should be respected at all times. It should not be up to us to change what the name from the source is. - Sir Cavalier of OneFarStar(Squadron channel) 16:35, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  2. Nothing wrong with different titles if it's what was actually used in a canon source Lewisr (talk) 16:45, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  3. SaintSirNicholas (talk) 18:28, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  4. Kind of on the fence about this one, but still per accuracy of the source material. Rsand 30 (talk) 18:50, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  5. Per above and my previous Oppose vote. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 19:28, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  6. Xd1358 (Talk) 21:13, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  7. NanoLuukeCloning Facility 22:50, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  8. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 16:23, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Discussion

  • For both the second and third vote, I think it might make more sense to have the redirects point to the Legends article rather then the canon one. That way the name only used in Legends still points to the Legends article, but in link suggest we still have one of the options clearly labelled as /Legends so there's no confusion. Ayrehead02 (talk) 18:15, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
    • I've updated the third one, but it's a bit messy to reattempt it on Vote #2, so if it fails, I'll do another CT for that specific wording. Cade GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 18:35, 22 December 2024 (UTC)