This page is an archive of a community-wide discussion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made in the Senate Hall or new Consensus Track pages rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record.
The result of the debate was overwhelming support for merging Force power "variants." -- Darth Culator ^(Talk) 05:09, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Should we merge them? In the spirit of hyperinclusionism, I would say no, but someone said something that made me pause: Doing so would actually enable us to combine a ton of stubs into real, long articles. Sounds kinda neat, providing info doesn't get lost in the process. The obvious arguments are, why merge power variants that have canon names, when we have tons of stubs existing only because of hyperinclusionism? Why shouldn't they have their own articles as well? Would we be selling out on the Wookieepedia founding stone by going the road of Wikipedia? On the other hand, do we really need Force Push, Force Pull and Saber barrier as articles sepatate from Telekinesis? Seems kinda stupid. Quite frankly, the only thing I care about is whether info would be lost to make stubs fit in the main power articles. Stubs are expanded upon, at least, while the big articles are more likely to be cut down. Waddaya think? DarthMRN 04:12, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Merge Force Power variantsEdit

1. I have a bias against "powers" anyway, and think that 90% them are game mechanics at best. I mean, push and pull are two different things? How does that make any sense? - Lord Hydronium 04:22, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
2. Havac 04:50, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
3. Jedimca0 ^{(Do or Do Not, There is No Try)} 08:55, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
4. Weak merge. I have a tendency to argue for common sense, but I usually get blasted for it because we see enough idiocity to make us doubt the common sense of the common editor. So my vote is merge obvious stuff like push and pull to telekenisis, and draw the line if something is questionable, debatable, or hard to source as not-directly-related to another more encompassing "power". Wildyoda 17:38, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
   • So basically, we'll do it just like now and have a vote on every single case... Evir Daal 08:56, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
5. I must agree that most commonly-named force powers are glorified game mechanics who's names just stuck. Personally, I think everything should be narrowed down to one of three powers: Control, Sense and Alter, just like in the old SW RPG, but I don't see that happening.Thorvindr 16:41, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
   • Funny thing about that, really... Jedi vs. Sith: The Essential Guide to the Force actually refers to all powers falling into one of these three categories. Interesting, huh? ^Jorrel _Fraajic 18:05, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
6. I agree that most of them are gameplay mechanics. Although Wookieepedia:Trash compactor/Chain Lightning was closed as "no consensus", I think we should not differentiate between minor variations. Otherwise, we would have to add Improved Force Heal and Master Force Heal, or have Knight Speed and Master Speed, etc. - Sikon 10:09, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
7. Alright, big S. That Knight Speed/Master Speed argument totally Force Pushed me off the fence. DarthMRN 19:16, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
8. Atarumaster88 ^{(Talk page)} 15:32, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
9. Imperialles 13:10, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
10. Game mechanics, no more. If RPG stats are not canon, then there's no reason individual levels of a Force power in an electronic RPG should be included either, unless the effect is considerably different. There are also other wikis on which such statistical information can be displayed for more game-minded readers.—Graestan ^{(This party's over)} 05:59, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
11. per Lord Hydronium and Graestan. --Craven 13:00, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
12. {{SUBST:User:Unit 8311/sig}} 17:01, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
13. This is still open? Can we please get some relatively sane and sensible people in here to overwhelm the game fanboys and end this thing? -- Darth Culator ^(Talk) 23:24, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
14. Merge, now that we have an in-universe, non-game book that categorizes Force powers for us to work from. jSarek 01:57, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
15. Per jSarek, Lord Hydronium and Graestan. Besides, it's not like any of my fly Force Power images from KOTOR will be axed... ;)--Goodwood ^{(For the Rebellion!)} 06:58, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
16. Merge those which appear to be game mechanics, Keep those expressly named in this book per jSarek. ^Jorrel _Fraajic 18:05, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
    • That's insane. That's like saying Jaden Korr doesn't exist because he's not in this book. TEGTTF is useful, but certainly not comprehensive. Din's Fire 997 20:44, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
      • But Jaden Korr can not, in any way, shape, or form, appear to be or cannot be mistaken for game mechanics. The different levels of Force Speed (as shown above: Burst of Speed, Knight Speed, and Master Speed), or any other Force power varient, for example, could easily be accredited to game mechanics. I'm all for the hyperinclusionist side of Wookieepedia (I was the one who made Stud, for Katarn's sake), but when Stud is taken as a "game mechanic", obvious Force power variants should be applied the same layer. And, since I don't want to be going around voting on every single case, we go off of our most complete, IU-written source, which just happens to be the EGttF. (Besides, Jaden Korr is mentioned elsewhere ;-) ) ^Jorrel _Fraajic 23:41, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Keep them separateEdit

1. You'll never take me alive! :) Evir Daal 09:16, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
2. {{SUBST:DarthAbsig}} 10:29, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
3. You gotta keep 'em separated. KEJ 08:12, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
4. I worked too bloody hard on that screencap of Chain Lightning to see it merged. Din's Fire 997 15:29, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
   • We can still include it in the Chain Lightning subsection of the Lightning article.
     • That's just it: If I worked that hard on one screenshot for some dead-end article, there's bound to be dozens of other cases like it.
       Don't think this is just personal either: I'm not afraid of sacrificing my work for the greater good. I'm all for merging into Telekinesis and Mind Trick, but fear what this could do should it become policy. This place was started for these kind of little, one-shot articles, and I'd hate to see this track lead to something like "List of minor characters in XXX" someday. Din's Fire 997 03:29, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
       • I can sympathize with that, but as outlined above, it might be possible to create real, long (maybe even FA) Force power articles if we merge them. Besides, wouldn't that picture experience a lot more views if located on the page of the revered Force Lightning, rather than some obscure half-stub which you more or less gotta have played the game to even suspect the existence of? DarthMRN 20:06, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
5. hey guys i dont know how this works but i agree with this i have seen articles that would be usefell but they where either stubs or not yet made pffff i hate it —Unsigned comment by The terminator15 (talk • contribs).
   • Single issue voter. —Xwing328^(Talk) 22:56, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
6. I think that they should be kept separate, so people that are looking for a specific force power can just find it, instead of scrolling through a whole long article, looking for one power.--Fonon Calus 00:39, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
   • Single issue voter. —Xwing328^(Talk) 22:56, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

CommentsEdit

Before I vote, I'd like to know exactly how we're going to pick which articles get to have the merge treatment and which ones don't. Is there any in-universe addressing of the different powers to serve as a guide? (I know Affect Mind, Farseeing, and Force Lightning have been mentioned by characters at various points, but those alone aren't going to do the job). If there isn't, then game mechanics, however micromanaged they may be, may in fact be the most canonical way to represent Force abilities. jSarek 08:42, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

• Actually, some of the worst sinners come from novels, I believe, which means they might have been mentioned by the characters. Or the author....Damn good question, that. How about doing the obvious ones, and leaving the ambigous ones until we know for sure? Largely, this is an issue with blantantly obvious variations of Mind Trick and Telekinesis. By getting those out of the way, we would solve most of the stub/hyperinclusionism problem, leaving only powers we would have to get overly conjectural to start merging. Like, Force Push is obviously a kind of Telekinesis, but Force Protection is less obvious, but certainly is possible to explain through telekinetic Force use. Basically, once it gets too conjectural, we stop. A bit weak for a guideline, though. DarthMRN 09:28, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
• Combining/merging some of them would be a good idea, especially the stubby ones. I don't think all power articles need to be removed though. -Fnlayson 19:40, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
• Force Push is a variant of Force Pull. Are we to merge them? Jasca Ducato ^{(Talk to the Dark Lord)} 20:41, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
• They are both variants of Telekinesis. If the vote says yes, we will merge them. DarthMRN 22:02, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
  • What do you mean "merge them all"? Create one giant "Force powers" article with everything in it? If so, hell no. If not, again, where do we draw lines? jSarek 09:11, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
    • That is partially what this CT is here to determine. My above suggestion was that we merge only variants which are obviously derieved from a "main" Force power, and leave all which are in doubt. Force Push should be merged with Telekinesis, but Force Protection should stay separate. Weak for a guideline, but that is the best I got. DarthMRN 13:16, 17 July 2007 (UTC)