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 no consensus for deletion, consensus building for merge..—Silly Dan (talk) 01:17, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Pizza Hut Girl (talk - history - links - logs), Harland Sanders (talk - history - links - logs)
Canon? - Sikon 11:32, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Delete (sample vote, do not count): promotional material is not canon. Besides, no article on the source. - ChanServ 11:33, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Keep, if clearly stated that these articles are non-canonical. KEJ 11:36, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- I agree, Keep --Jedimca0 (Do or Do Not, There is No Try) 11:39, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- My main problem with this is that it is being added to mainstream categories such as "Humans", "Slicers", and "Females", even though it's very likely she doesn't exist in the star wars galaxy. I've said this before, but I think we need a totally new tree of categorization for non-canon articles. --Azizlight 12:35, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, that's a good idea, we should probably start a CT on categorization of non-canon articles. - Sikon 12:41, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- It is a good idea. Anyway, back to this, I say keep only if it's placed in special categories and it is specifically stated it's non-canon. Chack Jadson 13:20, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, that's a good idea, we should probably start a CT on categorization of non-canon articles. - Sikon 12:41, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- I say keep, but decategorize this and other non-canon articles completely. I really don't think we need to create a whole tree of Category:Non-canon females and Category:Non-canon slicers, (etc.) if that is what is being suggested by having a "totally new tree of categorization for non-canon articles". Wildyoda 16:17, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Create the Defeat the Dark Side article and merge these "characters" into it, or re-write them as OOU articles. I don't think they are canon and should not be treated as IU articles. - Esjs(Talk) 16:27, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. And why do people always suggest we merge these things into the article for the source they came from? Should we merge Luke Skywalker into Star Wars: Episode IV A New Hope? -- I need a name (Complain here) 16:39, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Create Category:Non-canon and restrict all non-canon to that category. It would keep articles like this from getting into canon categories and confusing everyone while still giving them a category. Havac 17:41, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Can someone provide some kind of evidence that this is meant to be non-canon? If not, this discussion is moot. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 19:01, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I know of nothing that says these are non-canon. That means they are ambiguous. And to those treating this as something new... do you know just how much ambiguous and non-canon stuff we have in regular categories? If you want to make separate categories, then make a vote for that, but don't confuse that subject with this VFD. -- Ozzel 19:44, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, I know. It's one of my pet peeves. Why do you think I'm taking this opportunity to try to suggest it? Although I'd also support a merge to the Defeat the Dark Side ad campaign, just like we would a fanfilm; these characters aren't notable on their own. Havac 19:56, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Are we saying that something is canon until proven otherwise? I would think it would be the opposite: it's non-canon until it can be sourced as canon. What makes ad campaigns canon? I remember a Duracell (or was it Energizer?) commercial where Darth Vader's lightsaber ran out of battery power. Should we update the lightsaber article to describe how they run off of alkaline batteries like a Maglite flashlight? I don't think we need a new category if we can be a bit more reasonable about what's written IU and OOU (see Manual of Style: Perspective). - Esjs(Talk) 20:35, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- It doesn't get an article because it was in an ad, it gets an article because it was on an official website, presented in an in-universe context. -LtNOWIS 17:33, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I know of nothing that says these are non-canon. That means they are ambiguous. And to those treating this as something new... do you know just how much ambiguous and non-canon stuff we have in regular categories? If you want to make separate categories, then make a vote for that, but don't confuse that subject with this VFD. -- Ozzel 19:44, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. Weak keep as separate articles - unlike most of our so-called "ambig" articles, these characters were introduced by a legitimate Lucasfilm licensee, but I wouldn't weep if they were merged into the "Defeat the Dark Side" article. If kept separate, definitely re-categorize so as not to clutter canon categories or confuse new users. jSarek 21:52, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. These articles come from an official, licensed source, and thus, are at least ambiguously canon until proven otherwise. Adamwankenobi 08:27, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Merge to Defeat the Dark Side. —Xwing328(Talk) 17:28, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Ah, don't suppose I ever, er... "voted," or whatever the kids are calling it these days. Keep. -- Ozzel 19:18, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Keep but make clearly non-canon and remove from categories. There is no way this is canon. Be realistic. (Also, why do we not have an article for the Chihuahua? :D ) --Valin Kenobi 04:23, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Be realistic? Canon is determined by whether something appears in anything that is officially licensed, which Defeat the Dark Side was. Unless they directly contradict any other canon, then they are therefore canon themselves, ridiculous as they might be. Ambiguous maybe because of the real-world references that their very existence makes, but still. Not non-canon. 76.5.175.59 21:22, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
- Ozzel started it when he fried up the Colonel for his own, as of yet unstated, reasons (presumably to bring him up to finger lickin' Good Article status). I'd long contemplated cooking up an article on the Pizza Hut Girl, the hottest dish ever served in a Star Wars commercial; seeing Ozzel's article made me realize I had to deliver in 30 minutes or less, or someone else would beat me to it. I guess nobody quierod the taco lovin' rat-dog enough for the same rush treatment. jSarek 09:30, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
What the?--Windu223 19:22, 8 May 2007 (UTC) As per Windu223 - ??? Darth Seth 16:37, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
- Strong Delete. Please, people! I'm one of the worst hyperinclusionist here, and even I can't stand this! Nothing good is coming out of this, except advertising for the fast-food conglomerates, and I don't think they need our support. Please don't let Defeat the Dark Side be canon! Evir Daal 10:23, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
- Keep it man! This is simply too funny to delete! LukeSkywalker 14:44, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
- Merge to Defeat the Dark Side. Really, if ads are canon, that means Luke had a blue lightsaber in RotJ. Din's Fire 997 06:29, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
- Merge to Defeat the Dark Side. She's too hot to delete. -- Riffsyphon1024 22:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
- Did you mean "she's too hut(t) to delete"? :-P KEJ 22:32, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
- She kinda looks like Jaina Solo in a Pizza Hut uniform. Adamwankenobi 22:33, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
- Did you mean "she's too hut(t) to delete"? :-P KEJ 22:32, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
- we shold try to merge it if not delete.User: Grand Admiral Potts 20:11, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
- Merge. Rodtheanimegod4ever 01:11, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
- Merge to Defeat the Dark Side: seems obvious to me that they can't be a "real" IU article, and we have precedents for merging topics which only appear in a single, clearly non-canonical source which could only be wedged into canon with great difficulty being merged into the article for that source. (Someone will be along any second know to remind me that Jean-Luc Picard is a counter example, to which I say I wanted that merged too, and Captain Picard arriving through an interdimensional rift is actually more plausible to me. Wait, am I actually trying to figure out which of the two is more likely to be canon? I'd better sign off for the night.) Someone should create that article first, though. —Silly Dan (talk) 01:55, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
- Shh . . . I wasn't going to say anything about good ol' JLP until AFTER this set the precedent. ;-) jSarek 04:54, 5 June 2007 (UTC)