Wookieepedia:Comprehensive article nominations/Fifth Pius Dea Crusade

< Wookieepedia:Comprehensive article nominations
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a comprehensive article nomination that was unsuccessful. Please do not modify it.

Fifth Pius Dea Crusade

(0 ECs/0 Users/0 Total)

Support

Object

  1. From the Council Chambers:
    • This applies to all of the crusades listed here except the First and Second. Per the precedent of Forum:TC:Battles of Zehava, should we even have these articles? The linked TC pretty well established that unidentified battles about which nothing is known other than the basics of the full war shouldn't have articles. That seems to apply pretty well here. The first and second crusades have unique information, so they should stay, but the rest have nothing unique at all. Do you see where I'm coming from here? —MJ— Comlink Friday, May 11, 2012, 03:40 UTC
      • Since more have been added, I'll state that this applies to the 5th, 6th, 8th, 9th, 13th, and 14th. The others have unique information that warrants keeping them. —MJ— Comlink Friday, May 11, 2012, 03:48 UTC
      • While I do see your point, I discussed this with Nahdar on IRC when I was creating Contispex III through XVIII. NaruHina helped me finish up the Contispex articles, and when I asked about doing the crusades, Nahdar said to put as much info as I could without speculating. Seeing as all of the Contispexes were not explicitly mentioned, but logic dictates that they existed, I don't see why we shouldn't keep the crusades. Cade Calrayn GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit 03:57, May 11, 2012 (UTC)
        • On a related note, Menk has suggested that since the titles of most of the crusades are conjectural, those be moved to "Fifth Pius Dea crusade" and be referred to as the "fifth Pius Dea crusade" in the body. That would further exhibit the fact the titles are conjectural, and that they were not directly mentioned. Cade Calrayn GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit 04:05, May 11, 2012 (UTC)
        • (edit conflict) It's the exact same situation as the Battles of Zehava; logic dictates that they exist, but they are never explicitly mentioned, and nothing is known about them except what is known about the surrounding war. It's the same here. Honestly, I personally don't think these should exist, and I may start a TC thread tomorrow (I need to think about going to bed right now). If there isn't a consensus to delete them, I won't push it further, but based on the precedent, I think the community needs to at least discuss this. If they are kept, then yes, they should be decapitalized. —MJ— Jedi Council Chambers Friday, May 11, 2012, 04:08 UTC

Comments