Forum:TC:Jedi lightsaber

Forums > Trash compactor archive > TC:Jedi lightsaber

This page is an archive of the Trash compactor discussion about the future of Wookieepedia's coverage of the topic(s) listed below, including whether or not to delete or redirect the relevant page(s). This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the relevant talk pages or in the Senate Hall forum rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was Keep redirect. —spookywillowwtalk 03:42, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Jedi lightsaber (talk - history - links - logs - delete - protect)

Hey guys! So two months ago, I was looking at the Star Wars: The Lightsaber Collection page and noticed a redlink for Jedi lightsabers. Naturally, I decided to create the redlinked page. But Cade redirected it to the main Lightsaber article saying that it's all about Jedi lightsabers. Even though there is a page for Sith lightsabers and the book has a section about them. So I want to hear from you, do we keep the redirect or remove it? Elijah Palmer (talk) 03:32, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

Remove redirect

Elijah Palmer (talk) 03:32, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

Keep redirect to Lightsaber

  1. The lightsaber is inherently a Jedi weapon. The two concepts are the same. Some lightsabers are wielded by non-Jedi, yes, but as the Sith lightsaber describes, there's fundamental differences between Sith lightsabers and normal lightsabers. This would be like making articles for the same blaster model per faction. Cade GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 03:54, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. SaintSirNicholas (talk) 03:58, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. I kind of think Sith lightsaber should also be redirected CometSmudge (talk) 04:13, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Rsand 30 (talk) 04:30, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
  5. Fan26 (Talk) 04:42, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
  6. Per my comment on the SH. Bonzane10 Bonzane10-Sig 04:46, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
  7. Yasen Nestorov (talk) 05:12, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
  8. Per Cade. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 05:13, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
  9. Wok142 (talk) 05:59, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
  10. The way this vote is set up it suggests that we remove a perfectly valid search term as a redirect, which makes zero sense to me. Imperators II(Talk) 08:56, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
  11. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 09:09, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
  12. Cade says it well OOM 224 11:32, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
  13. —spookywillowwtalk 13:50, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
  14. Elijah Palmer (talk) 13:55, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
  15. Hk 47 (talk) 09:25, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
  16. Xd1358 (Talk) 11:20, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

Comments

  • Addressing the idea of redirecting Sith lightsaber, I kind of agree that page should also be redirected. A Sith lightsaber doesn't really have any unique differences from a "normal" or "Jedi" one - although the Sith's relationship with the Force, kyber, etc. is all very different, the actual lightsabers aren't like their own category of different. Everyone has their own uniqueness with their own personal weapon, but I don't feel like a Sith lightsaber is its own class that needs its own page. Wok142 (talk) 06:03, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
    • Not necessarily disagreeing, but that would require separate TCs for both the Canon and Legends pages (separate from this TC). Cade GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 06:07, 13 February 2025 (UTC)