Forum:TC:Super Star Destroyer/Canon

Forums > Trash compactor archive > TC:Super Star Destroyer/Canon
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. Exiled Jedi (talk) 01:01, September 6, 2016 (UTC)

Super Star Destroyer/Canon (history - links - logs - delete - protect)

As far as I know, "Super Star Destroyer" is a colloquial term used in Canon to refer exclusively to the Executor-class Star Dreadnought. The Databank backs this up. The only reason the Super Star Destroyer Legends article exists as an independent page is because "Super Star Destroyer" is used in that continuity as an umbrella term to refer to a multitude of different starship classes. The same cannot be said for the Canon version, although this page was originally created with that incorrect understanding. Since "Super Star Destroyer" in Canon refers exclusively to the Executor-class, this page should be merged into the class article. I would have turned this page into a redirect and skipped the TC completely, but there's no reason why this /Canon page with a week's worth of edit history needs to be preserved. In the event circumstances change that require us to recreate this page as an independent article, we may do that then. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 23:50, July 18, 2016 (UTC)

Delete

  1. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 23:50, July 18, 2016 (UTC)
  2. Nivlacanator(talk) 05:40, July 19, 2016 (UTC)
  3. Exiled Jedi (talk) 21:58, July 20, 2016 (UTC)
  4. 1358 (Talk) 17:43, July 23, 2016 (UTC)
  5. Corellian PremierJedi symbolThe Force will be with you always 02:58, July 24, 2016 (UTC)
  6. Lewisr (talk) 10:23, August 17, 2016 (UTC)
  7. CC7567 (talk) 01:34, August 30, 2016 (UTC)
  8. Supreme Emperor (talk) 05:48, August 30, 2016 (UTC)
  9. While searching Imperial archives to find out the status of the SSDs in Life Debt, Sloane refers to them as "Dreadnoughts." Cevan IMPpress (talk) 21:40, September 5, 2016 (UTC)
    • But it still doesn't explain why Tagge would replace the Annihilator by the Executor (which is bigger) if they're the same class. --LelalMekha (talk) 21:42, September 5, 2016 (UTC)
      • Perhaps it's a similar situation to the Providence-class dreadnought, in which there is a smaller and a larger size, despite both being the same class of ship? Cevan IMPpress (talk) 22:40, September 5, 2016 (UTC)

Keep

  1. Tommy-Macaroni (talk) 07:22, July 19, 2016 (UTC)
  2. Not that my vote will matter anymore, but this statement by Jordan D. White implies there is a difference in design between Tagge's Annihilator and the Executor. If we delete the SSD article, we will state that Annihilator belongs to the Executor-class, which is speculative at best. --LelalMekha (talk) 23:32, September 5, 2016 (UTC)

Discussion

In Star Wars: Darth Vader (2015) and Aftermath: Life Debt, the SSDs we see/read of aren't confirmed to be Executor-class Star Dreadnoughts, and are just called Super Star Destroyers. We can't assume that Super Star Destroyers are Executor-class, as we don't have any solid evidence. Furthermore, in the Darth Vader comic series, Cassio Tagge is due to switch his command from the Annihilator to the Executor. Why would he switch if they are both Executor-class? It makes more sense that the Annihilator is another class. As the term Super Star Destroyer is used for both ships, we need this page to put on the Annihilator page, as well as other unconfirmed SSDs, such as the Eclipse. - Tommy-Macaroni (talk) 07:22, July 19, 2016 (UTC)

  • If there indeed exists evidence to show that the term "Super Star Destroyer" is meant to apply to anything more than the Executor-class in Canon, then I'll be happy to strike my delete vote (that's why I created this forum, after all, to give someone a chance to prove this page should exist, since my request for such referencing was poorly and improperly handled). But the fact is, you haven't proven anything in your response other than an emotional investment in the article that you created. These other sources may not explicitly confirm the Annihilator to be Executor-class, but it sure looks like one, doesn't it? And, to repeat myself from above, the aforementioned information from the StarWars.com Databank states that the Super Star Destroyer and the Executor-class are one and the same. Taken together and in the absence of any other contradicting information, we can take that to mean that the Annihilator is, in fact, an Executor-class. Is there a source that says the Executor was the first of the Executor-class line in Canon, which would trump my reasoning? I don't see one. Your argument is steeped in wishful, open-end thinking and unanswerable hypotheticals (there could be a million reasons why Tagge would transfer his flag), while I'm presenting you actual, concrete evidence from the Databank, which, again, states that the SSD and the Executor-class are the same. If someone can prove this wrong, by all means show us the evidence. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 16:41, July 19, 2016 (UTC)
    • Fair enough. I respectfully disagree, but your points have good evidence and you present a better argument. Let's see if anyone has any other evidence, but I think that may also be wishful thinking on my part... - Tommy-Macaroni (talk) 17:11, July 19, 2016 (UTC)

I'm not sure if this could be considered evidence that the Executor-class and Super Star Destroyers are different, but in the Darth Vader comic series Tagge's flagship, the Annihilator is a Super Star Destroyer, and later in the series Tagge plans to switch to the Executor and use that as his new flagship. I'm just not certain why Tagge would switch to another ship of the exact same model if he was already in command of one. Cevan IMPpress (talk) 19:09, July 24, 2016 (UTC)

  • You linked to a Legends article and we're discussing the deletion of a Canon article so I'm not sure what your point is here. 1358 (Talk) 19:19, July 24, 2016 (UTC)
    • It's just not the right link. Here is the Anihilator Cevan was thinking of. --LelalMekha (talk) 20:13, July 24, 2016 (UTC)
      • I see. The {{youmay}} on that page says it's an Executor-class vessel though, wonder if that has any basis in the source material or if it's just speculation. 1358 (Talk) 20:16, July 24, 2016 (UTC)
        • The youmay, however, was written on the assumption that Tagge's Anihilator belonged to the Executor-class, but we don't really know that. What we do know, however, is that Anihilator was a "Super Star Destroyer," and that Tagge intended to replace it with Executor. Jordan D. White did confirm that Executor was going to be larger than Annihilator. --LelalMekha (talk) 20:33, July 24, 2016 (UTC)
          • My mistake; I accidentally linked to the wrong page. The page isn't currently loading for me, but thanks for that new bit of info from Jordan D. White. Since we now have official confirmation that the Executor is larger than the Annihilator, I'm not sure if Super Star Destroyer/Canon should be kept, or if we should just make note on the Executor-class page that there were smaller SSDs. Cevan IMPpress (talk) 21:30, July 24, 2016 (UTC)