Forum:TC:Another round of lightsabers

Forums > Trash compactor archive > TC:Another round of lightsabers

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or, if the page was deleted, in the Senate Hall rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was Delete. 1358 (Talk) 14:50, March 27, 2013 (UTC)

More individual lightsabers

I can't see anything remotely notabled about any of these. If you can dig up anything notable about one of these, note it in the Comments and I'll remove it from the list. —MJ— Council Chambers 06:18, March 10, 2013 (UTC)

Delete all

  1. As nominator. —MJ— Council Chambers 06:18, March 10, 2013 (UTC)
  2. Seriously, the only lightsabers that should be notable are Exar Kun's and those that are heirlooms, artifacts, or something. Why is this such a controversial issue?—Jedi Kasra ("Indeed.") 07:20, March 10, 2013 (UTC)
  3. [Redacted by administration] -- Darth Culator (Talk) 07:44, March 10, 2013 (UTC)
  4. We should just make it policy to ask before creating new lightsaber articles instead of deleting them afterwards tbh. 1358 (Talk) 08:38, March 10, 2013 (UTC)
  5. Ugh, they're full of speculation. Corellian PremierJedi symbolThe Force will be with you always 14:10, March 10, 2013 (UTC)
  6. Cade Calrayn GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit 14:11, March 10, 2013 (UTC)
  7. 501st dogma(talk) 15:57, March 10, 2013 (UTC)
  8. CC7567 (talk) 19:16, March 11, 2013 (UTC)
  9. Delete ALL the lightsabers.—Cal JediInfinite Empire (Personal Comm Channel) 15:14, March 12, 2013 (UTC)
  10. Please, for the love of god. Also, per Ecks. — DigiFluid(Whine here) 15:17, March 12, 2013 (UTC)
  11. Winterz (talk) 23:55, March 26, 2013 (UTC)

Keep all

Discussion

Note that the voting options above are explictly "delete all" and "keep all". If you want to propose a mixture of keep and delete, please discuss it here first to avoid confusion. Thank you. —MJ— Council Chambers 06:18, March 10, 2013 (UTC)

  • The one I would consider keeping is An'ya Kuro's lightsaber because it is a very unique design, unlike any other. It isn't a "cookie cutter" design like many others. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 06:26, March 10, 2013 (UTC)
    • An'ya's lightsaber has been removed from the list. I've also added another one created by the same anon, K'Kruhk's first lightsaber. —MJ— War Room 06:41, March 10, 2013 (UTC)
  • I'd consider keeping K'Kruhk's first lightsaber. It has an unique model and was at least slightly notable because Grievous stole it and used it.78.97.91.207 08:39, March 10, 2013 (UTC)
    • Wait, wasn't K'Kruhk's lightsaber the one that was designed by a fan and that included in canon? That could be notable enough. Commander Code-8 G'day, mate 10:38, March 10, 2013 (UTC)
      • Yes, it was a fan design originally featured on the now defunct website thelightsaber.com.[1] --LelalMekha (talk) 10:46, March 10, 2013 (UTC)
        • But is it the same lightsaber? The lightsaber pictured on that website looks nothing like the one depicted in the article, and it's clear from the title of the article that he went through multiple lightsabers. This is clearly not this, and this is clearly the former, whereas the latter is the one pictured in the TCed article. It might be that the TCed article should properly be titled as his second lightsaber. —MJ— War Room 23:31, March 10, 2013 (UTC)
          • Still, it has a somewhat unique look and it was stolen and used by Grievous, so it's at least slightly notable unlike...Naeshahn's lightsaber. 78.97.91.207 19:14, March 11, 2013 (UTC)
    • It seems that you're right indeed. --LelalMekha (talk) 23:33, March 10, 2013 (UTC)

I would keep An'ya Kuro, K'Kruhk and A'Sharad Hett's lightsabers because they have enough information about them to be included alongside all the pther personal lightsabers. I strongly suggest the Hett saber article be kept though. 121.219.190.89 00:24, March 16, 2013 (UTC)