- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a comprehensive article nomination that was successful. Please do not modify it.
Ho'Din-style veggie omelet
- Nominated by: Exiled Jedi
(Greetings) 01:54, July 8, 2012 (UTC) - Nomination comments: One Ho'Din-style veggie omelet for Eyrezer...
(2 ECs/1 Users/3 Total)
Support
- NaruHina Talk
05:04, July 10, 2012 (UTC) 
--Eyrezer (talk) 21:04, July 14, 2012 (UTC)
Menkooroo (talk) 21:51, July 14, 2012 (UTC)
Object
Is there some sort of battle or event that could be linked to for the destruction of Dex's Diner?Menkooroo (talk) 14:55, July 11, 2012 (UTC)- I don't think so, I believe Dexter went into hiding and the Empire demolished his restaurant, which was later rebuilt and run by his waitress, Hermione Bagwa.--Exiled Jedi (Greetings) 16:46, July 11, 2012 (UTC)
- In the book, Ferus Olin goes to it and finds it in ruins, IIRC. I dont think the books ever delve into what happened, aside from saying the Empire did it and specifying that isn't really relevant to the food he served. NaruHina Talk 17:43, July 11, 2012 (UTC)
- Thank Naru, I don't have the book and wasn't too sure of what happened.--Exiled Jedi (Greetings) 18:06, July 11, 2012 (UTC)
- Thank Naru, I don't have the book and wasn't too sure of what happened.--Exiled Jedi
- I don't think so, I believe Dexter went into hiding and the Empire demolished his restaurant, which was later rebuilt and run by his waitress, Hermione Bagwa.--Exiled Jedi
Comments
- Is not the use of the name Ho'Din an explicit reference? --Eyrezer (talk) 11:39, July 11, 2012 (UTC)
- Hmmm, it probably was intended to be one, and the only reason I worded it that way in the BTS was because that's the way Naru did his Diner articles originally. I assumed that someone made objections saying that it was speculation to assume they were the same. However, I have checked all the Diner nominations that I could find and none have any mention of this. I'll go with your judgment.--Exiled Jedi (Greetings) 12:53, July 11, 2012 (UTC)
- I don't know what you mean by none, but those are all mine. However, it does appear that a lot of the ones written since thos have left it out. Since we lifted the stringent ban on referencing "speculative" naming in things (remember that silliness?), the compromise has been to say that we don't know for sure that the author named it so intentionally. Most of these are a rather obvious, like calling it "Sernpidalian," but there is also the Gonzo yellow cheese, where it's pretty ambiguous whether he was going for the pre-existing IU term. He may well have mean the Muppet. Stating flatly that it was a reference to Ho'Din requires attribution that says he was going for that, or a blanket source that says references to planets and species were intentional, which doesn't exist. It would therefore, officially, be speculation to say so in the article without qualifiction. NaruHina Talk 17:43, July 11, 2012 (UTC)
- I more meant that no one asked you to do it that way in any of the nominations, sorry for the confusion. I see your point, and will wait for Eyrezer's reply before changing anything.--Exiled Jedi (Greetings) 18:06, July 11, 2012 (UTC)
- But let us be clear, the problem is attributing inspiration developed for references to out-of-universe ideas or items (i.e., are the Chironians named after the centaur Chiron). That kind of information would never go in the body anyway. For in-universe naming such as this, I see no reason not to mention it in the in-universe section. I haven't been involved in reviewing Naru's other articles, but, for instance, I think that to not mention Boontaspice in the IU section of Boontaspiced mustard is a mistake. --Eyrezer (talk) 21:08, July 11, 2012 (UTC)
- Yikes. I whole-heartedly agree with Eyrezer. If we had a source that said "Joe was able to speak Guudrian," it wouldn't be speculation to say that the language of the Guudrian species is intended here, even though there's no explicit note that "Guudrian is the language of the Guudrian species." We can use common sense here. ~Savage 21:22, July 11, 2012 (UTC)
- So should I merely link to the species/item in the body of the article or should I provide some context where possible? Also, what should I do about Revwien coleslaw which I already have as a CA?--Exiled Jedi (Greetings) 23:41, July 11, 2012 (UTC)
- For the sake of clarity, since do I find our rules a little too sringent as well at times, what is there to say about the omelet in relation to Ho'Din anyway? Was it a recipe created by the Ho'Din? Was it inspired by the Ho'Din and their culture? Was it inspired by the Ho'Din homeworld? Did the creator just like names with apostrophes in them? It's really way too broad a reference to say anything definitive. When you're talking about a language reference to a species, it does not make much sense at all for there to be any other explaination than "that species spoke this language," which puts it in the realm of duck testing since there is only one solution. The Mynershi do not speak a language named after their foes, the Psadan. What is the benefit of saying, vaguely, that the Ho'Din were related in some way to the omelet IU—without explicitness to reference—as opposed to saying, still vaguely, that the author probably took the name from the pre-existing species in the BTS? We have a reasonableness clause when the intention of the IU reference is clear and obvious, as a language, but where do we draw the line when the inspiration of the use of the word was primarily meta? A lot of these foods, like tailring bacon, were named so because the author wanted to include references to pre-existing Star Wars lore. It was not because he was establishing any definitive reason for the food to have that name or connecting it to thatculture. Dex's slider menu is comprised of dishes established as inspired by time he spent on the invoked worlds, but if that explicit backstory did not exist, would it be appropriate to say "this food came from the planet of Coruscant?" "Gonzo" is an easy thing to point out again: a slang term I only knew about personally because I had read a single Jedi Quest novel ages ago and it reminded me of the Muppet. We opened the floodgates on this sort of referencing a crack—formerly there was to be no reference whatsoever— and I fear if we keep on inching it open further than it already is, larger and larger speculative leaps will be considered acceptable and the information actually in the source will be less prominent than what we have inferred "reasonably." What's more important? That it was related to a species or that it was served in some restaurant in the galaxy? I may find it too shackling at times—I just hit up Aaron Allston to confirm that a bleeding Sonic Screwdriver reference was intentional—but a rule that is bent too much ceases to be a rule and we have the rule for a reason: "The threshold for inclusion in Wookieepedia is whether material is attributable to a reliable published source, not whether it is true." NaruHina Talk 06:32, July 12, 2012 (UTC)
- Well, to put it bluntly, we know that it is a Ho'Din-style omelet. I would therefore suggest saying something along the following lines: "A Ho'Din-style veggie omelet was a dish made from vegetables[1] and eggs[2] that was a breakfast food. The omelet was made in the style of the Ho'Din,[1] a nature-loving species known as master botanists.[3] The veggie omelets were served in Dex's Diner..." This way context from canonical sources is added (the Ho'Din are a species, plants and vegetables are their thing), without directly asserting anything beyond the original source (that it is a "Ho'Din-style omelet"). That is how context works. --Eyrezer (talk) 10:43, July 12, 2012 (UTC)
- That'd work for me in this case, I suppose. However, I don't think this situation should be construed as cut-and-dry or that we should include it in the IU section every time. If there are so many alternative explanations for why something carries a name, it's best that we not say anything IU. Such as if the species name is merely invoked, not "style," and definitely not planet names, as there are multitudinous reasons for things to carry one of those. Case-by-case analysis is really required. I'll update my articles that would need that after my break. If I don't, please poke me, I've forgotten. NaruHina Talk 19:29, July 12, 2012 (UTC)
- That'd work for me in this case, I suppose. However, I don't think this situation should be construed as cut-and-dry or that we should include it in the IU section every time. If there are so many alternative explanations for why something carries a name, it's best that we not say anything IU. Such as if the species name is merely invoked, not "style," and definitely not planet names, as there are multitudinous reasons for things to carry one of those. Case-by-case analysis is really required. I'll update my articles that would need that after my break. If I don't, please poke me, I've forgotten. NaruHina Talk
- Well, to put it bluntly, we know that it is a Ho'Din-style omelet. I would therefore suggest saying something along the following lines: "A Ho'Din-style veggie omelet was a dish made from vegetables[1] and eggs[2] that was a breakfast food. The omelet was made in the style of the Ho'Din,[1] a nature-loving species known as master botanists.[3] The veggie omelets were served in Dex's Diner..." This way context from canonical sources is added (the Ho'Din are a species, plants and vegetables are their thing), without directly asserting anything beyond the original source (that it is a "Ho'Din-style omelet"). That is how context works. --Eyrezer (talk) 10:43, July 12, 2012 (UTC)
- For the sake of clarity, since do I find our rules a little too sringent as well at times, what is there to say about the omelet in relation to Ho'Din anyway? Was it a recipe created by the Ho'Din? Was it inspired by the Ho'Din and their culture? Was it inspired by the Ho'Din homeworld? Did the creator just like names with apostrophes in them? It's really way too broad a reference to say anything definitive. When you're talking about a language reference to a species, it does not make much sense at all for there to be any other explaination than "that species spoke this language," which puts it in the realm of duck testing since there is only one solution. The Mynershi do not speak a language named after their foes, the Psadan. What is the benefit of saying, vaguely, that the Ho'Din were related in some way to the omelet IU—without explicitness to reference—as opposed to saying, still vaguely, that the author probably took the name from the pre-existing species in the BTS? We have a reasonableness clause when the intention of the IU reference is clear and obvious, as a language, but where do we draw the line when the inspiration of the use of the word was primarily meta? A lot of these foods, like tailring bacon, were named so because the author wanted to include references to pre-existing Star Wars lore. It was not because he was establishing any definitive reason for the food to have that name or connecting it to thatculture. Dex's slider menu is comprised of dishes established as inspired by time he spent on the invoked worlds, but if that explicit backstory did not exist, would it be appropriate to say "this food came from the planet of Coruscant?" "Gonzo" is an easy thing to point out again: a slang term I only knew about personally because I had read a single Jedi Quest novel ages ago and it reminded me of the Muppet. We opened the floodgates on this sort of referencing a crack—formerly there was to be no reference whatsoever— and I fear if we keep on inching it open further than it already is, larger and larger speculative leaps will be considered acceptable and the information actually in the source will be less prominent than what we have inferred "reasonably." What's more important? That it was related to a species or that it was served in some restaurant in the galaxy? I may find it too shackling at times—I just hit up Aaron Allston to confirm that a bleeding Sonic Screwdriver reference was intentional—but a rule that is bent too much ceases to be a rule and we have the rule for a reason: "The threshold for inclusion in Wookieepedia is whether material is attributable to a reliable published source, not whether it is true." NaruHina Talk
- So should I merely link to the species/item in the body of the article or should I provide some context where possible? Also, what should I do about Revwien coleslaw which I already have as a CA?--Exiled Jedi
- I more meant that no one asked you to do it that way in any of the nominations, sorry for the confusion. I see your point, and will wait for Eyrezer's reply before changing anything.--Exiled Jedi
- I don't know what you mean by none, but those are all mine. However, it does appear that a lot of the ones written since thos have left it out. Since we lifted the stringent ban on referencing "speculative" naming in things (remember that silliness?), the compromise has been to say that we don't know for sure that the author named it so intentionally. Most of these are a rather obvious, like calling it "Sernpidalian," but there is also the Gonzo yellow cheese, where it's pretty ambiguous whether he was going for the pre-existing IU term. He may well have mean the Muppet. Stating flatly that it was a reference to Ho'Din requires attribution that says he was going for that, or a blanket source that says references to planets and species were intentional, which doesn't exist. It would therefore, officially, be speculation to say so in the article without qualifiction. NaruHina Talk
- Hmmm, it probably was intended to be one, and the only reason I worded it that way in the BTS was because that's the way Naru did his Diner articles originally. I assumed that someone made objections saying that it was speculation to assume they were the same. However, I have checked all the Diner nominations that I could find and none have any mention of this. I'll go with your judgment.--Exiled Jedi
