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 Mon Calamari (planet). - Sikon (Vacation) 12:16, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

ProposalEdit

Currently, Mon Calamari (planet) redirects to Dac, and some (but not all) references to the planet say Dac in their links. This is confusing for users trying to find information out about the planet, which is only called "Dac" in a handful of obscure sources.

I contend that "Dac" should be moved to "Mon Calamari (planet)." Barring that, at the very least, intertextual links should at least show "Mon Calamari" and point to Dac.

Reasons to move:Edit

• Mon Calamari is its official basic name.
• Mon Calamari is how it's known to most Star Wars fans.
• Mon Calamari is how it's referred to in the vast majority of sources.
• Daniel Wallace, who brought the term "Dac" back into continuity in Geonosis and the Outer Rim Worlds, has gone on record stating he thinks using Dac as the primary term is a bad idea (his opinion is spread over several posts, beginning here).
• This Wikia is written as if it were a standard IU reference work. As such, it should, in titles, use the universal standard names of planets, i.e., Mon Calamari, Circarpous V, Marat V, and Sartinaynian, not local indig names or codenams such as Dac, Mimban, Skye, and Bastion, regardless of fan preferences and familiarities.JustinGann 05:35, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Reasons to not move:Edit

• Dac is the name used in the native languages of the planet.
• Dac does not require an awkward (planet) disambiguator in its title.

jSarek 02:41, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

VotesEdit

Move to Mon Calamari (planet)Edit

1. Support. It's Mon Calamari in Basic, so that's where it should be here. jSarek 02:41, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
2. For reasons similar to the Mandalorian move. —Silly Dan _(talk) 02:47, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
3. Adamwankenobi 03:07, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
4. I made my reasons clear in the same thread as Wallace. Common use "in universe" is Mon Calamari. "Dac" should still redirect to Mon Calamari. --JMM 03:28, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
5. Officially known by the Republic as "Mon Calamari". Also, "Dac" = Mon Calamarian/Quarrenese. "Mon Calamari" = Basic. Wookieepedia = Basic. --Azizlight 03:50, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
6. This especially includes all battles. -LtNOWIS 04:10, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
7. I vote for Mon Calamari for all the reasons above. Otherwise it would be the same as having a wiki article on Japan redirect to Nippon. Kebis
8. support.–Sentry^Talk 06:00, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
9. Mon Calamari is Basic. Dac is local. -- Riffsyphon1024 06:03, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
10. Support. (But ironically, I think Skye, Mimban, and Bastion should go by those names as well! Oh well, next time. :P) Dan 13:37, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
11. support for the reasons above. Jedi Dude 13:54, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
12. Support "Mon Calamari" is the official name - Kwenn 15:14, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
13. Ozzel 01:52, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
14. Fatguy2006 19:27, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
15. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision) (Data file)} 14:55, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
16. Wookieepedia = Basic. "Mon Calamari" = Basic. Move. --Gem (talk) 00:21, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
17. Roron Corobb 16:49, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
18. AdmiralNick22 22:32, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
19. Support It's how most everyone refers to it as. NKSCF 22:33, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
20. I believe we should stick to basic for all articles. --Petiflo 12:39, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
21. Dac sounds awful. TopAce 12:41, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
22. I have to remind myself that it's Dac and not Mon Calamari. Ick. DAWUSS 16:04, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
23. Support I never even heard of 'Dac' before this debate came up... -- Dark Spork 18:52, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
24. Rhysode 12:01, 24 August 2006 (UTC) 11:58, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Leave at Dac, but have all in-article links show Mon CalamariEdit

1. Support. The right of naming belongs to the first discoverers, in this cae, the Mon Cal and the Quarren. Thanos6 02:45, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
2. For. I support this side. Go with the native name, like with Mitth'raw'nuruodo/Thrawn. -Finlayson 04:20, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
3. Darth Kevinmhk 05:15, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
4. MyNz 05:24, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
5. QuentinGeorge 06:13, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
6. Minimalist vote. This is what needs to be done, the title of the page is of less importance. Charlii 08:39, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
7. Support. If the planet is called Dac by the natives, the planet is Dac. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 16:08, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
8. Lord Hydronium 20:54, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
9. VT-16 21:48, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
10. Redemption^Talk 22:03, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
11. Yes. If the natives call it Dac, it's Dac. — Aiddat ^{(Holonet) (Contribs Log)} 01:54, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
12. Changed my mind, a planet or person's genuine name should be respected at least in the tile of it's article. --Petiflo 17:12, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Leave at Dac, and leave links unpipedEdit

Move to Mon Calamari, move the species to Mon Calamari (species)Edit

1. Sikon (Vacation) 17:29, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

OtherEdit

CommentsEdit

• Not being exposed to a lot of the newer EU material, I honestly thought when I started contributing here that Lucasfilm was calling it Dac now, in a process similar to the resizing of the Executor and the Death Star II. Since this does not appear to be the case, an additional reason to move the planet's name to Mon Calamari would be to avoid giving other new users the wrong impression. —Silly Dan _(talk) 02:47, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • As Finlayson said above, it's the same thing as using Mitth'raw'nuruodo over Thrawn. Therefore, it would be Dac over Mon Calamari. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 15:16, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
    • I have never understood why we are using such obscure names for article titles. Encyclopedias usually list people, places, and things under the most common name to avoid confusion. I mean, if you flip through an average encyclopedia, you will likely find very few people listed under their full birth name and many of them will be listed under names that they were given or took for themselves later in life…Sentry^Talk 01:48, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
      • I would vote for moving all articles in similiar cases. The only example I can come up with is the above mentiones Thrawn vs. Mitth'raw'nuruodo. When I first got redirected from Thrawn, I was like "Wtf is this?!". It confuses new users. Best keep the local names and such as redirects and keep the article at the Basic name. --Gem (talk) 00:24, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
        • Thrawn as nothing to do with Basic, it's just a core name. Technically, Mitth'raw'nuruodo is nor Basic not Chiss, it's a person's name. --Petiflo 12:41, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
      • That's more important for convenience on printed media. But no so important here with Redirects. -Finlayson 22:24, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
        • Wikipedia is not primarily printed media, and they have Bill Clinton over William Jefferson Clinton. Where's the debate? - TopAce 12:45, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
          • And with Redirects it make little difference. Either way gets you there. -Finlayson 16:02, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
            • True. I have to switch my vote again. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 16:08, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
              • You know, if this was an in-universe vote, the Quarren would be pretty mad at all those voting for Mon Calamari (planet). The Mon Calamari weren't the only sentinent species on the planet, you know. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 16:11, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
                • Yea, I've thought the Mon Calamari name a bit biased. I guess that why I lean to calling it Dac. But I'm not strongly opposed to Mon Calamari either.. -Finlayson 21:04, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
• Looks like we already have a winner. Who will execute the move? - TopAce 10:26, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Done. --Azizlight 09:50, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.