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. JocastaBot (talk) 18:12, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
Forums > Senate Hall archive > SH:Squadon callsigns
Sorry, this is a bit rambly. I have noticed a large amount of inconsistancy in articles regarding callsigns. There are many callsigns that have only one known pilot. Often they are just a single mention such as "X Three, standing by" or some other small line of dialogue. I have found several articles about the callsign (High Flight Twelve, Cyan Two, Hail Leader, Shadow Three) and others about the pilot (Gauntlet One, High Flight Three, Nova Four, Shadow Three/Legends) However, there are some articles about unidentified pilots with callisigns that have multiple members that would be nonnoteable otherwise (Green Leader (Rebel Alliance)) Is this correct inerpretation of policy? callsigns always recieve an article, having a callsign does not make a pilot notable, they need to have a name or nickname or notable dialogue ThrawnChiss7 (talk) 15:28, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
- I would say that for the purposes of determining notability a callsign is equivalent to a nickname. Imperators II(Talk) 15:31, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
- So every pilot with a callsign would need to have an article? This would also mean that if a callsign is mentioned once, there would need to be two articles created, one for the callsign and one for the pilot with the callsign. -ThrawnChiss7 (talk) 15:42, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
- I would say no, unless the pilot by themselves was actually notable. A pilot reporting in as 'Green Nine' or whatever and that was it and is really not notable, and all the relevant information could be added to the Green Nine callsign page. Lewisr (talk) 16:05, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
- I agree with Lewisr's interpretation. Wok142 (talk) 18:08, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
- I think this makes the most sense as well. -ThrawnChiss7 (talk) 18:29, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
- I would say no, unless the pilot by themselves was actually notable. A pilot reporting in as 'Green Nine' or whatever and that was it and is really not notable, and all the relevant information could be added to the Green Nine callsign page. Lewisr (talk) 16:05, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
- So every pilot with a callsign would need to have an article? This would also mean that if a callsign is mentioned once, there would need to be two articles created, one for the callsign and one for the pilot with the callsign. -ThrawnChiss7 (talk) 15:42, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
- As far as I understand it, if we only know of one pilot that utilized the callsign, it goes under that pilot's page (if we know their actual name then as a redirect if nothing else, or at least mentioned). If we know of multiple pilots that utilized it, THEN it receives its own page dedictated to specifically the callsign and its users. DFaceG (talk) 17:22, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
- As a similar example, see Fulcrum. DFaceG (talk) 17:23, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
- I don't agree that if we had one pilot who used the callsign that we would redirect it, and I'm not aware of that practice being followed. You might be thinking of aliases, but a pilot callsign is not the same thing Lewisr (talk) 17:35, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
- I'd agree with Imperators that a callsign should be treated the same as a nickname for an individual, it's an identifier for a specific person which in all other scenarios would lead to us making an article for them. I don't see why we'd treat this any different. Equally, if a call sign is mentioned even once it should have it's own article as a named concept, same as anything else. As such even if an individual is mentioned once by their callsign we should create an article for the individual and the call sign as per our normal precedent. Ayrehead02 (talk) 19:32, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
- I see a callsign as more of a title than a nickname, as we have articles fore callsigns and not nicknames, so just having a title is not notable. -ThrawnChiss7 (talk) 22:20, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
- The purpose of a title is to denote a military or social rank, which callsigns don't do other then maybe the leader ones, their purpose is to act as unique identifiers for an individual within a specific context, the same as nicknames. Ayrehead02 (talk) 23:02, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
- So according to your interpretation the quote "Yellows Three and Four, Ten and Twelve, form up on Yellow Two" (from Tarkin) would require 10 different articles: one for each callsign and one for each pilot, treating the callsign as a nickname? -ThrawnChiss7 (talk) 23:56, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah, I don't see any issue with that. If the line was "Lazla, Veron, Kepiks, Druuv, form up on Tinmpa" we'd make articles for all those characters with pretty much the exact same amount of info and it wouldn't be a problem. Ayrehead02 (talk) 09:51, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
- Having "duplicate" articles is not the current wiki policy, and so implementing this would require a lot of new articles to be created. -ThrawnChiss7 (talk) 18:00, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah, I don't see any issue with that. If the line was "Lazla, Veron, Kepiks, Druuv, form up on Tinmpa" we'd make articles for all those characters with pretty much the exact same amount of info and it wouldn't be a problem. Ayrehead02 (talk) 09:51, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
- But they're not really the same as nicknames, because a nickname is tied to an individual, whereas a callsign is tied to a squadron position. If the pilot with the callsign Red Nine dies in combat, the next person assigned to Red Squadron might well be called Red Nine. But if a dude nicknamed "Slick" dies in combat, no one is going to call his replacement in the squadron "Slick" as well. "Slick" denotes a specific individual; "Red Nine" denotes a military role. Asithol (talk) 03:10, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
- You're right that the concept isn't quite the same, but the callsign is still a unique identifier for that individual, it's just time specific. We have no way of knowing that droid, clone, or stormtrooper designations aren't also reassigned if the user dies, but those are still useful identifiers for those characters, as these are here. Ayrehead02 (talk) 09:51, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
- I dunno, I'm not seeing it. A nickname is something based on the individual: a trait (real or ironic), something they did, etc. A callsign is completely generic. They serve fairly opposite purposes: a nickname humanizes someone, a callsign dehumanizes, reducing them to a squadron affiliation and a number. (Or whatever the species-independent form of the term "humanizes" is: "sentientizes"?) And I feel like "Red Nine" is a concept that exists even if the slot is temporarily unoccupied: the position remains to be filled, akin to a job title, a concept that doesn't even make sense in a nickname context. I also find the "we have no way of knowing" claim a bit overstated: canon(/Legends) provides numerous examples of callsigns being reused for various individuals but none of trooper designations. So we have some way of knowing, even if it's not definitive. Asithol (talk) 01:29, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
- Fair enough, nickname is possibly not the best comparison then, comparison to designation is more apt. But designation is a totally valid name for an article. Your points about humanizing are correct but not relevant, stormtrooper and clone trooper designations are explicitly purposefully dehumanizing but are still valid names. What I'm saying is that at any given moment in the timeline you can say "call up Red Nine" and it will refer to a specific unique individual and is therefore a unique identifier. The same logic applies to if you said "call up the baron administrator of Bespin," which is a unique identifier for one individual at any given time and is something we'd make an "unidentified baron administrator of Bespin" article for if it logically couldn't be one of the baron administrators we already know. Ayrehead02 (talk) 09:43, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
- I dunno, I'm not seeing it. A nickname is something based on the individual: a trait (real or ironic), something they did, etc. A callsign is completely generic. They serve fairly opposite purposes: a nickname humanizes someone, a callsign dehumanizes, reducing them to a squadron affiliation and a number. (Or whatever the species-independent form of the term "humanizes" is: "sentientizes"?) And I feel like "Red Nine" is a concept that exists even if the slot is temporarily unoccupied: the position remains to be filled, akin to a job title, a concept that doesn't even make sense in a nickname context. I also find the "we have no way of knowing" claim a bit overstated: canon(/Legends) provides numerous examples of callsigns being reused for various individuals but none of trooper designations. So we have some way of knowing, even if it's not definitive. Asithol (talk) 01:29, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
- You're right that the concept isn't quite the same, but the callsign is still a unique identifier for that individual, it's just time specific. We have no way of knowing that droid, clone, or stormtrooper designations aren't also reassigned if the user dies, but those are still useful identifiers for those characters, as these are here. Ayrehead02 (talk) 09:51, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
- So according to your interpretation the quote "Yellows Three and Four, Ten and Twelve, form up on Yellow Two" (from Tarkin) would require 10 different articles: one for each callsign and one for each pilot, treating the callsign as a nickname? -ThrawnChiss7 (talk) 23:56, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
- The purpose of a title is to denote a military or social rank, which callsigns don't do other then maybe the leader ones, their purpose is to act as unique identifiers for an individual within a specific context, the same as nicknames. Ayrehead02 (talk) 23:02, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
- I see a callsign as more of a title than a nickname, as we have articles fore callsigns and not nicknames, so just having a title is not notable. -ThrawnChiss7 (talk) 22:20, 11 October 2022 (UTC)