Forum:TC:Journal of the 501st

Forums > Trash compactor archive > TC:Journal of the 501st

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 keep.—Silly Dan (talk) 03:32, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Journal of the 501st (talk - history - links - logs)

Copyright breachy with buttons. It serves no encyclopedic purpose whatsoever, and is presented in a completely nondescript format. Delete. Thefourdotelipsis 10:38, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Arguments for deletion

  1. Delete. Unrepentant copyvio. Probably should've been speedied. jSarek 10:41, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
  2. Delete the page and its talk page tomfoolery. -- Ozzel 10:45, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
  3. Delete. A chance to have -1 article *and* raise my post count? I'm there! Darth Maddolis 10:50, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
  4. Per Fourdot. --Imperialles 15:21, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Arguments for keeping

  1. Because it seemed to me like a good idea at the time, I removed all the copyright violating text. Since it's a legit in-universe document, an article on it should be OK, even though one that reproduces all of the in-game excerpts isn't. —Silly Dan (talk) 12:20, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
  2. Like deleting the article on A Galaxy Befuddled. ~Roger Roger~ Home of the B1s 12:45, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
  3. Per Silly Dan. Sure isn't copyright-breachy now, heh. Graestan(This party's over) 16:11, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
  4. Changing my vote. Don't see why it can't stay now, per Dan. Unit 8311 19:29, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
  5. Per the Dan. I figured recreating a basic article afterward would have been the next step anyway. -- Ozzel 21:00, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
  6. This is a vote that this article needs serious improvement, not bahleetion. It's canon AFAIK. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order (Talk page) 04:45, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
  7. per Ataru, it needs improvement not deletion. --Jedimca0(Do or Do Not, There is No Try) 18:29, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
  8. Perfectly canon, legit IU document. Needs improvement, not deletion. Keep. Jorrel Wiki-shrinkable Fraajic 19:24, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
  9. Per Ataru. Chack Jadson (Talk) 19:27, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
  10. Hobbes(Tiger's Lair) 19:52, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
  11. It's both newly free of copyvio and demonstrably canon, so it now gets a resounding keep from me. jSarek 09:46, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
  12. Per Ataru and jSarek Stake black msg 17:56, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
  13. C'mon it's already half the article it once was and it's canon. Keep the patootin' thing! -- Riffsyphon1024 08:22, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Comments

  • It's still fanon. There's nothing in the game to say that it's a compilation of journals. :P Thefourdotelipsis 22:33, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
    • Do the words "Journal of the 501st" appear nowhere in the game? Is the narration just narration, and not neccessarily a document which could be covered by a separate IU or OOU article? Because I haven't played the game. —Silly Dan (talk) 22:38, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
      • Yeah, the words do appear before each mission. Thefourdotelipsis 06:10, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
        • The words "Journal of the 501st"? That would make it an unambiguously canonical document, wouldn't it? —Silly Dan (talk) 15:58, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
          • Yes, yes it would. jSarek 09:46, 17 December 2007 (UTC)