Forum:SH:Opening discussion on clone names

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. —spookywilloww^talk 17:05, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

---

More of a dicussion than a proposed policy today, everyone. Simply a way to get user opinions and begin a formal process. For several years now, users have discussed the idea of moving clone troopers to their preferred name instead of their number. It is a common criticism of Wookieepedia that we do not title clone trooper pages after their name. While often called "nicknames" by some sources and even some characters, the clones themselves put a great deal of emphasis on their chosen names, valuing them above the designation they were assigned at birth. Across Star Wars: The Clone Wars in particular, this is made clear; Pong Krell using designations instead of names is frowned upon, Fives declares "But I am not just another number! None of us are!", Rex notes to Cut Lawquane that he too has a name too, etc etc. The clearest example, however, comes from Fives:

This is a clone trooper directly stating that, to the clones themselves, these are their names. They are the names they choose and answer to. That on a legal document somewhere they are called a number isn't important, they value their names. Something similar was raised in Doctor Aphra (2020) 19; Kho Phon Farrus' name on their Imperial I.D. is outdated, but we of course don't treat that outdated name as Kho's name, Kho has chosen the name Kho.

This is a formal opening discussion to seeing user perspectives on changing clone trooper names to their chosen names. I would love for users with a greater understanding of Legends to explain Legends sources on this matter, although The Clone Wars would still of course impact Legends pages, to see if there is any difference to canon. Editoronthewiki (talk) 21:31, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

• And just to start, I am well aware of the outlier who is RC-1140 "Fixer." As noted in Star Wars: The Clone Wars: Character Encyclopedia - Join the Battle!, he is "so focused on following regulations that he uses his comrades' operating numbers during missions." While that doesn't directly mean he sees them as numbers, perhaps only on missions he uses numbers, RC-1140 could be a rare example of a clone who personally prefers his number. Therefore, his page would remain at the number. Also, this is the exception, not the rule: the book felt the need to spell it out, establishing it is uncommon. Across nearly all media, we see clones calling each other names and their not numbers. Editoronthewiki (talk) 21:31, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

EDIT: Just so its clear, this SH will not be followed by a CT. This post serves as a discussion entry point and a place to invite investigation of sources. After this SH and its collection of information, a SH proposing the change formally, with all collected evidence for and against listed out, can be made. Only after that would a CT come Editoronthewiki (talk) 00:07, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

EDIT 2: Ah, since I've gotten a DM asking about it, no this thread wasn't intended to address the question of whether the {{Nickname}} would be placed at the top of the page after movement. I feel like it will naturally come to questions about that, but it may have to be its own thread after this discussion; the clones both refer to their names as "nicknames" and "names", so you could argue it doesn't need the template or that it does. Personally I wouldn't mind not needing it, but you could argue that, since they use the term nickname (despite considering them formal names), it is necessary Editoronthewiki (talk) 00:31, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

NOVEMBER 2023 UPDATE: The policy has now been proposed at Forum:CT:Clone trooper naming update. I believe this SH can now be archived, it has not seen activity in months and any new discussion can occur over on the CT Editoronthewiki (talk) 16:56, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Discussion

• Ah, and I forgot to mention, we already have decided to move deserting clones to their names (and do so without the nickname tag, which is a whole discussion in and of itself on whether that should be put at the top), so we have precedent for anyone wondering Editoronthewiki (talk) 21:35, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
  • To me, the way forward is that clones should automatically get their name/nickname as their page title since most evidence I see, for canon at least, holds that clones prefer it to their number. Any clones who can be found who prefer their number to their name are the exception, not the rule, and would get their number as their page name. There's debate to be had if CT-411 "Ponds" falls into this school of thinking, since he says his number when Aurra Sing asks for his name, although some have argued he's just being stubborn with Aurra. that's a discussion for his talk page Editoronthewiki (talk) 00:56, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
• Personally, for clones who are still serving the Republic or later the Empire, it's best to keep on using the number designation. For me at least, it's easier to differentiate the two. But if we're talking about their preference, I'd say it's like a legal name. Whether they like it or not, legally their names are still their designated number. As for the deserted clones, their designated number doesn't mean anything to them anymore, so some might want to change their names, like Cut did. Bonzane10 (talk) 22:01, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
  • I mean, I did provide an example of how legal names don't line up to someone's actual identity all the time. I'm not saying clone trooper names and the chosen names of trans/non-binary people are one-to-one, but the comparison in this example is easy to point to. Beyond that, I feel like Echo's line "its ironic, clones wanted names instead of numbers, yet now people are signing up to be given numbers" in "Cut and Run" is important to note, given its in reference to legal codes. It also again confirms that to the clones these are more than just nicknames: they are reflections of their real selves Editoronthewiki (talk) 22:54, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
    • Yeah, it's a tough one to convey for me. My head went everywhere earlier. Bonzane10 (talk) 23:57, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
      • No problem, as noted this is a beginning to the discussion. Perhaps this SH should be given subsections, one for users to add pro-name evidence, one for against moving, while up here remains a general discussion Editoronthewiki (talk) 00:07, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
        • That has been added Editoronthewiki (talk) 01:24, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
• I would certainly support putting their chosen names as article titles. NanoLuuke^{Cloning Facility} 00:06, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
• Concurring with above, but only for canon. Canon's got boatloads of evidence for not using numbers, which has expounded greatly on the original TCW stuff. Legends however, had most content cut off after TCW, leaving it much harder to establish.—spookywilloww^talk 00:18, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
  • Hence why this thread is just the opening to discussion. this a;; might very well may end up with canon clones getting their names, while legends remain at numbers (maybe with /Legends remaining at the end), but time will tell Editoronthewiki (talk) 00:58, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
• I don't know enough about Legends to have an opinion on that, but I think your Canon evidence is sound. I don't understand why deserters get their names but others don't, since if we're going by the "legal" argument (which I think is a bad one), their number is still their legal name, it's just that they're now wanted by the law. Under the naming policy, we have "Whenever two or more names are used by a character simultaneously (adopted names included), use the most commonly known of those names" - and clones are overwhelmingly known as their name, not their number. Thanks for opening up this discussion again, Editor! It's been on my list of things to do one day. Dropbearemma (she/her) 09:52, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
• I would certainly support use of their names as opposed to numbers. It's what they're known by in-universe, and it's what all of the fans know them as. It would increase the reader-friendliness of the Wook. Jarhead002 (talk) 00:17, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
• This has been weighing on me for quite some time. I really would prefer we use their chosen names. Using their number just seems dehumanizing, and if Star Wars has taught us anything in recent years, it's that clones are very much people who deserve to be treated as such. Master Fredcerique(talk) (he/him) 05:40, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
• I personally could go either way, though I do want to point out the reasoning why this was made a rule in the first place. As established in both Canon and Legends material, the Republic considers clone troopers to be their property. With the exception of those who deserted, this would technically make their designation a more formal title than their nicknames. And although we prefer formal titles for pages, I also agree that clone designation vs nickname is a very different case than something like using "Jabba Desilijic Tiure instead of Jabba the Hutt." Rsand 30 (talk) 17:38, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
  • Preferring numbers is also pretty bad for searching, for example Dogma: nobody is going to look up "CT-6922", since a random reference book is the only place to use that designation. As clones are more well-known by their names, those would be easier for readers. Rsand 30 (talk) 17:38, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
  • Well, if the rational for both canon and legends was "they are legally property", and every clone story basically serves to say that perspective is wrong, I think it would be easy to knock that away and just go with names for both canon and legends if that is the primary reasonEditoronthewiki (talk) 17:46, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
    • I mean, they were manufactured and mass-produced for the Republic. Rsand 30 (talk) 19:14, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
      • that does not define their existence. Essentially every clone trooper story exists to say they are people. Editoronthewiki (talk) 23:21, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
• Yeah, my views here essentially remain unchanged from the time when this was first brought up some time ago: clones as individuals are shown to primarily identify by their chosen names; when they do refer to their alpha-numerical designations it is done so in more of a military context. Clones' chosen names best represent them, so they should be preferred where available. What about which is more "formal," for the purposes of the Naming policy: a clone's chosen name or their alpha-numerical designation? The answer is neither; for they are not variants of one another but distinct and equally valid. But again, the chosen name—what you'd call a "nickname" in the legal/military context—is a better reflection of the character as an individual because it comes from their personal qualities/choices. It's a choice between actual names that you use to address individuals ("oh, I think I heard of this guy!") and clumsy and arbitrary call-signs. In the event that a clone has a name and designation that are both known to us, I'd like to see the Wook in consistent in preferring the actual name. OOM 224 (he/him) 21:21, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
  • This is a great point. This is how I felt when nicknames were changed to alphanumeric years ago. It might be good to get back to this! Please disregard my points against change that I made previously. I thought that there would be a lot of unnecessary work involved.Red Heathen (talk) 23:35, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
  • thank you for articulating this so well, OOM! My feelings as well. Dropbearemma (she/her) 21:50, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
  • Yes, something to note is that even clones who seem to "prefer" their number, as you note, only "prefer" it in military context. Fixer uses numbers on mission. Ponds grumbles out his number when Aurra demands his name twice, which Aurra declares pathetic, and Anakin uses his name in the personal context of watching his death. the names are not variants of numbers, numbers are not variants of names. Even in cases of "Fives" coming from 5555, the nickname takes on its own purpose Editoronthewiki (talk) 17:46, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
• My two cents - I've been working on an all-inclusive clone trooper database for more than two years and am on Wook a lot. I'm a clone fan, and even prior to starting my clone project, I have been on Wook for years looking up clones and various related military info. Finding a clone is not difficult. Not all troopers have a nickname. Not all clones' alphanumeric is given, but search has worked fine in both instances, even when only partial names or a.n. is given as a search term, so I'm not sure if a change needs to be made. If Wook decides to move forward with this project, then consider the following.
  • I've noticed over the years that some clones had their pages moved because their names were originally entered as a nickname. A new page would be created for the alphanumeric, and the old page is left sitting there wasting space (how many bytes is this) for a redirect. My question is why couldn't the title of the page be changed in those instances, thus keeping the old page and not creating a new one? Is this what would happen if Wook moves forward with changing a.n. to nicknames? Does Wook want to lose this space and have even more redirects?
    • I think there's some confusion about how redirects work - they're not wastes of space, as they can be very useful, because that way people can link to pages even if they get the name slightly wrong. We're not worried about space, and every clone who has a name and a number has a redirect with their name currently, I think, or a disambiguation page. Dropbearemma (she/her) 22:42, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
      • I've come across several that were dead in the water and did not redirect. These are the ones that I'm talking about. I cannot give you examples because I discarded them.Red Heathen (talk) 23:35, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
  • On the flip side, if the original page could have had the title changed and/or page updated, thus not creating a new page, then perhaps it would be helpful if current page titles could include both the a.n. and the nickname. Is this possible? I don't think search would be affected because when I've searched for partial names and numbers, I get many results with the relevant needed entry at the top.
  • The good thing about alphanumeric is that there is no way to get a clone mixed up with another clone, but when searching by nickname, there might be more than one clone available - not that this is really a problem. Both clones are at the top of search results and the user can click on both links if needed and figure out which clone they are interested in.
  • I might be misunderstanding, but this seems like a stereotypical bureaucracy creating paperwork in order to deal with existing paperwork. If it ain't broke don't fix it. The examples given on this page don't really mean much because in the instances of Dogma and Rex, they had both nicknames and a.n. Examples not given are the many instances when clones don't have a nickname.
    • The argument of the people in favour of changing this is that it is broken, in our opinion, that they're not listed by their actual names, because we think it's dehumanising and less useful to the reader. There are a lot of important changes that require a lot of work to implement, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't do them. Infobox pronouns and sourcing gender and pronouns separately is a good example. Dropbearemma (she/her) 22:42, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
      • That is a good example. I said in a different reply to OOM that in the past I was sad to see the nicknames changed to a.n., and this is one reason why. The other is because that is how we knew them from the shows and comics. My only real gripe was that the work involved seem unnecessary, but thankfully you and others have replied. Now I can see from a different perspective and I think it would be a good thing.Red Heathen (talk) 23:35, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
  • I don't think that there should be any changes if new pages need to be created. It is not worth the headache because search works just fine. I'm on here often and searching for clones, and for a person that doesn't have much time - and I also have limited neuro ability (for what that's worth - it's hard paying attention, to read, etc, meaning my mental capacity is low and I get confused easily) - and searching for a nickname or a.n. is not a problem. Even if the clone has an a.n., you still find them at the top of search results when searching by nickname...usually. If not at the top, then the page is in the top three. There's always disambiguation pages for instances when there might be many results for one term. It's not a real problem, so I don't think it is worth the headache. Honestly, considering how each clone has either an a.n. or a nickname, the problem can be summed up as six of one and a half dozen of the other. You're just recreating a problem from a problem that has already been resolved. Official policy concerns official given identifiers, and this is likely the best policy. ... and if it is decided to go back and use nicknames for those who have one, and of the ones who originally had pages with titles using their nicknames but those pages were deleted and now used as redirect pages, can you go back and reuse the redirect pages so as not to create even more new pages?
  • Also consider the fact that after the clone troopers came stormtroopers, and the vast majority of them are listed by a.n. and have page titles with such. Do we go back and change their pages for naming policy consistency if they have nicknames? If we change the page title name to reflect nicknames for clones, then do we change all pages on Wook for people, places, and things to reflect nicknames instead of official identifiers, such as droids?
  • What would prevent a naming policy from happening again?
    • Nothing, but that's okay! We can't be afraid of doing this just because it might be changed in the future. This is what a wiki is about. Dropbearemma (she/her) 22:42, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
      • After working on these spreadsheets for a couple years, I've come to learn that there are more than a few that no longer connect. I think this has been my only true issue, and it is so minor! Ayrehead and you are right. Change takes place, and we gotta keep with the time! LOL Thanks for your reply! Red Heathen (talk) 23:27, 12 March 2023 (UTC).
        • If you do find things that should redirect that are currently empty, a redirect page has this in the source edit window: #REDIRECT [[CC-2224]] for Cody, for instance. Just for your future reference! Dropbearemma (she/her) 00:03, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
  • What do you do when a clone has more than one nickname?
    • Which clones have more than one nickname? I'm blanking on any examples, but I believe you that there are some. We also have plenty of clones with more than one number, so I don't think it's a problem with the idea of moving to using names. Dropbearemma (she/her) 22:42, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
      • Havoc is one name I was working with last night. There's also 35, Ace, A'den, Chatter, Fi, Fox, Scythe, Sev, and a few or couple more who I can't recall offhand. Comet is one name that I need to check on. I need to get back to a question I asked Hanzo H last night regarding Battlefront II (Legends) and see if they have replied. There are two Comets listed on two other wikis, but only one on here. I think there might be another instance or two of this, but I can't tell you atm. Red Heathen (talk) 23:27, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
        • Ooh, could you link to where other wikis have two different Comets? We'd just disambiguate the names like we do for Tyric. Dropbearemma (she/her) 00:03, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
          • After looking into this more, I think most of these instances are non-playable characters in video games, and this includes Comet. I replied with a question on the talk page for List of computer-controlled... Will you please read this and tell me what you think? When I finish what I'm doing now on my database, I'll get back to a list of clones that share a nickname. Something to think about are the few clones who have more than one nickname or call sign, e.g. Oddball, aka Daavijaan, but he is better known as Oddball, which is his name in the movie.. Nate, aka Jangotat, but in this case he chose to change his nickname to the latter, so I'd assume the latter would be used. I'll share more as I find them. Should I continue to post here, or would you like for me to share elsewhere? Red Heathen (talk) 23:49, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
  • I think if any changes are made, then we should put both name and alphanumeric in the title. If you'd like to see the name problem I've encountered while working on my project and how I'm currently trying to deal with it, then let me know. Red Heathen (talk) 21:31, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
    • You've made a fair number of points Red Heathen, but to try and address some of the major ones first, in terms of new pages being created this wouldn't change anything since any clone with an alpha-numeric designation and a nickname should currently have a page for both, generally with the article at the a.n. designation and the nickname serving as a redirect. This means that when people search for the nickname or link to it, it will redirect them to the correct clone page rather then a series of search results or an empty link. We use redirects for all such alternate names and they're an important part of how the searching here works, plus we don't have any limit on memory usage so there's no need to worry about them wasting space or anything like that. It will take some work to switch them over, and it isn't impossible that in future the community will decide to switch them back, but it's true of any decision that opinions might change in future. All we can do is act on our interpretation now, otherwise no changes would get made at all. Ayrehead02 (talk) 22:31, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
      • These were deleted pages, but I think that is what you mean. However, if pages do exist for the nicknames, and if those pages redirect if the clone has an alphanumeric -- as opposed to say if a clone doesn't have an alphanumeric then the page would not redirect --- then why is there going to be any change? Or are yall just talking about in the case that a clone has both a.n. and nickname, to have the a.n. redirect to the nickname (thus populating the nickname page that is currently a redirect) -- thus leaving all the a.n. titled pages as they are? If so, then I think I was making a bigger deal out of this than was needed via misunderstanding. As to no changes - my point was unnecessary change. However, I do understand, acknowledge, and agree the fact that interpretation changes over time. I've been spending so much changing Wook's archived links to current links to Wook's URL's for all clones, though. Sometimes, of the links that were updated in the past from nickname to a.n., the redirect page didn't redirect. It just says the page was deleted and moved. The new link is usually given (one instance it was not), but now I'm kicking myself for removing all the archived links. I never expected this because it just seems unnecessary, however, again, I do understand. Thanks for your reply. Red Heathen (talk) 22:53, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
        • Under the current system, if a clone only has a nickname, their article will be at the nickname with a template noting it's a nickname. If they only have an a.n. designation, the article will be at that with no redirect. If a clone has both, then the article will be at the a.n. and the nickname will be a redirect. What's being proposed is that for clones that have both a nickname and an a.n. designation, the article would now be at the nickname, since that's how they've chosen to be identified rather then something assigned, and the a.n. designation would be the redirect. So we'd basically just be shifting the content of the article from one page to the other so that the article's title is changed. Not sure what you mean about deleted pages, but if you're saying that there's redirects that point to pages that have since been deleted, then those redirects should have been deleted as well, so just let an admin know when you find them or tag them for deletion with Template:Delete. When you say you've been removing archived links do you mean from your own database? Ayrehead02 (talk) 23:24, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
          • Yes! LOL No worries for you. I might not be the sharpest nor the brightest, but if I don't know or understand something on here, then I don't touch it. I ask questions, such as I am doing here. Wook is safe from me. Unfortunately, I discarded those links, though, so I cannot share them with yall. I appreciate your patience and helpfulness. Red Heathen (talk) 23:40, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
• Before making any changes, reference sources have to be double checked to see if they confirm that their names are nicknames or chosen identifying names. For example, Star Wars: The Clone Wars: Character Encyclopedia - Join the Battle! explicitly says for CC-1993 the following: "CC-1993, nicknamed Jet, serves under Jedi General…." It also says "CT-782 is a member of Domino Squad and is given his nickname Hevy by Clone 99." When sources explicitly say nickname, I'd say it would be best to keep them at their CC/CT designations, as by definition of it being a nickname, it's "a familiar or humorous name given to a person or thing instead of or as well as the real name." I would agree with other cases, like Fives for example, that moving it to their non-CC/CT name is more appropriate. --Vitus Infinitus^Talk 02:28, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
  • I don't think the fact that they are often called nicknames should change it. OOM put it well that the names and numbers aren't the same thing. And with the change, this isn't talking about removing the nickname template at the top of the page (I could see another discussion opening up for that, but that isn't this discussion). Editoronthewiki (talk) 01:07, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
    • After a lot of back and forth between myself… let's change the names. They're identified as clone numbers while they say their "nicknames" when asked what their name is. I'm convinced to support this. --Vitus Infinitus^Talk 03:41, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
• Just want to chime in support to move Canon Clones. Too unfamiliar with Legends to form an opinion, will review the evidence on it if it comes to a CT. NBDani (they/them)^{Yeager's Repairs} 13:02, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
• So for the current canon personal take is that we should default to the preferred names with the exception of possible outliers such as Ponds, since most clones we see have a strong preference for their names and elements of dialogue such as Fives' affirmation of Fives as his real name seems to be written with the intention of applying to most, if not all, Clones. Not to mention when you have a character like Sister whose name is meant to affirm her gender identity this policy may get a little contentious if we ever learn her CT number. With Legends you could apply the same sentiment to clones introduced 2008 onwards, since TCW is what introduced the characterisation of Clones as more human and individual, but there is an argument that clones introduced before 2008, such as Fordo and Alpha, could remain with the designations as their page names since the clones were humanised a lot less in those production years, particularly non-ARC and RC clones. However, I realise the latter idea is more Doylist in its thinking and Wookieepedia is very much a Watsonian website.JM1998 (she/her) (talk)
  • One clarification, while I think we should use the preferred names instead of the CT number, I think the CT number could be a good disambiguation tool if two clones have the same name. So for example if CC-1010 and CT-0000/1010 both got moved to "Fox" then I think "Fox (CC-1010)" and "Fox (CT-0000/2010)" could potentially be a better way of distinguishing the pages as opposed to "Fox (Clone Commander)" and "Fox (Clone Sergeant)".JM1998 (she/her) (talk)
  • I'm afraid we can't rely on the out of universe release information for this. It would be those pre-2008 clones move to nicknames because TCW changed so much of how we view the clones, unless we have proof those clones preferred their numbers Editoronthewiki (talk) 02:43, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Compiled evidence

Overview

The following is a section open to user to add evidence for or against moving clone trooper pages to their chosen names as part of collecting information on this topic. A source using the term "nickname" to describe a clone name is not evidence for or against. As seen in sources like "Tales of Villainy: Trade Relations" and "Worthless," clones have used the term "nickname" to describe their names, but that also does not discredit what, for example, Fives says about clone names in "Conspiracy" or what Echo says in "Cut and Run." Any discussion on if the clones using the term nickname is evidence against the move should be held above Editoronthewiki (talk) 01:23, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

• just so its clear, its open to any user, typo by just writing "open to user" heh Editoronthewiki (talk) 14:54, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Canon

Evidence for move

1. When meeting Cut Lawquane in the The Clone Wars: Season Two episode "The Deserter" and after asking Cut for his "number and rank" upon learning of Cut's desertion, Rex informs Cut "I also have a name, believe it or not" when Cut asks for his own number.^[2] Editoronthewiki (talk) 01:23, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
2. During dinner in "The Deserter," Rex tries to say that clones may have numbers because its more efficient, which Cut notes to be unlikely for the Kaminoans. Cut also deduces that Rex's name makes him feel unique.^[2] Editoronthewiki (talk) 01:23, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
3. Fives declares "I am not just another number, none of us are!" in The Clone Wars: Season Four episode "Plan of Dissent."^[3] Editoronthewiki (talk) 01:23, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
4. Fives dialogue to AZ-3 in the The Clone Wars: Season Six episode "Conspiracy," written out at top of this thread.^[1] Editoronthewiki (talk) 01:23, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
5. Echo states "Its ironic, clones wanted names instead of numbers, yet now people are signing up to be given numbers." in the The Bad Batch Season 1 episode "Cut and Run."^[4] Editoronthewiki (talk) 01:23, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
6. Mayday states "The name's Mayday" and is told "Crosshair" in response rather than "CT-9904" in The Bad Batch Season 2 episode "The Outpost." (Later, he doesn't answer for Reasons when asked "Hello, CT-9904. Or do you prefer Crosshair?")^[5] Immi Thrax (she/her) 05:24, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
7. In the The Clone Wars: Season Three episode "Clone Cadets", Cutup refers to Fives by his alphanumerical designation only for the latter to retort by insisting that his name is Fives.^[6]DarthVorath (talk) 00:52, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
8. In the The Clone Wars: Season Three episode "Clone Cadets," CT-782 "Hevy" refers to himself and his fellow clones as "just numbers" as a way to devalue himself until his talk with Clone 99, who notes "to me, you've always had a name." Inspired, Hevy then notes "one more thing, the name's Hevy!" upon being refered to as his number Editoronthewiki (talk) 01:03, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
9. "Clone troopers like Cody use names in addition to numerical designations. Encouraged by the Jedi and progressive-thinking Republic officials, many clones seek to establish their own monikers to show initiative and foster fellowship." (Star Wars: Character Encyclopedia, Updated and Expanded Edition) ThrawnChiss7 ^{Assembly Cupola} 01:45, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Evidence against move

Evidence that could go either way

1. Oh boy, here's the controversial one. I'm just going to list it out, any debate over can be handled on Ponds' talk page if any policy goes through. In The Clone Wars Season Two episode "Lethal Trackdown", CT-411 "Ponds" is demanded his name at gunpoint by Aurra Sing for a video to be sent to Mace Windu. Ponds is silent until asked again and kicked, to which he answers with his number. This can be seen as Ponds valuing his number over his name. However, he does so audibly annoyed, and Sing declares him using his number "Pathetic." Anakin also remarks "that was Ponds" sadly after watching the footage. This whole example is a land mine of different interpretations so I just want it down, and it can be left here Editoronthewiki (talk) 17:46, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Legends

Evidence for move

1. Any The Clone Wars examples above —Unsigned comment by Editoronthewiki (talk • contribs)
2. Amid battle in Republic Commando: True Colors, Jedi Etain Tur-Mukan thinks about an injured clone she sees, realizing that she does not know his name. She is upset by this, feeling that she is "denying him" by not knowing the trooper's name. As the text reads, "she always tried hard to learn their names—they always had names among themselves, not just the numbers their Kaminoan masters gave them." Upon hearing another clone cry out "Is Ven okay", the text reads "He did have a name. She knew it now". —Unsigned comment by Editoronthewiki (talk • contribs)^[7]
3. In True Colors, while confronting the Kaminoan Ko Sai when she calls him "clone," ARC trooper Mereel declares "I'm not your clone. I have a name" Editoronthewiki (talk) 20:40, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
4. In Republic Commando: Triple Zero, Kal Skirata meets the young Null Eleven on Kamino and remarks "I really think you should [have a name]," offering him the name Ordo. Ordo remarks "I like that name." On the next page, Ordo and his Null brothers are noted to be "now trying to get used to being Ordo, A'den, Kom'rk, Prudii, Mereel, and Jaing" instead of just being numbers.^[8]
5. In Triple Zero, Etain Tur-Mukan meets a clone trooper after the Skirmish at Dinlo and asks him for his "name, and not your number, okay?" The trooper is Nye. Editoronthewiki (talk) 13:28, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
6. In Republic 62, Anakin Skywalker asks ARC trooper Alpha-17, who is set to train a new generation of Clone Commanders, if he can "assign them names?" Anakin states "In the middle of battle, "1456724" doesn't always come right to mind." Alpha responds "I'll consider it."Editoronthewiki (talk) 04:43, 12 May 2023 (UTC)^[9]
7. In Obsession 4, prior to the Battle of Boz Pity, Alpha-17 introduces "Odd Ball", causing Anakin to remark "you're naming your squad members?" Alpha responds "you started it, kid."Editoronthewiki (talk) 04:43, 12 May 2023 (UTC)^[10]
8. In Star Wars: The Clone Wars novelization, Rex declares "Rex, Captain, Five-oh-first Legion, number CC-seven-five-six-seven" as the only answer he has to give as a prisoner of war. The number is after the name. Editoronthewiki (talk) 02:37, 11 August 2023 (UTC) ^[11]

Evidence against move

1. Any The Clone Wars examples above —Unsigned comment by Editoronthewiki (talk • contribs)
2. Ditto my reasons given in Canon Evidence against move and as I discussed in Discussion. Red Heathen (talk) 21:49, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Evidence that could go either way

1. Any The Clone Wars examples above Editoronthewiki (talk) 17:46, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Notes and references