Forums > Senate Hall archive > SH:Template Indirect Appearance
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. —MJ— Jedi Council Chambers 19:06, November 26, 2012 (UTC)
Just heard from MJ that the idea for a Indirect Appearance template has been tossed around a few times before and rejected each time. Since I have created it a while back, he suggested that I ask the community if we should keep it and put it to use. So I shall leave it's fate to the members of the community. DarthRevan1173 
(Long live Lord Revan) 02:31, October 12, 2012 (UTC)
- {{Indirect appearance}}, eh? Looks good. It makes sense to have a template for it. Menkooroo (talk) 03:42, October 12, 2012 (UTC)
- I don't think we need a template. This is not like {{Mo}} or {{Flash}}, where the context of use is cut and dry. There are times when this kind of notation is needed, but they will be so few and far between that a template is unnecessary. The existence of a template would say "this is a normal circumstance" when it isn't, it's an exception. If the template is there, people on the fence about whether or not it's indirect—mostly newer users—will find confirmation in the existence of a template for marking that, which they will just use instead of asking other Wookieepedians "do we have indirect appearances and how have those cases been treated?" This will lead to its use in articles where it probably shouldn't be. In any case where Indirect appearance has been marked,—I can think of Sossen-7 sublight engine off the top of my head—we've talked about it first. NaruHina Talk
03:54, October 12, 2012 (UTC)
- Also, if we do keep it, the Template name needs to be shortened. We may as well still type out {{C|Indirect appearance only}}. NaruHina Talk 03:58, October 12, 2012 (UTC)
- I'm a bit confused with what the Indrect appearance template is needed for but for a shorter name I suggest "Ind" or "Indap" Commander Code-8 To say hi, press 42 10:09, October 12, 2012 (UTC)
- From what I can gather, I'd say it is supposed to be used for instances that characters appear in media, but aren't named. A background appearance in a comic or television show, for example. I also would guess that it would be reserved for verifiable situations so as not to overlap with "Possible appearance".-I'm the Chosen One Talk10:58, October 12, 2012 (UTC)
- Thus, my point is demonstrated. An indirect appearance is when we know that someone was in a scene in some way, but were not actually shown. Tobb Jadak was onboard the Millennium Falcon when it was in ROTS, for example. People who appeared in the background but were unnamed fully appeared. We shouldn't have a template for this. NaruHina Talk
15:48, October 12, 2012 (UTC)
- If a ship appears, but we don't see the folks inside, those folks did not appear in my opinion, directly or indirectly. I'm not sure what an "indirect appearance" would be, but I think we probably have no need for a template since I don't think "indirect appearances" exist. ~Savage 04:21, October 15, 2012 (UTC)
- I agree with Bob on this, something can be mentioned indirectly, but it either appears or it doesn't.--Exiled Jedi (Greetings) 04:38, October 15, 2012 (UTC)
- I (and others) have used it in the past for personal starfighters but not for larger ships. Like, a shot of Biggs's X-wing during the Battle of Yavin as an indirect appearance of Biggs. Since they're the only one controlling the starfighter and making it do things, it seems fair to count it as an appearance, but indirectly so. Menkooroo (talk) 05:48, October 15, 2012 (UTC)
- Then again, I prefer the use of (Fighter only) in that case. Menkooroo (talk) 05:49, October 15, 2012 (UTC)
- Indeed, indirect appearance could be replaced with more specific per-case clarification like Menkooroo's example, thus eliminating the whole point of having the template. (: – Tm_T@Wookieepedia:~$ 05:50, October 16, 2012 (UTC)
- Then again, I prefer the use of (Fighter only) in that case. Menkooroo (talk) 05:49, October 15, 2012 (UTC)
- I (and others) have used it in the past for personal starfighters but not for larger ships. Like, a shot of Biggs's X-wing during the Battle of Yavin as an indirect appearance of Biggs. Since they're the only one controlling the starfighter and making it do things, it seems fair to count it as an appearance, but indirectly so. Menkooroo (talk) 05:48, October 15, 2012 (UTC)
- I agree with Bob on this, something can be mentioned indirectly, but it either appears or it doesn't.--Exiled Jedi
- If a ship appears, but we don't see the folks inside, those folks did not appear in my opinion, directly or indirectly. I'm not sure what an "indirect appearance" would be, but I think we probably have no need for a template since I don't think "indirect appearances" exist. ~Savage
- Thus, my point is demonstrated. An indirect appearance is when we know that someone was in a scene in some way, but were not actually shown. Tobb Jadak was onboard the Millennium Falcon when it was in ROTS, for example. People who appeared in the background but were unnamed fully appeared. We shouldn't have a template for this. NaruHina Talk
- From what I can gather, I'd say it is supposed to be used for instances that characters appear in media, but aren't named. A background appearance in a comic or television show, for example. I also would guess that it would be reserved for verifiable situations so as not to overlap with "Possible appearance".-I'm the Chosen One Talk10:58, October 12, 2012 (UTC)
- I'm a bit confused with what the Indrect appearance template is needed for but for a shorter name I suggest "Ind" or "Indap" Commander Code-8 To say hi, press 42 10:09, October 12, 2012 (UTC)
- Also, if we do keep it, the Template name needs to be shortened. We may as well still type out {{C|Indirect appearance only}}. NaruHina Talk
- This template is now in the TC here: Forum:TC:Template:Indirect appearance. —MJ— Jedi Council Chambers 18:32, October 24, 2012 (UTC)
