Forum:TC:Toothbrush (second nomination)

Forums > Trash compactor archive > TC:Toothbrush (second nomination)

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 Toothbrush/Legends, Delete Toothbrush. Imperators II(Talk) 10:52, November 28, 2017 (UTC)

Toothbrush (talk - history - links - logs - delete - protect)

This applies to both the Legends and Canon articles

So I tried this about a year ago and all of the votes were to delete, but it didn't pass due to insufficient participation. Unless I'm mistaken, there's no rule against trying again, especially if the only reason it didn't pass before was because it couldn't muster up two more votes. We've been moving nicely on the dictionary articles lately from what I can see; let's send this to the scrap heap too. Same exact reasoning as previous nomination. ProfessorTofty (talk) 04:42, November 14, 2017 (UTC)

Voting

Delete

ProfessorTofty (talk) 04:42, November 14, 2017 (UTC)
--Lewisr (talk) 04:43, November 14, 2017 (UTC)
Are we sure? I mean think about how many kinds of alien teeth there are in the SW universe. ;) - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 05:02, November 14, 2017 (UTC)
  1. This vote should in no way be taken as an endorsement of poor dental hygiene practices. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 05:03, November 14, 2017 (UTC)
  2. WINAD <-Omicron(Leave a message at the BEEP!) 05:06, November 14, 2017 (UTC)
    Imperators II(Talk) 09:07, November 14, 2017 (UTC)
    90% of dentists recommend this TC. 1358 (Talk) 16:27, November 14, 2017 (UTC)
  3. Asithol (talk) 03:09, November 15, 2017 (UTC)

Keep

Keep Toothbrush/Legends, Delete Toothbrush

  1. After looking at the listed source appearances in the Legends article, I actually think there's probably just enough to warrant keeping this article. Merging it with something else might also be an option. This is a solid case of the Dictionary policy's "distinct lack of an otherworldly quality" clause. The ultrasound cleaner is clearly meant to be the GFFA's advanced-technology equivalent of a toothbrush, yet we still have several examples of characters from the aforementioned sources using toothbrushes, which is certainly an interesting "unique incongruity," to apply the policy clause's wording. I would compare this to the recent Forum:TC:Bed decision, where many characters still use regular beds, but we nonetheless have an example of the GFFA's advanced-technology equivalent of a bed; with that rationale, it wouldn't be terrible if we merged Toothbrush/Legends with Ultrasound cleaner, though keeping Toothbrush as a separate page is still perfectly fair, IMO. It's probably also worth noting that The Abduction indicates that there's a TransGalMeg Industries, Incorporated souvenir shop on the planet Narg that sells items, including toothbrushes, imprinted with the TGM logo (Narg is TGM's home planet). That's a fairly interesting, SW-unique tidbit to add to the article -- that a major starship manufacturer is selling toothbrushes out of a souvenir shop. As for the Canon version of this article, there's nothing there that differentiates it from the real world, so it should indeed be deleted on its own standing. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 12:47, November 17, 2017 (UTC)
  2. I agree the TGM bit falls under the "unique incongruity" clause, and I feel it is enough to warrant a separate article for toothbrush. Imperators II(Talk) 13:01, November 17, 2017 (UTC)
  3. --Lewisr (talk) 13:11, November 17, 2017 (UTC)
  4. Exiled Jedi (talk) 23:01, November 17, 2017 (UTC)
  5. JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 00:57, November 18, 2017 (UTC)
    It's still IU technology... even if it's just a toothbrush. KEJ (talk) 08:51, November 18, 2017 (UTC) (Vote struck, reason: Per policy: fails to meet productivity requirements -- Imperators II(Talk) 09:08, November 18, 2017 (UTC))
  6. I've been swayed. 1358 (Talk) 11:34, November 18, 2017 (UTC)
  7. You make a convincing argument. I just hope we can get enough votes this time. I think we have enough if everyone else who voted for the original option changes their vote. ProfessorTofty (talk) 00:22, November 19, 2017 (UTC)
  8. Adamwankenobi (talk) 00:42, November 19, 2017 (UTC)
  9. I never knew I didn't know so much about toothbrushes. MasterFredCommerce Guild(Whatever) 08:36, November 21, 2017 (UTC)
  10. Ayrehead02 (talk) 23:51, November 26, 2017 (UTC)

Discussion

  • (in reply to ProfessorTofty's November 19 comment) It doesn't seem like any vote-changing needs to happen. Anyone who voted Delete under the unmodified ballot clearly meant to vote for the deletion of both, since that's how the initial proposal was presented. That should still count as a vote for the deletion of the canon version. Asithol (talk) 23:42, November 27, 2017 (UTC)