Hello,
A small thing to perhaps codify, though we've already gone on and WP:BOLD moved a couple of affected cases. Essentially, Unidentified moon and Unidentified planet are some of a few of very rare cases of being unidentified in-universe, whereas the majority of Wookieepedia "Unidentified"-titled articles are because we don't know their name, so it's conjectural.
Proposing adding a new subsection for "In-universe unidentified subjects" to the "Specific rules" section of the naming policy to explicitly codify having these unidentified in-universe pages take naming precedence. Of course, if we get two moons that are unidentified in-universe, they'd then need a parenthetical. But until then, say, Unidentified moon should hold that title, over just any conjectural unidentified moon in any other media. This would be a rare case I'd say even a Legends unidentified IU should trump a conjecturally titled current canon page, since the former is its actual page title, whereas we could've chosen to name the conjectural one pretty much anything and it would still be just as accurate.
Bit tricky to word this, though, so thoughts on what the clause should be worded as are appreciated.
—spookywillowwtalk 00:41, 5 May 2025 (UTC)
Discussion
- I mean, yeah. The official name of anything in any timeline deserves higher status than our internal tools.SaintSirNicholas (talk) 16:47, 5 May 2025 (UTC)
- Not that it's directly related to this thread, but I think it's very strange that we use the line "On the frigid of an unidentified moon" (from one source) as some sort of proof that the moon is (a) definitely known to be unidentified IU (b) formally named "unidentified moon" (which is why the article lacks a Conjectural template. Xd1358 (Talk) 18:08, 5 May 2025 (UTC)
- Perhaps a {{NotConjecture}} be created for such articles for clarity. SorcererSupreme21 (talk) 02:59, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
- Ecks is right that it's a bit tangential, particularly given that there are multiple such cases by now. :P But nevertheless - regarding point a: on Wookieepedia we don't generally concern ourselves with redundancy in sourcing information. If a source gives us in-universe information, and if there's no particular reason to hold that information suspect, we accept it and treat it as factual. In this case, the source does say "On the frigid surface of an unidentified moon" and I don't believe we have any reason to distrust that the particular moon could have been left unidentified in-universe, so no further "proof" is really needed. And as to point b, that's a misunderstanding of what the Conjecture template is used for - it's not used for when we are presented with something that might (?) not be a "formal" name. Rather, it's used for when no source gives us any name whatsoever (generic descriptors such as "a moon" =/= names) so Wookieepedia has to come up with a placeholder name. Imperators II(Talk) 09:50, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
- Perhaps a {{NotConjecture}} be created for such articles for clarity. SorcererSupreme21 (talk) 02:59, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
- As to potential wording for the clause - how about "If an article's subject is only referred to in-universe with an "Unidentified" descriptor (link to either the moon or planet examples) and there are also conjecturally-named articles competing for that same page title (link to the disambig page(s)), the former shall take precedence. If there is more than one subject referred to with "Unidentified" in-universe and also conjecturally-named articles competing for that same page title, create a disambiguation page at the central title."? Are we sure the Specific rules section is the best one to place it in, though? Imperators II(Talk) 09:58, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
- Open to other suggestions; could even be its own subsection I suppose. But it does seem like a "niche" and rarely used rule, so the first thought was that it may fit under the specific oddity rules, if nowhere else.—spookywillowwtalk 19:45, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
- Fair; was thinking "it's about disambiguation so perhaps it'd be at home in the disambiguation section" but yeah. Imperators II(Talk) 21:33, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
- Open to other suggestions; could even be its own subsection I suppose. But it does seem like a "niche" and rarely used rule, so the first thought was that it may fit under the specific oddity rules, if nowhere else.—spookywillowwtalk 19:45, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
- Seems a no brainer to allow for subjects that are confirmed unidentified in-universe to have priority over conjecturally titled, so agreed Lewisr (talk) 17:28, 31 May 2025 (UTC)