Forum:TC:Daniel Fleetwood

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 No consensus. Anıl Şerifoğlu (talk) 19:43, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Daniel Fleetwood (talk - history - links - logs - delete - protect)

I first submitted the idea of removing this page a few months ago on Discord, because I felt it didn't fit the mission of the encyclopedia, as this individual has no relation to the universe and it's inception, and is not credited/mentioned in an official capacity, as far as I know. However, Cavalier One came up with a more elegant solution: merging the article with either The Force Awaklens or the Sequel Trilogy articles. Agreeing with him, I now would like to propose this article to be merged with the movie article. NanoLuuke^{Cloning Facility} 12:52, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Merge and redirect to Star Wars: Episode VII The Force Awakens

1. NanoLuuke^{Cloning Facility} 12:52, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
2. Fan26 (Talk) 15:41, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
3. JediMasterMacaroni^(Talk) 16:01, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
4. We shouldn't be enforcing policies selectively, no matter the reason. 01miki10 ^{Open comlink} 18:04, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
5. There's absolutely no reason respect can't be fully shown by including a section on the article for the film. I'd absolutely push back against removing coverage of Daniel from the wiki entirely. That being said, if we want to have an article that currently doesn't meet notability requirements, then we change the requirements first, not the other way around. Master Fredcerique(talk) (he/him) 23:11, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
6. There is 0 mention of Daniel on SW.com. If someone finds a mention in SWI of him I'll be willing to change my vote. NBDani (they/them)^{Yeager's Repairs} 00:03, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
7. Totally agree with Master Fredcerique. Asithol (talk) 10:27, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Keep

1. I still very much disagree with the notion of doing away with this page. While from a practicality standpoint I kind of get it, from a respect standpoint it would feel incredibly tone deaf and disrespectful for us to remove the article and would reflect poorly on all of us. Notability may be in question but there is no reason an exception cannot be made here. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 16:22, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

   I would agree were this not being merged into the relevant movie articles. I felt comfortable not voting keep because the information will still be on the wiki. Notability policy still applies. Fan26 (Talk) 16:33, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

2. Bonzane10 (holonet) 16:34, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
3. Nah, it looks good from the readers' perspective for us as a wiki to offer a dedicated article here. OOM 224 (he/him) 17:29, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
4. Panther436 (talk) 21:54, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
5. While not officially part of anything, this is someone who captured the hearts of the entire Star Wars fandom. It costs us nothing to have this article, as a small token of respect to a fan who lost their fight. Cast members, up to and including Mark Hamill himself, pushed to get him an advance screening of The Force Awakens, just prior to his death. That means something, and is absolutely worth documenting here. Out of respect to him, his family, and the entire community that fought for him, this article should stay. Supreme Emperor ^Holocomm 22:22, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
6. Jarhead002 (talk) (he/him) 22:24, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
7. Only because it got notable in the US after being picked up by major news networks. In general though, we should remain just as strict regarding fan articles though, lest every other fan getting a page (which would go both out of scope and super crazy very quickly).—spookywilloww^talk 22:31, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

   Specifically; sympathies aside, should any articles marginally less notable than this one (that don't have the same level of coverage from media and cast members) should be made only if the Notability policy gets updated, because it's a really slippery slope to circumvent policy without changing it properly first.—spookywilloww^talk 22:40, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

8. Per Spooky entirely Lewisr (talk) 22:57, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
9. Imho, Lucasfilm's early screening for Fleetwood counts as the "official recognition" mentioned in the notability policy even though it wasn't reported on StarWars.com, etc. Anıl Şerifoğlu (talk) 23:58, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
10. Per SE and Spooky. I get the policy. I do. But this is so close to being notable because of the widespread support it garnered across the entirely of Star Wars fandom, including that of non other than Mark Hamill, it should remain. - JMAS ^{Hey, it's me!} 00:00, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
11. Rakhsh (talk) 00:12, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
12. Per JMAS. ThrawnChiss7 ^{Assembly Cupola} 02:32, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Comments

• Some are denying the notability because there is no mention of him on StarWars.com. But here is a portion of a long list of major news and media outlets who covered his story: The Today Show, Entertainment Weekly, ABC News, CBS News, NBC News, USA Today, Time Magazine, Newsmax, People, NY Times, MTV and the BBC. And other than BBC, that's just the USA. This has also been covered by the media in Australia and elsewhere around the world. Heck, even Al Jazeera covered it. That. Is. Notable. - JMAS ^{Hey, it's me!} 02:25, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
  • This comment seems to be confusing real-world notability with Wookieepedia notability. No one is arguing against the former. Asithol (talk) 10:32, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
    • Per Wookieepedia:Notability of fan projects, "Fan-related subjects that receive extensive and, most importantly, mainstream media recognition may be suitable for an article on Wookieepedia. Note that this is the most difficult form of recognition to substantiate. Media coverage must be both substantial (in number and size) and from a major mainstream outlet that is not specifically devoted to Star Wars news, including but not limited to news media, entertainment trades, or entertainment websites. Any single mention or a few mentions from a mainstream media outlet(s) does not automatically qualify." Given how widespread of mainstream attention this got, I absolutely believe this would apply under this clause. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 18:12, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
      • The intent of this change to the notability policy was in regards to fan projects and organizations. I'd support a change to this policy to specify individual fans, as well, just for clarity. Master Fredcerique(talk) (he/him) 18:33, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
        • While that may be the intent of the change to begin with, it does not specify that it does not apply to fans themselves. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 19:32, 1 February 2024 (UTC)