Forum:TC:Martin Dew

Forums > Trash compactor archive > TC:Martin Dew

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 Delete. —spookywillowwtalk 02:02, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

Martin Dew (history - links - logs - delete - protect)

As I believe the only listed citations are unreliable. If anything else credits him, then the article would be ideally amended to reflect that.

Redirect to [PAGENAME]

Delete

  1. Hanzo Hasashi (talk) 19:57, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
  2. Below said for future ones, point stands unverified fansites aren't valid sources, so, indeed delete until/if someone finds something. A simple search doesn't turn up much though.—spookywillowwtalk 03:23, 14 March 2025 (UTC)
  3. Lewisr (talk) 03:34, 14 March 2025 (UTC)
  4. Mountain Dew lol Rsand 30 (talk) 04:07, 14 March 2025 (UTC)
  5. Yasen Nestorov (talk) 05:07, 14 March 2025 (UTC)
  6. OOM 224 22:55, 15 March 2025 (UTC)
  7. Wok142 (talk) 21:00, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
  8. CometSmudge (talk) 21:03, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
  9. Booply (talk) 01:58, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

Keep

| Per my reasoning and source within the comments. — Commandant Bhatoa (talk) 16:39, 15 March 2025 (UTC)
  1. Better off keeping it sourced with what information we have. The fact that it was published in a magazine means it'd have to have passed editorial and have had internal proof of one's claims. Anyone who is even passingly familiar with Martin's cameos can clearly tell that it's him. Looks like a duck... The page is just going to be a target for recreation in the future with the same non-sources or less due to internet rot. There's also plenty of other similar pages here with even less evidence or actors own personal CVs. Why not just ask Martin himself via the forums? Labyrinthine G0B-L1N (talk) 06:20, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
    Anyone's welcome to ask him, but for the record, any pages with less evidence that do not have adequate sources are, by policy, allowed to be deleted by administrators outright, per usage of the {{Verify}} template. For that to change (ie, for admins to not be able to delete articles with no adequate sourcing provided after a full week period) you would need to change that via a formal vote. There being "less evidence" on other pages is really not an argument that has basis on a site that has as robust sourcing policies as we do, unless that ever changes; because TCs are about individual pages, not what may or may not exist on other subpar pages.—spookywillowwtalk 20:30, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Comments

  • Just as a logging note for the future, {{Verify|oou=1}} is better for instances like these.—spookywillowwtalk 19:59, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
  • https://www.hometheaterforum.com/thx-when-the-audience-was-listening/ Does this help? Labyrinthine G0B-L1N (talk) 12:23, 15 March 2025 (UTC)
    • I completely forgot to add this, however after only a few minutes of searching yesterday, I tracked down a celebratory article written by Martin Dew himself for ANH's 40th anniversary, published in the April 2017 issue of Home Cinema Choice magazine. He explicitly confirms his own appearance in TESB's 1997 Special Edition more directly than the source Labyrinthine G0B-L1N supplied and other sites with brief bios akin to that, such as IMDb (although the Home Theater Forum article is useful in its own right, since it corroborates his presence at Lucasfilm (THX) in the 1990s, which is linked to the circumstances which led to his appearance) So, probably a much better source than Star Wars fan autograph websites. I'd say, the TC is resolved, with approval from the administrators. — Commandant Bhatoa (talk) 16:36, 15 March 2025 (UTC)
      • One point; admins are not automatically allowed to resolve TCs; once started, they need to end out. Secondly, the WP:ATT policy states "For that reason, self-published material is largely not acceptable." along with a much longer explanation of why; anyone can claim anything. Is there any source not based on him making a claim about himself (so, self-published)? And as for IMDb, other than its news articles, that's explicitly defined as an invalid source in general because it's editable by anyone, thus making it just as reliable as citing a Wikipedia article (which is to say, it isn't sourceable for our purposes).—spookywillowwtalk 17:02, 15 March 2025 (UTC)
      • The reason above is important is because, even if his self-published article is added as a citation here, it still has every right to be challenged for being self-published (because he wrote it, making a claim about himself) so even after the TC closes it could very well end up with a Verify tag anyway. Unless Wookieepedia overall started taking anyone/everyone at their word for their own claims, but, that obviously would result in a lot of problems.—spookywillowwtalk 17:05, 15 March 2025 (UTC)
        • Admittedly in my enthusiasm of believing I'd saved his article from the TC purge, the self-publishing of his article lapsed my mind - I focused on the magazine as opposed to the fact he wrote his own factoid and indeed the entire article being written by himself. Unfortunate on my part, and apologies. A valid source is still required to corroborate him in TESB. Definitely understood on unverified information not being appropriate to retain without a source corroborating also. I did not mean to suggest IMDb and similar sites should be cited, just raised them as a contrast to articles and magazines in general. Appreciated on explaining thoroughly on all fronts, such as administrators' role in TCs. — Commandant Bhatoa (talk) 17:35, 15 March 2025 (UTC)