'Tis a question that's been buggin' me for a while, but it was sheerly academic up until now. I will give you the specific example. I want to nominate the article on the Vodran alien species. I will check all the apps & sources mentioning either the species, the planet and each and any of the known, named Vodrans. One of these Vodrans was Xenon Nnaksta. Nnaksta had a passing mention in Wanted by Cracken, saying only that "[this other guy] made attempts on the lives of (...) Commander Nnaksta (and others)." No more info on Nnaksta, and in fact Nnaksta's species wouldn't be specified for one more year later in a different source.
To me, this is enough to list WbC in the source list of the Vodran article, because one Vodran was unambiguously mentioned in WbC, even if the species itself was not. In other words: The complete source list for one species will include all the items in the source lists of any member of the species. The source list of an alien is a sub-set of the source list for this alien's species. Every of these source will surely include information on the species—for instance, sometimes other people made attempts on the lives of Vodrans.
Alternatively, I've been just told, when the source mentions only one individual and not the species, that source should not be included in the species (My talk page). I wanted to hear your opinions before making a decision, because it affects an article that's in my aim. Kudos, Skippy Farlstendoiro 09:37, October 11, 2010 (UTC)
- Well, first, these cases are unambiguous as far as I'm concerned:
- A source mentions the species by name, regardless of whether the species "appears" or not: Add it to the list.
- A source depicts the species, regardless of whether the species is mentioned by name or not: Add it to the list.
- Your conundrum has to do with a named member of a species being mentioned, but not that individual's species, in a textual source (If Chewbacca appears in a movie, we don't leave that off the list simply because the word "Wookiee" isn't mentioned). In this case, the general site consensus seems to be not to list the source. I'd say that in general I agree with that, unless it can be argued that the source is adding new canon about the species despite the fact that he species is not mentioned by name. For example, if a text source mentions a known Vodran by name (or even indirectly), but not the word Vodran, and says something that has species-wide implications for the species, go ahead and add the source. An example might be: "Gragra the gorgmonger lost her first tooth after she finished primary school." Here, even though Gragra's species (Swokes Swokes) is not mentioned, we learn that Swokes Swokes lose their teeth, and at least some of them attend primary school. In other words, for your Vodran example, make the call based on whether the info on the species has broader implications than just to the character in question.
- I hope this make sense! :) ~ SavageBob 15:33, October 11, 2010 (UTC)