Forum:TC:Kae Kwaad

Forums > Trash compactor archive > TC:Kae Kwaad

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 Merge & Redirect, and take further discussion regarding alias articles to Consensus Track. Toprawa and Ralltiir 18:03, June 17, 2011 (UTC)

Kae Kwaad (talk - history - links - logs)

I do not think alias's should have article and this is by far the largest one I could find. It can also me misleading to people reading articles of both the alias and the person who assumed it. I also really think there needs to be some measure of consistency as we do not have articles for all the alias's Mara Jade or Han Solo ever assumed so maybe this can be a start to a measure of consistency GTQ(Problems?) 00:42, May 29, 2011 (UTC)

Voting

Delete and put a Consensus Track for all alias articles

GTQ(Problems?) 00:42, May 29, 2011 (UTC)
Aliases aren't things, they're alternate names used by a subject. One subject, one article. If people are worried about lost information, then allow for an "Aliases" subsection to be added to the LG, and/or an aliases/alternate names field in infoboxes. But you don't need a full article on a false name used briefly by someone or something that has its own article already. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 03:31, May 30, 2011 (UTC)
Entirely per Jujiggum, as well as my own comments here. Master Jonathan — Jedi Council Chambers Monday, May 30, 2011, 03:51 UTC
Although this has been voted on before, the previous CT vote count indicated that opinions are leaning towards merging aliases (11 for keep, 15 for merging). Additionally, I know that the "spoilers" argument always comes up, but I think we fail to realize that soft redirects ruin spoilers just as much as normal redirects. When the first sentence is "Keil Garris was an alias of Han Solo..." etc., there's no spoiler prevention. Furthermore, this is Wookieepedia. Every article contains a spoiler. Also, per everything JJM said. Darth Trayus(Trayus Academy) 03:59, May 30, 2011 (UTC)
And in specific reference to Kae Kwaad: if I'm not mistaken, this isn't so much an alias as it is an alternate identity. For this instance, I would definitely go for delete. It's the same situation as Vader and Anakin, Nyna Calixte and Morrigan Corde, and Vydel Dir'Nul and Kardem, if I'm not totally mistaken. Darth Trayus(Trayus Academy) 04:03, May 30, 2011 (UTC)
Agreed. Corellian PremierRobotechAll along the watchtower 15:01, May 30, 2011 (UTC)
Alias articles should only exist under specific circumstances, and we need a CT to hammer out those circumstances. This is not one of them. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 18:35, May 30, 2011 (UTC)
This article should be merged with the Onimi article, since that is the person that had this alias, to avoid any loss of information. A consensus track for all alias articles is also in order.--Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 18:39, May 30, 2011 (UTC)
Kilson(Let's have a chat) 19:16, May 30, 2011 (UTC)
Clone Commander Lee Talk 17:44, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
Fire at will, commander.—TK-999 Era-imp(Rise of the Empire) 17:57, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
Along with all other alias articles. MasterFredCommerce Guild(Whatever) 18:26, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
Per Jon and Trayus. Darth Karikawill destroy your planet! 14:07, June 1, 2011 (UTC)

Do not delete

My vote here has less to do with the separation of alias articles and more to do with the benefit of at least keeping alias articles as redirects to the main character articles, because there's nothing gained by just deleting this stuff outright. I'm voting here rather than creating a new voting option, but this should be considered a "Merge/Redirect/Take further discussion to CT" vote. If a new voting option is created, I can move this to a more appropriate place. Toprawa and Ralltiir 20:18, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
  • That is how I took the above choice. I figured a redirect was assumed. MasterFredCommerce Guild(Whatever) 20:34, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
    • Assume nothing but what the voting option says. That option is for a straight delete. Toprawa and Ralltiir 20:35, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
Hey this is what I wanted too, I just wasn't sure where to put it. Per Toprawa and Ralltiir.--Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 20:27, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
  1. For now atleast. –Tm_T (Talk) 20:32, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
    • And I would rather see the alias articles as a soft redirect if there's context worth it, not plain redirect. –Tm_T (Talk) 08:40, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Per Tope. Consider this a "take it to a CT" without splitting the vote between two don't delete options. Grunny (talk) 14:14, June 1, 2011 (UTC)
    Per Tope—these should be redirected, and not deleted. But I still very strongly stand behind my above points that aliases should not get their own articles. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 14:53, June 1, 2011 (UTC)
    The natural approach is to redirect an alias to the actual individual. 1358 (Talk) 07:22, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
    Yeah. Redirect is more natural. As it was pointed out, it is unnecessary to have articles on aliases, but it is useful to leave them as redirects to the subject.—TK-999 Era-imp(Rise of the Empire) 07:53, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
  3. Eh, I don't have a problem with alias articles, when they're done well. That said, I sure as hell think they ought to at least be redirects. jSarek 08:57, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
    Per Tope and Jon. Master Jonathan — Jedi Council Chambers Thursday, June 2, 2011, 13:24 UTC
    • I get by what most people are saying that this should be changed to a "Merge/Redirect/CT" vote. Should we make an option for that? MasterFredCommerce Guild(Whatever) 14:25, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
  4. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 15:35, June 2, 2011 (UTC)

Do not delete and put up a Consensus Track for all alias articles

Merge & Redirect, and take further discussion regarding alias articles to Consensus Track

  1. Since there seemed to be a general demand for it… I'll go ahead and notify everybody who has voted. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 14:35, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Moving to specified thread.—TK-999 Era-imp(Rise of the Empire) 14:38, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
  3. All right, now this is exactly what I thought should be done, so my vote goes here.--Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 14:46, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
  4. Still per Tope and Jon. Master Jonathan — Jedi Council Chambers Thursday, June 2, 2011, 16:25 UTC
  5. Darth Karikawill destroy your planet! 16:30, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
  6. (two edit conflicts :P) This is more like it. MasterFredCommerce Guild(Whatever) 16:35, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
  7. NAYAYEN 17:34, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
  8. Works for me. Toprawa and Ralltiir 18:24, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
  9. (edit conflict) 1358 (Talk) 18:26, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
  10. GTQ(Problems?) 18:46, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
  11. Oh. Now i'm agreed. Corellian PremierRobotechAll along the watchtower 21:50, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
  12. Kilson(Let's have a chat) 22:08, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
  13. Really I think we all could have assumed a redirect would be kept, but whatever. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 22:56, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
  14. Clone Commander Lee Talk 17:35, June 3, 2011 (UTC)
  15. Darth Trayus(Trayus Academy) 02:49, June 5, 2011 (UTC)
  16. Chack Jadson (Talk) 16:36, June 5, 2011 (UTC)

Discussion

  • Where's the Delete option without any CT? –Tm_T (Talk) 19:03, May 30, 2011 (UTC)
    • I don't think one is needed. If this one is deleted, then a CT should be started to decide the fate of all other alias articles. MasterFredCommerce Guild(Whatever) 18:14, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
      • We already had CT very recently, I see no point hammering it yet again this soon. –Tm_T (Talk) 20:05, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
        • A CT that resulted in "no consensus." I think we all feel this should be settled, and the first CT didn't settle anything. MasterFredCommerce Guild(Whatever) 20:13, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
          • And I don't believe new voting would change much, unless there's anything _new_ to add to discussion. Repeating same voting until it succeeds is not constructive IMHO. –Tm_T (Talk) 20:27, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
            • Also one of the things that I always try to push is a measure of consistency and right to there really is non on alias article so I really nominated this as a gauge to see If anything had changed and maybe to give it another shot GTQ(Problems?) 20:52, June 2, 2011 (UTC)