Forum:TC:Notability species, part 4

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 Delete all. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 21:05, February 9, 2014 (UTC)

Notability species, part 4

• Demos Traxen's species (history - links - logs - delete - protect)
• Dethro Glok's species (history - links - logs - delete - protect)
• Doc's species (history - links - logs - delete - protect)
• Dominus' species (history - links - logs - delete - protect)
• Dreebo's species (history - links - logs - delete - protect)
• Droq'l's species (history - links - logs - delete - protect)
• Edi Wedd's species (history - links - logs - delete - protect)
• Eelien Kirat's species (history - links - logs - delete - protect)
• Et Rex's species (history - links - logs - delete - protect)
• Eyes' species (history - links - logs - delete - protect)

Round 4.

Demos Traxen's species

Delete

1. Cade Calrayn 18:05, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
2. —MJ— ^{Jedi Council Chambers} 20:56, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
3. Much as I like the design... —Silly Dan _(talk) 21:05, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
4. Exiled Jedi (Greetings) 23:37, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
5. Ayrehead02 (talk) 00:43, January 27, 2014 (UTC)
6. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 07:35, January 28, 2014 (UTC)
7. JangFett ^(Talk) 14:35, January 28, 2014 (UTC)
8. Winterz (talk) 14:00, January 29, 2014 (UTC)
9. Corellian Premier^{The Force will be with you always} 22:50, January 29, 2014 (UTC)
10. Trip391 (talk) 21:12, January 30, 2014 (UTC)
11. MasterFred^(Whatever) 21:04, February 9, 2014 (UTC)

Keep

Dethro Glok's species

Delete

1. Cade Calrayn 18:05, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
2. —MJ— ^{Jedi Council Chambers} 20:56, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
3. —Silly Dan _(talk) 21:05, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
4. Exiled Jedi (Greetings) 23:37, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
5. Ayrehead02 (talk) 00:43, January 27, 2014 (UTC)
6. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 07:35, January 28, 2014 (UTC)
7. JangFett ^(Talk) 14:35, January 28, 2014 (UTC)
8. Winterz (talk) 14:00, January 29, 2014 (UTC)
9. Trip391 (talk) 21:12, January 30, 2014 (UTC)
10. MasterFred^(Whatever) 21:04, February 9, 2014 (UTC)

Keep

1. This one I wonder if it falls under "Significant Development". The Prima Guide to the game has several illustrations of him, including what appear to be B&W production sketches of the character's face. If the book had just the full color image being used right now, then it doesn't matter, but due too the extra art in the book I have to wonder. --Clonehunter^{(Report your W.M.D.)} 15:49, January 29, 2014 (UTC)

   Mightn't that just count toward notability for the character? —Silly Dan _(talk) 21:55, January 29, 2014 (UTC)

   Perhaps, but he'd be notable already without since has a name, published background, and an appearance. Unless that's not how character notability works. --Clonehunter^{(Report your W.M.D.)} 23:42, January 29, 2014 (UTC)

   Oh yes, of course. The BTS stuff just brings him further beyond the notability threshold. I'm just not sure it takes his species any further, unless the Prima Guide shows (for example) they were going to use a bunch of characters of the same species, or they had developed some storyline about his species which didn't make the final cut, etc. —Silly Dan _(talk) 01:20, January 30, 2014 (UTC)

   The book has the current image, along with B&W sketches that show a detailed look at the character's head, though of course we only see the character in a brief cutscene and he isn't very close to the camera. However the extra detailed art, as production images, makes me question. --Clonehunter^{(Report your W.M.D.)} 02:06, January 30, 2014 (UTC)

2. KEJ (talk) 17:19, January 29, 2014 (UTC)
3. Although he could also just be a mutant Moggonite. Corellian Premier^{The Force will be with you always} 22:50, January 29, 2014 (UTC)

Doc's species

Delete

1. Cade Calrayn 18:05, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
2. —MJ— ^{Jedi Council Chambers} 20:56, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
3. —Silly Dan _(talk) 21:05, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
4. Exiled Jedi (Greetings) 23:37, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
5. Ayrehead02 (talk) 00:43, January 27, 2014 (UTC)
6. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 07:35, January 28, 2014 (UTC)
7. JangFett ^(Talk) 14:35, January 28, 2014 (UTC)
8. Winterz (talk) 14:00, January 29, 2014 (UTC)
9. Corellian Premier^{The Force will be with you always} 22:50, January 29, 2014 (UTC)
10. Trip391 (talk) 21:12, January 30, 2014 (UTC)
11. MasterFred^(Whatever) 21:04, February 9, 2014 (UTC)

Keep

Dominus' species

Delete

1. Cade Calrayn 18:05, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
2. —MJ— ^{Jedi Council Chambers} 20:56, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
3. —Silly Dan _(talk) 21:05, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
4. Exiled Jedi (Greetings) 23:37, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
5. Ayrehead02 (talk) 00:43, January 27, 2014 (UTC)
6. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 07:35, January 28, 2014 (UTC)
7. JangFett ^(Talk) 14:35, January 28, 2014 (UTC)
8. Winterz (talk) 14:00, January 29, 2014 (UTC)
9. Sigh. Corellian Premier^{The Force will be with you always} 22:50, January 29, 2014 (UTC)
10. Trip391 (talk) 21:12, January 30, 2014 (UTC)
11. MasterFred^(Whatever) 21:04, February 9, 2014 (UTC)

Keep

Dreebo's species

Delete

1. Cade Calrayn 18:05, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
2. —MJ— ^{Jedi Council Chambers} 20:56, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
3. —Silly Dan _(talk) 21:05, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
4. Exiled Jedi (Greetings) 23:37, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
5. Ayrehead02 (talk) 00:43, January 27, 2014 (UTC)
6. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 07:35, January 28, 2014 (UTC)
7. JangFett ^(Talk) 14:35, January 28, 2014 (UTC)
8. Winterz (talk) 14:00, January 29, 2014 (UTC)
9. Uh what? Corellian Premier^{The Force will be with you always} 22:50, January 29, 2014 (UTC)
10. Trip391 (talk) 21:12, January 30, 2014 (UTC)
11. MasterFred^(Whatever) 21:04, February 9, 2014 (UTC)

Keep

Droq'l's species

Delete

1. Cade Calrayn 18:05, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
2. —MJ— ^{Jedi Council Chambers} 20:56, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
3. —Silly Dan _(talk) 21:05, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
4. Exiled Jedi (Greetings) 23:37, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
5. Ayrehead02 (talk) 00:43, January 27, 2014 (UTC)
6. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 07:35, January 28, 2014 (UTC)
7. JangFett ^(Talk) 14:35, January 28, 2014 (UTC)
8. Winterz (talk) 14:01, January 29, 2014 (UTC)
9. Corellian Premier^{The Force will be with you always} 22:50, January 29, 2014 (UTC)
10. Trip391 (talk) 21:12, January 30, 2014 (UTC)
11. MasterFred^(Whatever) 21:04, February 9, 2014 (UTC)

Keep

Edi Wedd's species

Delete

1. Cade Calrayn 18:05, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
2. —MJ— ^{Jedi Council Chambers} 20:56, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
3. —Silly Dan _(talk) 21:05, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
4. Exiled Jedi (Greetings) 23:37, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
5. Ayrehead02 (talk) 00:43, January 27, 2014 (UTC)
6. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 07:35, January 28, 2014 (UTC)
7. JangFett ^(Talk) 14:35, January 28, 2014 (UTC)
8. Winterz (talk) 14:01, January 29, 2014 (UTC)
9. Trip391 (talk) 21:12, January 30, 2014 (UTC)
10. MasterFred^(Whatever) 21:04, February 9, 2014 (UTC)

Keep

1. "Significant description". That is, the fact that one member of the species had his own fortress and took over a planet. Corellian Premier^{The Force will be with you always} 22:50, January 29, 2014 (UTC)
   • That doesn't quality the species for keeping. It's an achievement of the individual. Cade Calrayn 23:02, January 29, 2014 (UTC)
     • Indeed. This seems to be the biggest misinterpretation of the notability guidelines cropping up on this TC so far. You're mistaking character specifics for species specifics. To quote the notability policy: "Significant backstory or accomplishments that have been directly attributed to the species" and "Significant description and identification as a unique species in dialogue." The fact that this character owned a fortress and took over a planet has no direct stated connection to his species. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 04:11, January 30, 2014 (UTC)

Eelien Kirat's species

Delete

1. Cade Calrayn 18:05, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
2. —MJ— ^{Jedi Council Chambers} 20:56, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
3. —Silly Dan _(talk) 21:05, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
4. Exiled Jedi (Greetings) 23:37, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
5. Ayrehead02 (talk) 00:43, January 27, 2014 (UTC)
6. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 07:35, January 28, 2014 (UTC)
7. JangFett ^(Talk) 14:35, January 28, 2014 (UTC)
8. Winterz (talk) 14:01, January 29, 2014 (UTC)
9. Corellian Premier^{The Force will be with you always} 22:50, January 29, 2014 (UTC)
10. Trip391 (talk) 21:12, January 30, 2014 (UTC)
11. MasterFred^(Whatever) 21:04, February 9, 2014 (UTC)

Keep

Et Rex's species

Delete

1. Cade Calrayn 18:05, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
2. —MJ— ^{Jedi Council Chambers} 20:56, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
3. —Silly Dan _(talk) 21:05, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
4. Exiled Jedi (Greetings) 23:37, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
5. Ayrehead02 (talk) 00:43, January 27, 2014 (UTC)
6. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 07:35, January 28, 2014 (UTC)
7. JangFett ^(Talk) 14:35, January 28, 2014 (UTC)
8. Winterz (talk) 14:01, January 29, 2014 (UTC)
9. Corellian Premier^{The Force will be with you always} 22:50, January 29, 2014 (UTC)
10. Trip391 (talk) 21:12, January 30, 2014 (UTC)
11. MasterFred^(Whatever) 21:04, February 9, 2014 (UTC)

Keep

Eyes' species

Delete

1. Cade Calrayn 18:05, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
2. The things that Dan brings up below don't rise to the level of notability IMO. —MJ— ^{Jedi Council Chambers} 20:56, January 26, 2014 (UTC)

   So, you'd draw the line somewhere between Aurra Sing's father's species and this one? That's perfectly fair, but I'm curious to know what for you makes the difference. (For me, the "1.5 known members" thing makes a major difference. If anything, I'd say Eyes's people seem to have more IU facts recorded.) —Silly Dan _(talk) 00:07, January 27, 2014 (UTC)

   It's the "1.5 known members", as you put it, that makes the difference for me. Otherwise, that one wouldn't be notable IMO. "Significant description", to me, is a lot more than what can be described in just a few simple sentences. What's in Aurra Sing's father's species could easily go in the father's article, if not for the fact that Aurra herself is half that species. As for Eyes, inability to identify could just be a simple matter of having an incomplete database, and the speciecide speculation is just the opinion of a few people, not something that would be written in history books (which is what I would look for for the requirement you cited). —MJ— _{War Room} 02:30, January 27, 2014 (UTC)

   OK, that makes sense. I still think the info on this species is enough for an article, even if it's pretty close to the minimum for significant description...but that's why we have TC discussions. 8) —Silly Dan _(talk) 05:38, January 27, 2014 (UTC)

3. I think we need more something a little more concrete to have an article for a species.--23:37, January 26, 2014 (UTC)—Unsigned comment by Exiledjedi (talk • contribs)
4. Ayrehead02 (talk) 00:43, January 27, 2014 (UTC)
5. If Airen Cracken's info about the species were more than just in-universe speculation, I would consider that to be "significant" enough to warrant an article. But as it is, I don't think we can exactly attribute that to being a backstory. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 07:35, January 28, 2014 (UTC)
6. JangFett ^(Talk) 14:35, January 28, 2014 (UTC)
7. Winterz (talk) 14:01, January 29, 2014 (UTC)
8. Trip391 (talk) 21:12, January 30, 2014 (UTC)
9. MasterFred^(Whatever) 21:04, February 9, 2014 (UTC)

Keep

1. Could just qualify under "Significant backstory or accomplishments that have been directly attributed to the species", namely Airen Cracken and Alliance Intelligence inability to identify his species and speculation that the species was wiped out by Palpatine. —Silly Dan _(talk) 20:43, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
2. Speculation of the Empire's extermination of this species makes it notable. KEJ (talk) 17:19, January 29, 2014 (UTC)
   • Speculation isn't accepted at all in here. Winterz (talk) 19:05, January 29, 2014 (UTC)
     • In-universe speculation is, though. Can't think of the name, but there's a guy at the Great Pit of Carkoon who has a similar unknown fate. Corellian Premier^{The Force will be with you always} 22:50, January 29, 2014 (UTC)
       • Is it Droopy McCool, who is canonically known to have disappeared, possibly becoming the source of mysterious music the moisture farmers claim to hear? Just as with Eyes being a member of an unidentified species and rumoured to be the survivor of an Imperial genocide, that's a canonical IU piece of speculation, together with a canonical IU admission of a missing part of someone's story. So that's perfectly acceptable in an article -- unlike, for example, some editor just guessing that the rumours are correct, or even making up unsourced details about the genocide. But this is not the issue -- the issue is whether these IU rumours, speculations, and total absences of solid facts constitute enough backstory to pass the notability rules for an article on the species. —Silly Dan _(talk) 01:36, January 30, 2014 (UTC)
       • I would say that, if there is IU speculation or IU rumors about a character, then that character, species or something else is obviously significant to other characters... otherwise they would not even speculate about the character/species/etc., and they would not develop rumors about the character. Such IU significance of a character/species/etc. gives the character/species/etc. some notability (even if the speculation and rumors turn out not to be factive [still in an IU perspective], or if the character/species/etc. itself turns out not to exist [still in an IU perspective]). KEJ (talk) 21:16, January 30, 2014 (UTC)
         • Yes. The character is significant. Not the species. Cade Calrayn 21:18, January 30, 2014 (UTC)
           • Well, the IU speculation also applies to the species... and so the significance-by-IU-speculation should technically also apply to the species and, indeed, any other IU entity or concept. EDIT: Updated my previous post to reflect this more clearly. KEJ (talk) 21:20, January 30, 2014 (UTC)
     • I was obviously referring to this "Eyes' hatred of Emperor Palpatine led several people to speculate that the species had been exterminated by the Galactic Empire" from the entry, and not to fan speculation. KEJ (talk) 21:06, January 30, 2014 (UTC)
3. Exactly. Corellian Premier^{The Force will be with you always} 22:50, January 29, 2014 (UTC)

Discussion