Forum:SH:Updating Canon Planetnamia

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. —spookywillowwtalk 12:47, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
Forums > Senate Hall archive > SH:Updating Canon Planetnamia

Hey all. Back when the Star Wars Galaxy Map was published, we updated the {{Planetnamia}} citation template to account for that principle being carried over to that Canon galactic map. By now, however, we have had two new Canon maps made by Jason Fry, the original co-author of The Essential Atlas as well as a co-author of Star Wars: Timelines with which the Star Wars Galaxy Map was associated. Namely, those two maps are included in Star Wars: Complete Locations, New Edition and Star Wars: The Acolyte: The Visual Guide.

The former map doesn't appear to have any new celestial bodies introduced in it to which the Planetnamia principle (as summarized on the abovelinked CT thread) would be applied, but The Acolyte: The Visual Guide map certainly does. So I'm thinking we should update Template:Planetnamia's line

"Jason Fry, co-author of The Essential Atlas and Star Wars Galaxy Map, stated his intention to [...]"

as well as the accompanying Canon policy clause:

"[...] as presented in {{Planetnamia}}, which is assumed to also apply to the Star Wars Galaxy Map."

But what would be the best approach to doing so?

  1. Simply add in the newest book? "co-author of The Essential Atlas, Star Wars Galaxy Map, and Star Wars: The Acolyte: The Visual Guide" and "which is assumed to also apply to the Star Wars Galaxy Map and Star Wars: The Acolyte: The Visual Guide"
  2. Try and make it more evergreen that wouldn't need updating every time a new map comes out? Something like "co-author of The Essential Atlas and a number of maps in the current Star Wars canon", with Template:Planetnamia perhaps listing them all? And something to the effect of "which is assumed to also apply to sources of the current Star Wars canon to which Fry has contributed"?
  3. Or perhaps any better suggestions? Imperators II(Talk) 15:03, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

EDIT: noting that this has been taken to the Consensus Track for voting now. Imperators II(Talk) 14:25, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

Discuss

  • I'd go with evergreen so that it can just apply to all maps Fry works on in future since there seems to be a consistent logic and design to them all. Ayrehead02 (talk) 15:09, 9 June 2025 (UTC)
  • I'm with Ayre. When I heard we needed to update this Policy after the Acolyte VG, and with the precedent being set with the VG and New Locations I figured our next move would be to update policy to treat all future Fry material like so. NBDani TeamFireballLogo-Collider(they/them)Yeager's Repairs 16:16, 9 June 2025 (UTC)
  • Yeah per the above, futureproofing and also just making it less clunky seems eminently sensible to me. Tommy-Macaroni (he/they) 16:41, 9 June 2025 (UTC)
  • Per everyone above. Bonzane10 Bonzane10-Sig 16:48, 9 June 2025 (UTC)