Please keep the original Talk page aligned to the main page
I have no strong feeling about whether this should have "Episode VII:" in the title or not, but please keep the Talk page with it... --Udesilva (talk) 22:27, December 26, 2015 (UTC)
- Hi. The novelization page never had a talk page. As you can see at Talk:Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens (novel), there's nothing there either. Were you thinking of the talk page for the film, which can be found at Talk:Star Wars: Episode VII The Force Awakens? - Brandon Rhea(talk) 22:40, December 26, 2015 (UTC)
article name
Brandon Rhea: I understand that the novelization's title does not include "Episode VII." But of the other six novelization titles, only two of them include their episode number—yet Wookieepedia has the episode number in the article name for all six. This novelization should not be handled differently from all the others.
Arguably, it is those four other articles that are named incorrectly and should be changed, but those articles follow the examples as set forth in Wookieepedia:Naming policy#Novels and books. This policy explicitly provides an article name for Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope (novel) (which does not include the words "Episode IV" in its actual title), so we must abide by that. By extension, this tells us the format to use for the other novelizations as well.
In my opinion, it is the policy here that is misguided: policy should not enshrine the inclusion of words in a title that do not actually appear in the title. But my opinion does not trump a policy that reflects consensus. Current policy clearly spells out what this article name should be. Asithol (talk) 23:27, December 26, 2015 (UTC)
- The policy in question is in regards to the inclusion of "Star Wars" in the article title. It uses those other pages as examples of how film novelizations can include "Star Wars" in their page titles, and is simply referring to them by the name that they already have here on Wookieepedia. It doesn't actually have any impact on whether or not "Episode" should be included in the title. Whether or not the other six book pages are correctly named is certainly something that can be discussed on their talk pages or in a Senate Hall thread (and indeed, they don't even follow the correct format of the films which is Star Wars: Episode # Film Title), but "Star Wars: The Force Awakens (novel)" is indeed the correct name for this page because "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" is the title of the book. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 23:46, December 26, 2015 (UTC)
- Hi, Brandon, thanks for the response. The policy paragraph in question has specific wording that was ratified in a CT (linked to at the bottom of that section). That wording includes the words "Episode IV" in the title of a novelization that does not include those words. This exact wording was proposed in the CT and unanimously ratified.
That the overall purpose of the paragraph is about something different does not change any of those facts. The specific novelization-title format was part of the vote, and achieved 100% consensus. Perhaps the CT used that format only because of historical precedent, as you suggest, but once a policy is ratified, it is policy, and the path that led to its becoming policy is of only tangential interest.
In the end, I don't quite follow how you conclude that that paragraph "doesn't ... have any impact on whether or not 'Episode' should be included in the [article name]," since it contains the exact article name Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope (novel). We both have issues with the policy (I, too, wish the typesetting and colon placement were consistent with the film titles), but it is certainly unambiguous. Asithol (talk) 00:23, December 27, 2015 (UTC)- The CT didn't ratify that "Episode" has to be in the title. It was simply using the existing page names as part of the example in the proposed wording. Reading it to say that "Episode" has to be in the title is reading into it way, way, way too literally and in the weeds. After all, the vote in question was specifically about "Star Wars" in page titles. I can't imagine the idea that anyone involved in the CT, including its proposer, would agree with your interpretation. If you reach out to Toprawa and Ralltiir, the proposer of that CT, I suspect he would agree with me (and, knowing Tope, most likely say that some of the other page names, particularly the original trilogy novelizations, are wrong). The fact remains (and this is the final point I'll make on this discussion), "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" is the title of the novel and this is the appropriate page name. I do hope that clears things up. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 00:31, December 27, 2015 (UTC)
- We have seven novelizations of Star Wars episodes. There are two ways to name articles about these novelizations: using a prescribed format, or using each novel's actual title. Currently, we are using different schemes for different articles. Using the former scheme would require changing one article name; using the latter would require changing four. Do you disagree with any of these points?
If you're with me so far, how should we fix this inconsistency? My preference is to make the change that affects only one, fairly recent, article, and brings it into line with what our naming policy actually states. (Arguments about intent notwithstanding, the policy words are indisputable.) What is your preferred fix? If it's to change the four other novelization article names, I have absolutely no quarrel with that. What I object to is the inconsistency. Asithol (talk) 01:25, December 27, 2015 (UTC)
- I think we should name the pages based on what the actual titles of the novels are. I would prefer going for accuracy, and so whether that leads to an inconsistency doesn't really matter to me. Nevertheless, that's not a topic for this talk page. Feel free to create a Senate Hall discussion about it to see what other contributors have to say too. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 01:47, December 27, 2015 (UTC)
- We have seven novelizations of Star Wars episodes. There are two ways to name articles about these novelizations: using a prescribed format, or using each novel's actual title. Currently, we are using different schemes for different articles. Using the former scheme would require changing one article name; using the latter would require changing four. Do you disagree with any of these points?
- The CT didn't ratify that "Episode" has to be in the title. It was simply using the existing page names as part of the example in the proposed wording. Reading it to say that "Episode" has to be in the title is reading into it way, way, way too literally and in the weeds. After all, the vote in question was specifically about "Star Wars" in page titles. I can't imagine the idea that anyone involved in the CT, including its proposer, would agree with your interpretation. If you reach out to Toprawa and Ralltiir, the proposer of that CT, I suspect he would agree with me (and, knowing Tope, most likely say that some of the other page names, particularly the original trilogy novelizations, are wrong). The fact remains (and this is the final point I'll make on this discussion), "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" is the title of the novel and this is the appropriate page name. I do hope that clears things up. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 00:31, December 27, 2015 (UTC)
- Hi, Brandon, thanks for the response. The policy paragraph in question has specific wording that was ratified in a CT (linked to at the bottom of that section). That wording includes the words "Episode IV" in the title of a novelization that does not include those words. This exact wording was proposed in the CT and unanimously ratified.
Question of canon events
Regarding the events that are present in the novelization but not in the film, we should see them as canon? Including some dialogue excluded in the film that are present in this book? User:Cloneablestar (talk) 23:32, December 29, 2015 (UTC)
- Probably not. Novelizations are canon "where they align with what is seen on screen".--MugaSofer (talk) 21:38, January 17, 2016 (UTC)
- Bit of an old discussion, but just to clarify, that statement was made specifically in regards to Legends novelizations, not later-released canon material that is approved by the Story Group. The events should be regarded as canon unless they specifically contradict the film. ProfessorTofty (talk) 04:09, March 3, 2016 (UTC)
Missing Scenes
There are two extra scenes in the TFA novelization that haven't been added to the "Additional Scenes" section.
1. A scene with Kylo and Snoke in which they discuss Vader's downfall ("Sentiment").
2. A snowspeeder chase scene on Starkiller Base.
3. A scene where Kylo Ren and some storm troopers come across the crashed Millennium Falcon on Starkiller Base. The Ultimate Dude (talk) 02:49, March 4, 2016 (UTC)