Talk: LadyNeret/Talk Archive 1

< User talk:LadyNeret

Welcome, LadyNeret!

Hello, LadyNeret, and welcome to Wookieepedia! We hope you like the place and choose to join us in building the best Star Wars encyclopedia there is. Here are some things you should know:

Wookiees-Transparent

New to wikis? Don't worry, we were all new once. Our welcome page has everything you need to get started, and the Jundland Wastes sandbox can be used for test edits. Don't be afraid to make mistakes—be bold!

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wookieepedian! If you have any questions, you can consult our FAQ, ask a question in the Senate Hall forum, visit our official Discord server, or leave me a message on my talk page.
May the Force be with you! —TanDivoInsignia-SenateMurders Anıl Şerifoğlu (talk) 11:38, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Archival links

Hiya! Great work with the Star Wars Galaxy Map article! I've added an archive link to the JCF citation (see here) per the Sourcing policy, just so you know next time. You're also welcome to join Wookieepedia's Discord server, where you can easily always ask for other editors' help if you need it. Happy editing! OOM 224 (he/him) 12:34, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks

Hello there, and welcome! That's a fun new feature that Fandom added recently, which allows any user to thank another user for a specific edit! If you look at the recent changes, you'll notice a small button to the right of a recent edit that says thanks! Supreme Emperor Holocomm 04:38, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

RE: Thanks

Happy to help! And you've been doing a great work with your recent edits such as the Star Wars Galaxy Map! Also, I have removed the {{Conjecturespell}} tag from Serolonis since, as the notice says, it is used when the actual spelling of the subject is "pure conjecture," such as audio dramas with no accompanying script, etc. But I have noted the spelling inconsistency in its Behind the scenes section. TanDivoInsignia-SenateMurders Anıl Şerifoğlu (talk) 11:44, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Blog post

Hey, thanks for helping out with the galaxy map! Nice to see a new face here. I just wanted to inform you that putting {{Po}} next to the blog post with the galaxy map is inaccurate since the labels are still present there. You may notice that some of your edits have already been reverted to reflect this. Hope this makes sense. UberSoldat93 ClanMudhornSignet-Redemption (talk) 12:37, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

RE: Thanks!

Hey! No problem at all, happy to help. If you have any further questions, do feel free to ask Lewisr (talk) 04:53, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Maps in Battles

Hey there! I'm wondering if you perhaps saw and have an answer for the question I posted on Forum:SH:Star Wars Timelines sources? Cheers, Imperators II(Talk) 08:08, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

‎Brentaali

Hey there! I think you are slightly missing the idea, we aren't saying there is a connection, it's a fact they share the same name so it's fair to say that they share a name in the IU section Lewisr (talk) 04:43, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

  • Just to let you know, this kind of noting the shared names is a long standing and well covered precedent within the site. So to change this, you would likely need to start a Forum:Senate Hall or something similar Lewisr (talk) 04:46, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
    • We are being clear though, we are just saying they shared a name, nothing more. And that much is accurate to add onto pages Lewisr (talk) 04:50, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
      • Then it's not really our fault, we are clear in our writing that it's only a shared name, we can't control that others for some reason take it another way. But if you are doing a SH, I'm sure it'll be discussed Lewisr (talk) 04:56, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
        • No don't worry, I'm not taking it that way at all. I see and understand your concerns completely Lewisr (talk) 05:09, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Timelines source

Hey! I've noticed a few times that you've removed Timelines as a source from pages where it actually is mentioned in the book. Do you not have the book itself? Lewisr (talk) 06:51, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

  • No worries I totally understand, if you have any questions whether things are mentioned in the final book, feel free to ask Lewisr (talk) 06:56, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
    • Perfect thanks! I do have a searchable copy on my laptop so it's really easy for me to search for potential mentions if needs be Lewisr (talk) 07:01, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
      • Damn nice job on that! But yes it will make things easier I'm sure Lewisr (talk) 07:08, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
        • Done. Just cleaning up the redlinks. LadyNeret (talk) 07:25, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Re:Maps in Battles

Thanks. Not particular section, no, since I've written quite a few articles on locations from that map already :P But yeah, if you can acquire said copy of the book it'd be very valuable to document what it has. Imperators II(Talk) 07:23, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

C4-DE

Hey there! Just noticed you left a message on C4-DE Bot's talk page, lol. So, what you're seeing with the dates is the Source Engine, a bot-implemented system of Appearance & Source dating, tracking, and sorting I've created that is controlled by the Sources Project subpages here on the site. They are free for anyone to edit, so if you see an incorrect date, feel free to correct it like I did here! Also, no pressure, but we're all pretty impressed with your motivation and work as a new editor and you're more than welcome to join the Discord, where you can see the Engine at work (C4-DE and JocastaBot are both primarily controlled by Discord commands) and talk to other editors in real time. Cade GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 14:48, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

  • That's correct, yes. I will be kicking off another loop through Category:Canon articles after the first one completes tomorrow(?), and it'll fix the Timeline dates if necessary. Cade GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 04:31, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

GrogaGrogaGroga

Grogutok
I, Braha'tok enthusiast Hello there, sincerely award thee a Grogu'tok
for your extensive work on the Star Wars Galaxy Map. Looking forward to more great contributions from you!

Freerock and Benath

Hey there! Regarding Freerock, it probably would be better to contact the nominator yes, just as a courtesy and so Braha is aware of such changes, and agrees with them. I see on Benath, though the page is currently using a planet infobox and you were saying that the homeworld was a point of interest regarding Benath, which isn't necessarily completely confirmed Lewisr (talk) 01:17, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

  • Originally it was the difference in regions that probably prevented any kind of merging Lewisr (talk) 01:48, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
    • Regarding your message to Braha, are you using Legends sources as your basis for Wild Space's borders in canon? Because we cannot do that. We can only use the material provided in canon sources for canon articles, even if they were based on something in Legends that was in Wild Space. It's rare but wild discrepancies in terms of placement between the continuities do happen, so we've as a community decided to adopt a strict no-assumptions-at-all rule for Legends/Canon stuff like that. Cade GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 02:19, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
    • Also, to be clear, {{Planetnamia}} only applies to stuff from the Atlas and the Atlas Companion; so it's only for Legends. We don't use that same logic for Canon content. scratch that someone pointed out we use it in certain Galaxy Map-related canon articles. Cade GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 02:21, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Nadiri

Hey! Well in this instance 1.9 just refers to the summary type in the standard summaries box. But per the layout guide you'll notice instances where ID or C| is not to be used. In Nadiri's instance it shouldn't be added because Nadiri has been refered to that simply before in other sources, I was just getting to adding it on the page after I had made the edit Lewisr (talk) 01:18, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

  • Plus the map didn't refer to the Nadiri as a space station, see Nadiri Lewisr (talk) 01:23, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Space sation template

Hi, saw your recent field addition to the {{Space station}} template. In the future, it would be great if, when editing a template used on many pages (in this case, over 500) pages, please leave a bot request for the field to be added to the rest of the pages using the template. In this case it seems the field is likely needed, but in most other cases, field additions to any major infoboxes should nearly always be discussed in the Senate Hall to see if anyone disagrees, since it affects a lot of pages. In some more major cases, the community also often votes on infobox field additions to codify them in cases where folks may disagree (examples: 1, 2). Any other page using the same template gets an red error added to the top of its page when a parameter is now detected missing, which just added around 600 pages to a maintenance category in this case, including some status articles. Cheers, —spookywillowwtalk 03:07, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

  • Hi, yes, a discussion in Senate Hall at minimum is generally required for infobox changes that aftect such a large range of articles. When there is any disagreement as there is here, it should be taken to a vote, as not everyone may feel a field is necessary. In this case, anything astrography related I'll defer to Imp for. Though notedly, due to timezones and such, I'm sure he'll get back to your messages—we're all volunteers here and get to stuff when we can when it comes to talk pages, as most Wooks currently use Discord for swifter matters.—spookywillowwtalk 01:19, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

Sunspot

Hey, I saw your message to Spooky, and figured I'd take care of it. In likely the Legends page should be moved away from /Legends, but that can be handled at a different point, so the hide=1 is just a temp solution Lewisr (talk) 03:21, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

  • Of course, happy to help! Lewisr (talk) 03:23, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Garbage Moon

This isn't really the kind of practice we've been implementing and work with though until there is actually a clear link between the two in a canonical sense, hence the instances where we say they share their name etc Lewisr (talk) 03:17, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

  • I was under the impression that was only for species in canon as of now Lewisr (talk) 03:26, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

Re:Space station template

Hello! I see you have posted a Consensus track thread about this matter, so I'd say that any instances of the template attempting to use the star parameter should be reverted until we get a community consensus on this. Cheers, Imperators II(Talk) 06:59, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

Re:Sarrassia

Hello. Regarding Sarrassia, I removed the information in question because explaining the backstory of Sarassian iron in Canon and that 'Sarrassia's proximity to both Niful and the belt have yet to clarified by Lucasfilm' isn't really something that would go on the page of Sarrassia. I've spoken to a couple others about this and they agree the info isn't necessary there. Explicitly saying that we don't have information (in this case that any connection between Niful and Sarrassia is unexplained) isn't really something Wookieepedia does. I appreciate your work in examining the connections between Sarrassian iron, but please understand this isn't really necessary. I would recommend a brief explanation of the history of Sarrassian iron in both continuities in the Canon iron page's BtS-just explaining where it came from in Legends and where it came from in Canon-so your work can be put to good use. Thanks, Fan26 (Talk) 15:41, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

  • Hey so you say "both Niful and the belt most likely reside in the same system as Sarrassia" which is the sort of assumption we can't really be making Fan26 (Talk) 04:07, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

re:reversions

as I explained in my edit summaries on each of those reversions, there's no need for an unnecessary reference note for the article name when it is sourced to the same source as the rest of the paragraph. One reference note works fine regardless of wether the subject is a galactic location related to the Timelines map or not, and the only reason two reference notes would be needed in cases like these is if information from a different source (which therefore requires its own reference note) appears between them Fan26 (Talk) 05:02, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

    • If it's an "assumed" name then it's conjecturally titled and the article is marked as so. Those cases where the system name is immediately cited are likely articles where the system was named in one source but the majority of the relevant info is from another source-ergo, the system name is immediately cited to whatever named it (likely the Atlas) while the rest of the info is then cited to whatever the relevant source is. I understand all this could be confusing but in time you'll get the hang of it Fan26 (Talk) 05:16, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Systems

Hey there, I am of course checking these systems names are actually used, and each time it has been used. Sorry that you feel that way, you shouldn't close your account though, you're still new and maybe once you get the hang of things you'll find that you enjoy it here! Also don't forget that we're used to operating a certain way, and you're slightly doing a different way, which is fine, but takes getting used to in both fronts Lewisr (talk) 05:07, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

  • Wouldn't say you're wasting your time at all, perhaps just focus on something slightly different for a while and then come back to the map stuff! I'm sure there's some things you're interested in doing Lewisr (talk) 05:16, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Galactic Map BTS

Hey Neret, thanks for reaching out! If I am honest, I really am not the best person to be asking about this sort of thing, I mostly just follow what others do as system/planetary stuff is not my specialty. Though from what I can see, the logic you're presenting does make sense, especially when linking to comments directly from Jason Fry himself, though we must also remember some of the comments were only applied to Legends before (such as the 'Yes, planets not assigned a system in published source can be assumed to reside in system of same name.') iirc Lewisr (talk) 04:03, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

  • That would probably go a long way to clearing things up for sure if you can Lewisr (talk) 04:15, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Bith system

Hello, apologies. However, we only list out of universe sources in appearances and sources on pages. Once the inuse tag is off, that will be removed per site policy. The contents of this category are referenced to in numerous onsite articles, including many status articles, but the sources and appearances sections do not reflect in-universe fictional titles and works. Cheers, —spookywillowwtalk 03:56, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Klasse Epheroma

Since you're mapping every star, would you say canon Klasse Ephemora should be split into two astronomical objects if that Chiss map is supposed to be treated like a system Atlas map? --Goodmind (talk) 11:08, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Page move

If that's the full name of the book then yeah it should be moved to that. And I'm not sure what you mean by the 2nd point? Lewisr (talk) 15:24, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Conflicting opinions

Hi LadyNeret, hope you are doing well! First of all, you've been doing some great work with the Galaxy Map updates, so thank you for that! However, I've noticed that some of your changes, like assuming system names from that map, have received some backlash, with multiple editors voicing their opinions against those changes in talk pages, which is perfectly okay! But in cases like this, especially if they are site-wide changes, it's vital to have a proper discussion about the disagreement, such as creating a Senate Hall thread, so that the community at large can reach an agreement over the competing opinions. For that reason, I'm kindly asking you not to keep reverting these edits or implementing these changes on other pages until we hold a discussion where both you and other editors can express the reasonings behind their logic, and the community can decide on the best course of action. Thank you for your understanding, TanDivoInsignia-SenateMurders Anıl Şerifoğlu (talk) 19:46, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

  • Thank you for responding! I can totally understand why it can be frustrating to see some of your good-faith edits being reverted (which I have experienced myself during my earlier days on Wook!), but a simple reversion is sometimes the only way to fix the issue. What I'm trying to say has really nothing to do with the edits themselves, are all about how to handle disputes after they naturally arise in a wiki with many different editors. Here, for example, you may not know that the in-universe reference books are also listed in Sources per an official policy, which are put into place via community votes, and that's completely okay! But the issue is to simply revert your edit back without properly communicating with that editor, admin or not, who has pointed out it's not the current site-wide practice in the edit summary, which means that they didn't revert it just because they don't like it or disagree with your edit. TanDivoInsignia-SenateMurders Anıl Şerifoğlu (talk) 03:37, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
    • She has reverted your edit because you had listed the in-universe book and in Appearances. But as she noted in the summary, we only list the real-life books and they should be listed in Sources per the policy. Since the book was already listed in Sources, there was no other way to fix your edit without simply reverting it. TanDivoInsignia-SenateMurders Anıl Şerifoğlu (talk) 03:59, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
    • Most editors keep an eye on recent changes and discuss some changes on our Discord channel that may have some issues, or even report outright vandal edits to the admins. So it's possible they may have discussed one or more of your edits, and you don't have to be on Discord of course, but I don't see how it would be against transparency since the discussions I'm talking about are all in talk pages. As for me, it has simply come to my attention that there have been some reverts and disputes between you and others, took a look at it, and decided to message you about how we can discuss this kind of conflicts, unrelated to my opinion about the actual edits themselves. And about your second message on Spooky, I simply saw the correspondence between you, and as far as I can see, you have reverted your edit back despite her edit summary and without giving her a chance to explain it further following your talk page message, which she has responded five minutes later, and did not keep reverting the edit to solve this dispute first even though it was clearly against the policy. So this has nothing to do with her personal opinion or her status as admin. TanDivoInsignia-SenateMurders Anıl Şerifoğlu (talk) 04:31, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

Approach

Hey Neret! While I get you might be a bit frustrated with reversions of some of the edits you've made or how we deal with things around here, there's no need to be making comments like here, here, and here, where they come across as being passive aggressive. No one's being that way towards you. Again, I understand the frustrations, but it would be better as Anil suggested that things are discussed before we do anything further as it will affect a significant amount of pages Lewisr (talk) 03:26, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

  • I know that it was not just me who saw it that way, as I discussed with an admin before. I'm sorry that in the end it came to reverting the edits, but for the sake of those pages, it was the best course of action until further discussion was had. You're welcome to still have that discussion, and I implore you to come back from your vacation and discuss it when you're ready too. It was also certainly not any kind of stalking, as is well known by the many users of the site that I am pretty active a LOT of the time and actively patrolling the recent changes when I am editing, so I saw your edits just like I see any other editors edits. I did try to raise my concerns with you, and as I was still not completely okay with the situation, I did speak with an admin about it all, and then acted after some discussion, again it might not the best outcome, but that's why I also reminded about discussing first Lewisr (talk) 04:47, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
    • I want to just clarify that I did not go and revert things after you added the vacation tag, I did that before and infact I haven't removed any since the tag did go up. I really do disagree that we are being dismissive of new ideas, it has been mentioned multiple times that it would be better to discuss these ideas with a larger audience such as in Senate Hall, it may not have had the outcome you wanted, but the discussion is the more important thing. While you may have seen it in others, I think in these specific cases we need to be extra careful of what we are saying in summaries and messages, because even if you are frustrated, it's always better to keep a level head and if you need to take a step back for a minute before responding, then it's better to do that. But I appreciate the apology, and my apologies if I've come across in anyway to you like that (I don't believe I have, or at least not by intent).

Regarding Timelines, there was a StarWars.com post that seemed to say that the map was in fact going to be with the book so in a way it is not that unreasonable to think that the map was to be included with Timelines. But it was brought up a bit ago, I don't recall exactly when, but it was mentioned maybe a few months ago, that the map was in fact not included, which did kind of force some change in how we handled it, and all of our citations had been made even months before that so we were already behind in updating those.

While I understand you may have been hesistant to contact Jason Fry, I think it would have been the worthwhile thing to do. But I guess that ship may have sailed. While maps may be indicative of systems, they do appear to depict a lot of planets. And while it may have provided some confusion, it's not entirely down to us when we are trying to do our best to document these things with how we are led to believe they should be done. This is why discussion is important, so if there are other ways to improve our documentation then we should certainly be open to ideas, after all we all want the same thing, to document the sources in the most accurate way possible. You may call it fixing an error, but it is still implementing it onto our pages.

I'm sorry that you encountered resistance, as I said we all want to detail it in the most accurate way, just it appears for now our ways are entirely different. Maybe in the future we can agree on how it should be done, but that means we need to discuss it first. I hope you will come back after you've taken a break, and it sucks to hear that your enthusiasm has been sapped, it's not nice to hear that's the case. Take care Lewisr (talk) 04:21, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

  • These kind of messages are not helping your cause. Please again as I mentioned, take a step back and think before saying anything Lewisr (talk) 05:25, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Maher

Hi, just wanted to explain my reasoning for this reversion. As something labeled Maher exists on the Timelines map, there's really no reason to mark a page for it as Fanon even if some of the other items depicted on that map are meant to be systems and not astronomical objects. Echoing what others have said above, I really think it would be a good idea to discuss all this in a SH as opposed to unilaterally making changes-Wookieepedia is a community and the encyclopedia we maintain is a collaborative effort after all, so it would help if you presented in one place your reasoning regarding the way the site is currently handling this map. Thanks, Fan26 (Talk) 05:16, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

  • Wait, apologies, I misread the post linked to in the edit summary. Nevermind, sorry. I've reverted my reversion Fan26 (Talk) 05:18, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
    • As I said above, I misread the post-it seems Mr. Fry explicitly indicated those markers did not correspond to an actual system/object there. I saw a Fanon tag placed on a page for what at first seemed like a canonical subject-as I said it my edit summary, I took the time to check the map and confirmed something called "Maher" existed at G-7. And as I said above I re-read Mr. Fry's forum post, realised I was incorrect, and reverted my reversion. Saying that I can't "wipe my own" without a canonical source telling me too is way unneeded and impolite. I'm sorry, but I really do not appreciate that. Fan26 (Talk) 05:27, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Civility Warning

Hi LadyNeret. I see that you've chosen to voluntarily leave Wookieepedia, but I think it's important to point out that, should you choose to return, comments like this are totally unnecessary and inappropriate. Please remain civil in all interactions with other editors otherwise you will be subject to administrative action. Thanks, Ayrehead02 (talk) 09:11, 27 August 2023 (UTC)