Forum:TC:Meridian trench

Forums > Trash compactor archive > TC:Meridian trench

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 Keep. —MJ— Comlink 03:21, February 4, 2013 (UTC)

Meridian trench (talk - history - links - logs)

This is the same thing as the actual Death Star, and it should be merged to the DS-1 Orbital Battle Station.

Merge

  1. Cade Calrayn GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit 03:31, January 17, 2013 (UTC)
    Supreme Emperor (talk) 03:32, January 17, 2013 (UTC)
    While I understand, and to a point, agree with the rationale behind the "Keep" position, I do think it's a bit silly to keep a three-sentence page when that would be equally at home on the Death Star page. — DigiFluid(Whine here) 13:33, January 17, 2013 (UTC)
    • However, it may not stay a three-sentence page forever, provided that we give it some work—e.g. a picture, a brief recollection of the trench run... Many pages start like that and get bigger afterwards. --LelalMekha (talk) 13:44, January 17, 2013 (UTC)
      • Valid. I'll strike my vote and abstain, since I can see both POVs on this. — DigiFluid(Whine here) 14:01, January 17, 2013 (UTC)
  2. JangFett (Talk) 01:42, January 19, 2013 (UTC)

Keep

  1. There's plenty of precedent to having articles on locations within locations --- throne rooms, apartment suites, individuals' quarters, etc. The EU has also given this trench as much in-universe significance as it has out-of-universe significance. Menkooroo (talk) 03:58, January 17, 2013 (UTC)
  2. Per Menk. LelalMekha (talk) 09:48, January 17, 2013 (UTC)
  3. What Menk said as well. Besides, there was a redlink before it that led to nowhere. I had to add it in. The only thing we really need is to expand it to the fullest detail. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 12:23, January 17, 2013 (UTC)
  4. Death Star conference room FTW. Rooms and places like these are practically full locations themselves, and their showing up is significant. If we necessitated that they be covered in full on the Death Star page, it would be even more impossble to write. We'd lose a lot of information by distilling them into a Locations section of the DS-1 article, too. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 17:53, January 17, 2013 (UTC)
  5. Yeah I believe it's notable enough for its own article. <-Omicron(Leave a message at the BEEP!) 01:59, January 19, 2013 (UTC)
  6. You know after reading the reasons for keep, i'm gonna strike my vote for merge and change to keep:). Supreme Emperor (talk) 18:03, January 19, 2013 (UTC)
  7. Per above. —MJ— Comlink 18:46, January 19, 2013 (UTC)
  8. Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 18:47, January 19, 2013 (UTC)
  9. Keee-ee-ee-eeee-eeeeeeeep! (: – Tm_T@Wookieepedia:~$ 19:21, January 19, 2013 (UTC)
  10. Having articles on each of a group of nested locations is absolutely essential to having good articles. We wouldn't merge Chancellor's Podium, Grand Convocation Chamber, Senate Building, Senate District, Coruscant, Coruscant system, Coruscant sector, and Core Worlds all into our article on the galaxy. jSarek (talk) 06:57, January 20, 2013 (UTC)
  11. 501st dogma(talk) 20:03, January 20, 2013 (UTC)
  12. Meh. —Unsigned comment by Cade Calrayn (talk • contribs) 20:08, January 20, 2013 (UTC)
  13. Of Course. Keep. Rokkur Shen (talk)
  14. Notable for its own article. Location of the single greatest weakness to the space station. -- Riffsyphon1024 05:58, January 24, 2013 (UTC)
  15. Winterz (talk) 19:09, January 24, 2013 (UTC)
  16. Commander Code-8 G'day, mate 22:07, January 27, 2013 (UTC)
  17. Cumulonimbus Cloud (ℳeeting ℛoom) 22:30, January 27, 2013 (UTC)

Discussion