Forum:TC:Category:Chalmun's Cantina patrons (second nomination)

Forums > Trash compactor archive > TC:Category:Chalmun's Cantina patrons (second nomination)

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 rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete. Toprawa and Ralltiir 05:57, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Category:Chalmun's Cantina patrons ([[Talk:Category:Chalmun's_Cantina_patrons|talk]] - history - links - logs)

Second nomination; the first one ended in no consensus a year ago. It hasn't ceased to be any less of a ridiculously unencylopedic joke of a category. It's a triviality, and if you want trivia, go to the Federal Bureau of Miscellaneous Information. Does Wikipedia have Category:People who have been to Applebee's? Do we want a precedent for Category:People who have been to the Headquarters? Should we have Category:People who have ever been to Coruscant? Category:People who have fought Boba Fett? It's the same sort of unencylopedic, overbroad, pointless categorization of trivia. As interesting as the subject might seem to you, it's not a category topic.

Last time, people suggested it was good for telling you who's in the cantina scene. Well, a lot more people have been to Chalmun's than have ever been in the cantina scene. There was no consensus to maybe use a list instead, or have it on ANH's page. Well, let this just be a straight up-or-down delete or keep vote. If you think this is truly worthy of being a category, vote to keep it. If you don't, vote to delete it, and you're free to create a list or a new section on another page as you wish. But let's not clutter up what should be a straightforward vote with the kind of maybe-if-something-else nonsense that gets us no consensus and doesn't benefit anyone. Havac 17:53, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Delete

  1. Havac 17:53, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
  2. Grand Moff Tranner Imperial Department of Military Research (Comlink) 17:56, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
  3. Yes, delete this category along with Category:Images of Chalmun's Cantina patrons, but keep and cleanup the lists in the actual article. Mauser 18:35, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
  4. Yes. This is really nothing more than a "List of characters seen in the Mos Eisley Cantina in Episode IV." Certainly all of this information could probably be worked into the actual cantina article, but a category is very unnecessary. Toprawa and Ralltiir 19:31, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
  5. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 19:32, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
  6. Last time around I voted to keep. I guess my overall opinion is that the information should be here, because some Star Wars fan will probably at some point look for all the cantina patrons who were present during Episode IV. And my opinion hasn't changed, it's just that since the information is available in the article, I've now come around to the idea that the category isn't necessary. Wildyoda 19:38, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
  7. Cylka-talk- 23:19, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
  8. Grunny (Talk) 23:44, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
  9. Delete category. Don't create a list page. Add anything relevant to the cantina article. This is trivial at best. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 00:33, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
  10. IFYLOFD (Come with me if you want to live.) 23:23, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
  11. Per Culator. Master JonathanJedi Council Chambers 02:52, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
  12. List in the article, if cleaned up, should be more than sufficient. Needs some serious sourcing, though. jSarek 07:48, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Keep

Commentary

  • While I appreciate your not wanting the consensus-ruining third middly option, I don't think it's quite as straightforward as that. I would like to keep the category but to use it for actual patrons of Chalmun's Cantina, not just anyone who's ever been there, much less the ANH scene cast. I don't want to vote keep on that rationale if I'm supporting the silly option. So, would this be a matter of "if it's kept that can be sorted out separately," or what? -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 18:00, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
    • But the thing is, how do you define a "patron"? Someone who's there every day? Someone who's there frequently? Someone who's there more than once? You can't make it objective, and you can't really get it down to an encyclopedic form. It's like the whole long-lived species thing -- who decides what constitutes "long-lived"? No one really can, so we don't try to quantify it. We can't really quantify what a "patron" is, so we're best off leaving it alone. Havac 19:27, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
      • Well, one way to do it would be to go with who is called a patron in canon, but that wouldn't be particularly useful. Point ceded. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 19:32, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
        • What if the category was limited to images of cantina patrons while they are in the cantina, and possibly appropriately re-named? I feel like that would leave it existing usefully, but the entire Category:Images of Obi-Wan Kenobi would not be in here. Wildyoda 19:36, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Hmmm, am I the only one who thinks that articles like Unidentified Jawas entering as Han leaves, Unidentified Man standing by left wall and Unidentified Man with "Top Knot Nimbanel" should not be allowed to exist as they don't even have images to justify their existence? Mauser 18:35, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
    • I sort of agree as long as you mean dignifying them with at least an attempt to find an image for each of them first. Their existence as articles is based on the face that they are unidentified characters who are visually identifiable in some way, and screenshots aren't hard to add if someone bothers. Wildyoda 19:36, 15 March 2009 (UTC)