Forum:SH:Battle of X Location precedent

This page is an archive of a community-wide discussion. This page is no longer live. Further comments or questions on this topic should be made in a new Senate Hall page rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record. C4-DE Bot (talk) 07:26, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
Forums > Senate Hall archive > SH:Battle of X Location precedent

So, with the ongoing chaos incited by the recent Star Systems of the Galaxy appendix, the WP:ASTRO channel of the Discord has been discussing quite a lot, and the subject of how to treat the association between "Battle of <Location>" and "<Location>" has come up quite frequently. Currently, WP:ASTRO precedent is to only note "Battle of X shared its name with X".

I and several other users are of the opinion that the usage of the word "of" directly implies a location association, and that we should be able to say that (for example) the Battle of Crombach Nebula took place at the Crombach Nebula. We do the same thing with the {{Planetnamia}} reasoning that lets us tie stuff like the Leyakians/Leyaki system and the Silver Moon of Acomber/Acomber system, and it feels wrong to treat events differently.

Imperators did bring up a good point, however, that "Battle of Planet" does not necessarily mean it occurred on the planet (or in the system); Battle of the Kaliida Nebula is a solid example. I don't think that's worth completely tossing out the location association entirely, and thus I'm proposing a compromise: we instead say "Battle of X occurred in the vicinity of X". This lets us still establish the location association that's implied by the name and by our established Planetnamia precedents, but we don't go so far as to assume it occurred on the planet or directly in said system.

For example, the Battle of Kromus would say something like:

The Battle of Kromus was a battle[1] that occurred in the vicinity of the Kromus system[2] sometime between 22 BBY and 19 BBY.[3]
  1. ↑ Lead by Example
  2. ↑ The Essential Atlas and Galactic Cartography: Official Discussion (post by jasonfry) on the Jedi Council Forums' Literature board (December 11, 2007): "I wouldn't get your hopes up re alien homeworlds, beyond simple stuff like the Planetnamian species getting a Planetnamia on the map or things Dan and I can account for with a relatively quick reference." (backup link) (screenshot) Jason Fry, co-author of The Essential Atlas and a number of maps in the current Star Wars canon (see a list here), stated his intention to create homeworlds for numerous species based on context implied from their names. Given this principle, this article makes a similar basic assumption for Battle of Kromus in relation to Kromus system.
  3. ↑ Lead by Example indicates that the Battle of Kromus occurred during the same period of time as the Clone Wars, which lasted from 22 BBY to 19 BBY, according to Star Wars: Galactic Atlas.

I and Imp both agreed on the compromise, but I wanted to toss this out in the Senate Hall for public awareness and discussion before any sort of implementation. The Planetnamia template can of course be updated to support an event parameter. Cade GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 19:53, 7 July 2025 (UTC)

Discuss

  • I'm all for anything that expands planetnamia (with caution of course) Raptorfe10 (talk) 18:05, 8 July 2025 (UTC)
  • That's great news! Will we have things like, for example, Siege of Ramsir listed in Category:Battles in the Jospro sector? —DKS MaXoO (talk) 11:21, 10 July 2025 (UTC)
    • Er, I'm fairly sure what Cade meant by "Battle of X occurred in the vicinity of X" was that, and thus later said "don't go so far as to assume it occurred on the planet or directly in said system." And if it was not considered to be directly in said X, then it wouldn't be categorized as such as a firm assumption.—spookywillowwtalk 11:37, 10 July 2025 (UTC)
      • Yeah, per Spooky, we're changing the wording to more clearly convey a location relationship, but it's not equivalent to saying that Battle of X definitively occurred in X's parent sector/region. Cade GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 18:19, 10 July 2025 (UTC)
        • Alright, thank you both for the clarification. —DKS MaXoO (talk) 22:51, 10 July 2025 (UTC)
  • The wording "Battle of X shared its name with X" is strictly factual and lets readers draw their own conclusions about the relation between "Battle of X" and "X." Our Planetnamia policy is based on an explicit statement from Lucasfilm. The proposed expansion above is based on nothing more than our desire to be more specific in our articles. I sympathize with that desire, but it is absolutely not appropriate for us to synthesize information in order to satisfy it. If Wookieepedia wants to continue to be a trusted resource, we must be in the business of reporting what the sources say, not what we'd like them to say. Readers are perfectly capable of deciding for themselves "Hmm, I bet battle of X took place near X." Asithol (talk) 20:25, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
  • Cade Calrayn wrote of "agreement amongst WP:ASTRO editors to adopt the precedent several weeks ago," and that "the precedent was agreed upon and stands; we have plenty of evidence that supports this stance and is in fact how we already name conjectural battles at a location." Asithol (talk) 06:57, 22 August 2025 (UTC)