Forum:TC:Folklorist

Forums > Trash compactor archive > TC:Folklorist

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. Imperators II(Talk) 08:13, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Folklorist (talk - history - links - logs - delete - protect)

It's in the dictionary. It has the same meaning in Star Wars. The Star Wars folklorist has no special qualities distinguishing it from its real-world one. Wookieepedia is not a dictionary. Asithol (talk) 16:18, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Delete

  1. Asithol (talk) 16:18, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
  2. Samonic Signatureicon (Talk) 16:24, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
  3. JediMasterMacaroni(Talk) 16:28, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
  4. Imperators II(Talk) 16:34, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
    OOM 224 16:54, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
  5. RogueWhistler (talk) 18:10, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
  6. Unlike water or politics, there is nothing that makes this notable within the Star Wars universe, its just the same as the real-world definition. Rsand 30 (talk) 19:10, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
  7. DarthRuiz30 (talk) 22:32, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
  8. Wok142 (talk) 04:09, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
  9. SilverSunbird (talk) 04:26, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
  10. Lewisr (talk) 13:21, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Keep

  1. Honestly I think there's an argument to be made that having a page for this specific occupation is helpful to our readers, say someone's on a page that mentions a folklorist and they're curious as to what that is-it's better to link them somewhere than having a small bit of contextualisation. This feels like just being deletionist for the sake of being deletionist; we have tons of articles on real-world subjects like water or politics where we just give the very basic dictionary defenition and then explain their relevance in Star Wars. Fan26 (Talk) 16:27, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
    • It's not "for the sake of being deletionist"; it's because the term is a crystal-clear violation of the linked policy. We can link to the Wikipedia or Wiktionary article if we think the term is obscure enough to be confusing, but honestly, anyone using the internet in 2022 who encounters a word they don't know knows how to look it up. We can't hold users' hands for every potential gap in their vocabulary. And even were this some obscure term, the term "folklore" and the suffix "-ist" are not, so its meaning is easily deducible from basic knowledge of English. Asithol (talk) 16:49, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
  2. I agree with Fan here, it's a pretty obscure occupation VergenceScatter (talk) 17:24, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
  3. There may be more to say, making this vote premature; the article was just created hours ago. Immi Thrax RainbowRebellion2 (she/her) (talk) 17:31, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
  4. Per Immi. This was just created, and there is much folklore within the GFFA that isn't real-world. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 16:17, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
    • This vote will be open for at least a week, plenty of time for anyone to add Star Wars–specific content to the article should any such exist. And absolutely, plenty of folklore is IU-exclusive—but the lore itself is not what's up for deletion here. Asithol (talk) 23:11, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
  5. There are tons of other occupation articles with real-world counterparts, so it's arbitrary to single this one out. Even so, I argue that all occupations are inherently notable, real-world counterpart or no. SorcererSupreme21 (talk) 16:35, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
    • I agree, this term should not be treated specially; any occupation that doesn't differ from its real-world counterpart should be TCed as well. This was the one that came up on my radar yesterday. Anyway, "all occupations are inherently notable" is at odds with our dictionary policy, which gives pretty specific criteria for when to retain a real-world term here, so that really should be a larger discussion beyond this TC if we want to change it. Asithol (talk) 23:11, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Softredirect to Wikipedia:Folklore_studies

  1. We have precedent to do this, Wikipedia "Folklorist" redirects to Wikipedia:Folklore studies. As an obscure, but real, occupation I think it is prudent to do this rather than keep or delete. Manoof (he/him/his) (talk) 12:50, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
  2. OOM 224 16:13, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
  3. I agree with Asithol, but I prefer Manoof solution. I feel like the vote is going nowhere because of the initial soft bias ("waiting for more information" and the absence of this vote option from the start), and we're going to be stuck without consensus because most of the time, we "vote and forget" on TC, but I want to support this nonetheless, even if just as a posture while waiting for the initial vote to conclude and a second TC to be attempted later. NanoLuukeCloning Facility 11:32, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Comments

  • I created Aileron Roll as a soft redirect because I thought it was a unique IU star wars term, until someone mentioned it is a real thing. I think we should take similar actions for otherwise dictionary articles. Manoof (he/him/his) (talk) 13:01, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Is "folklorist" about a specific occupation or more as a general descriptor? SorcererSupreme21 (talk) 16:42, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
  • I've no objection to the page being made a soft redirect, but what value does this offer over simply using direct Wikipedia links on the 2-3 pages that refer to folklorists, the usual method to point to Wikipedia pages that come up only rarely here? Asithol (talk) 22:42, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Since you are on a "dictionary" purge. Then Breast, Limb, Eye, Swordmaster, Death and the list goes on, and on, and on, and on ad nauseam. We keep breast because some species have 3 or more breasts. We keep eye because because some species have more than the standard real-world amount. We keep swordmaster because they are masters with "swords" unique to the GFFA. How is Folklorist any different? They study the lore of cultures and species that are not real world. That makes them unique to the GFFA regardless if they are virtually identical to their real-world couterparts. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 04:27, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
    • I think the other examples (breast, eye, etc) have far more unique attributes than folklorist - you yourself said that its only SW-exclusive characteristic is the fact that their job applies to non-real-world species and cultures: in other words, being in the GFFA. It would actually make more sense to have a page for them if they only studied humans, in my opinion. You could also say that shirts are notable because non-real-world species wear them by your logic. I don't see how that is in line with the policy of WP:DICT. JediMasterMacaroni(Talk) 04:33, 30 September 2022 (UTC)