Wookieepedia:Votes for deletion/Clone advisor

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 rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was no consensus: awaiting confirmation, possibly requiring renomination.. —Silly Dan _(talk) 00:33, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Clone advisor (talk - history - links - logs)

This article is pure conjectural fanon regarding a variant clone trooper based on CT-01/425 from Star Wars: Republic Commando. No canon information supports this position or variant either through recognizing it overtly or by offering other similar examples. Any valuable information contained on the page already exists in its parent article, CT-01/425. — SparqMan ^Talk 21:38, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Keep

1. Clones have never been shown in such a role before. Even if there was only one, there was still a clone advisor. This article should stay because it's clearly shown in a canon source, even if the name is conjecture. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 21:41, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
2. Deleted must not be this article !From another planet you must be if you think that there is just a clone advisor !Darth Nospher 16:14, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
3. Keep. If it comes from a canon source, its canon.--Darth Tyler^(talk) 17:25, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
4. KEJ 17:29, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
5. Maclimes Zero ^(talk) 18:21, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
6. NighthawkLeader 00:10, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
7. It should stay, there's a example so it should be here Groode hdoge 16:41, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
8. Yoshi626 23:55, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Merge

Redirect

Delete

1. — SparqMan ^Talk 21:38, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

   Maclimes Zero ^(talk) 21:41, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

2. Per Sparq Comments N.Y.N.E.^Comlink 23:47, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
3. —Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 23:56, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
4. Sikon 16:30, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
5. Herbsewell 16:48, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
6. Imp 23:43, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
7. QuentinGeorge 23:55, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
8. Kuralyov 06:11, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
9. , or merge into CT-01/425 --Prime 17:23, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
10. Sentry ^Talk 07:00, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
11. Based on the comments alone it's pretty clear that those who actually play the game (like Nebs I don't have it) can see that this so-called "Clone Advisor" is anything but -- it would be more accurate to compare his role with that of a SpecForces controller, such as that used by U.S. Navy SEALs. And since we have no other source for such a clone-filled role (as far as I know) this is fanon.--Goodwood 20:05, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Comments

• We already have an Advisor article. We do not need one for each individual case of an advisor, in the same way that we do not need a Ewok Shaman article, since we already have a Shaman one. Maclimes Zero ^(talk) 21:41, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Then, judging from that, I take it you want to have clone engineer redirected into engineer. No way. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 21:43, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
    • No, because there is a wealth of information regarding specifically the role, equipment, etc, for a Clone Engineer, as well as (technically) many examples of them. We have no information whatsoever about Clone Advisors, short of conjecture based on one individual. Maclimes Zero ^(talk) 21:47, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
      • And since when does conjecture based on one individual mean we just delete it as fanon when it isn't, regardless of the amount of information is currently present? Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 21:49, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Fanon = fan created continuity. Please point me to the canon source that gave you this piece of information, "Their objectives were to inform the squad about their missions, status, and objectives." Star Wars: Republic Commando only shows us that CT-01/425 did that, not that he served a special role. Further, IIRC, he does indeed inform you of those things...which is not advising. As I said on the topic talk page, those functions are what any functionary in a military organization does. — SparqMan ^Talk 22:54, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
      • SparqMan, why don't you stop asking me and ask the person who actually created the article? Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 01:05, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Because you are its primary supporter. — SparqMan ^Talk 03:28, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
      • I've already explained that I don't have the game. I'm only supporting it from what I've seen here. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 12:05, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
        • It appears we have a tie. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 20:28, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
          • And just to make sure: Has everyone been checking Talk:Clone advisor every so often? Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 00:19, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
            • How much longer will this go? Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 23:40, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
              • Anyone? Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 23:48, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
                • The VFD? When a clear consensus emerges or the topic stays inactive for a week or so. --Imp 23:50, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
                  • And if it's been stated that there are more than one clone advisor? Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 23:52, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
                    • Well, I do believe that statement was from Ryan Kaufman on the TFN boards, which does not make it canonical. --Imp 23:53, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
                      • But that doesn't mean we just disregard it. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 23:54, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
                        • It could merit a mention in the BTS section of the CT-01/425 article. --Imp 23:56, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
                          • That's not good enough. We have to be open to the possibility that there are more clone advisors, based on Kaufman's statement. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 23:57, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
                            • Oh, no doubt there are more of them. The problem is, that's our and Kaufman's opinion, and is not supported by canon yet. --Imp 23:59, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
                              • Not yet. In fact, we should ask Leland Chee before this vote is over. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 00:02, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
                                • That's a great suggestion. =) --Imp 00:04, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
                                  • But if he says there are more than one clone advisors, this vote has to be ended with no deletion. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 00:05, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
                                    • Yes. If it's in the Holocron, it stays. --Imp 00:06, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
                                      • Could you ask him, and then provide a link to it? Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 00:08, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
                                        • Here. --Imp 04:13, 7 January

2007 (UTC)

• Great, thanks. This could actually become a way of double-checking before putting articles up for deletion in the first place. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 14:37, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
  • It's taking longer than I thought. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 12:06, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
    • There should be a "Pending verification by Leland Chee" template. *chuckle* Maclimes Zero ^(talk) 23:52, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
      • Actually, that may be a good idea. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 00:53, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
        • And just to let everyone know, this vote for deletion should not be concluded until we receive word from Leland Chee. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 21:19, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
          • I wonder what's taking Chee so long. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 14:38, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
            • Goodwood, it's not fanon. And we're still waiting to here from Leland Chee. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 22:14, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
              • why do you think is fanon when is coming from a canon source!go and play the game first, Goodwood!Darth Nospher 07:11, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
                • Calm down, Darth Nospher. —Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 12:11, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
• I'm calm now!Darth Nospher 14:54, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Then stop yelling. —Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 20:41, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
• Oki Doki !Darth Nospher 21:24, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
  • And for all we know, this might take awhile. Someone might want to ask Leland Chee again. —Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 22:58, 23 January 2007 (UTC)