Wookieepedia > Senate Hall archive > SH Archive/Edit changed to update?

The "edit" tabs have now been altered to read "update". What the heck? Havac 05:20, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Thanks to StarNeptune I believe. Is this a problem?--Lord OblivionSith holocronSith Emblem 05:22, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Well, we're not updating. We're editing. It just feels wrong. Editing the page is very definitely what we're doing, whereas "updating" just sounds like one of the ridiculous politically correct terms that replace a perfectly normal word. It's one of those little tweaks that doesn't make any sense and just screws with something that's been perfectly fine for years. Havac 05:31, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
      • No big deal, but I prefer "edit". --Azizlight 05:32, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
        • I agree. Such an important change to the interface really should require community approval before being implemented. I don't mind changing 'protect' to 'shield' and 'delete' to 'blast', but changing 'edit' to 'update' does not make much sense to me.–SentryTalk 05:38, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Meh. I figured if we're going to act like an in-universe database, using the word "update" instead of edit would make a little bit more sense. If people REALLY hate the word, it can be changed back. StarNeptuneTalk to me! 05:40, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
      • I don't HATE it . . . well, not like I hate StuporShadow or anything. But I definitely preferred it the old way. jSarek 05:42, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Well Update does sound more progressive. I can get used to Update. Either one is fine with me. -Fnlayson 06:21, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Interesting, we have "shield" and "blast" as well. -- Riffsyphon1024 07:32, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
    • ...and yet it still says "Editing XXX". I prefered it the old way. .... 08:07, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  • EH-DIT! EH-DIT! EH-DIT! EH-DIT! EH-DIT! EH-DIT! Enochf 08:08, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
    • It should be edit. I'm afraid of change :) -no, I'm joking in every sense of the word, however, in whatever case it is editing the page- however correcting something that is incorrent or correnting grammar and such isn't necessarily updating as it is editing or changing. This is ruining a tradition anyway. Darth Maddolis 09:39, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Prefer edit. Though I won't exactly be losing sleep over it. Green Tentacle (Talk) 13:19, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
      • I agree with Star Neptune. Adamwankenobi 18:10, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
        • Meh, I liked that 'lil "edit" box. "Update"'s all big and clunky, and it's just weird ;) - \\Captain Kwenn// Ahoy! 18:12, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  • I reverted it; please hold a vote if you wish to change something like this. --Imp 19:20, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Huzzah! Welcome back, little guy! ;) - \\Captain Kwenn// Ahoy! 19:43, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  • I feel "update," "blast" and "shield" just sound unprofessional. This is an encyclopedia, not some half-serious fanfic site. --Imp 21:24, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, come on. Non-admins don't even see "blast" and "shield". Why should one vote cover all three? -- Darth Culator (Talk)(Kills) 21:51, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

  • We should either stick to MediaWiki standard for this, or have our own fairy tale words replace them entirely. --Imp 22:02, 12 December 2006 (UTC)


Let's get this over with. --Imp 21:21, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Change to update, blast and shieldEdit

Adamwankenobi 21:23, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

  1. Darth Culator (Talk)(Kills) 22:47, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  2. Yoshi626 22:49, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  3.  G.He(Talk!) 23:49, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Keep as edit, delete and protectEdit

  1. Imp 21:21, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  2. Even in-universe, they'd be silly, gimmicky names. Havac 21:27, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  3. JMAS 21:37, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  4. Changed my vote. Havac has a point. What was I thinking?!? Adamwankenobi 21:45, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  5. Leave it alone This stuff is confusing enough for newcomers to figure out sometimes. Stuff related to the encyclopedia or the software should say what it means, whatever our own slang for it is around here. Wildyoda 22:11, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  6. .... 22:30, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  7. EH-DIT! EH-DIT! EH-DIT! EH-DIT! EH-DIT! EH-DIT! TO-GA! I mean, EH-DIT! EH-DIT! EH-DIT! Enochf 22:41, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  8. Tocneppil 01:38, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  9. Stick with MediaWiki's standard. —Xwing328(Talk) 04:00, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  10. Weak support. Having thought it over, it's probably best to keep the tabs, including the admin tabs, as unambiguous as possible. jSarek 04:10, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  11. I'm saying from an Encyclopedia standpoint, it should remain as the original three, it just seems to make more sense N.Y.N.E.Comlink 04:39, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  12. Weak support.Valin Kenobi 08:14, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  13. Green Tentacle (Talk) 09:20, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  14. Jasca Ducato Sith Council Sith Campaign 11:22, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Keep as edit, but change to blast and shieldEdit

Weak support, but I refuse to be hemmed in by Imp's false dilemma. I definitely think "edit" should stay as it was, but am more ambivalent about the admin options. jSarek 23:28, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

  1. Azizlight 23:31, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  2. SentryTalk 23:38, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  3. BLAST! SHIELD! BOOM! GRACKLE SWARM! I'm here to have fun. -BaronGrackle 23:52, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  4. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order (Audience Chamber) 01:07, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  5. Awesome idea. Chack Jadson 01:56, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  6. Seconding BaronGackle. KA-ZAP! - \\Captain Kwenn// Ahoy! 14:45, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  7. StarNeptuneTalk to me! 17:13, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  8. Per StarNeptune. Adamwankenobi 15:18, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


"Blast" and "shield" is a pretty pointless change from the MediaWiki standard of "delete" and "protect." First of all, we'd have to go through all MediaWiki pages to ensure they are referred to as "blast" and "shield." Second, we'd have to move Wookieepedia:Deletion policy to Wookieepedia:Blasting policy (etcetera). Third, "blast" and "shield" would confuse new users. This is as silly as it gets; we're not flying starships, we're editing a website. --Imp 23:41, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

  • New users don't get to see "blast" and "shield" anyway. jSarek 04:10, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Remaining neutral. To be "more encyclopedic" though, let us now drop terms like "Mofference" and "Senate Hall."--Lord OblivionSith holocronSith Emblem 04:33, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
      • Nnnnnnnnooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!! :-P --Azizlight 04:51, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  • jSarek: Yes they do. :P They just can't perform any actions related to them. --Imp 05:50, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Hmm. I could have sworn I got more tabs when I became an admin that weren't there to begin with. jSarek 06:25, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
      • Non-admins don't even see the delete and protect tabs. StarNeptuneTalk to me! 06:29, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
        • They still see us deleting and protecting pages in the history logs and recent changes. --Imp 06:38, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
          • Those have said "blast" and "shield" for months without complaint. jSarek 06:59, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
            • And therefore I am not allowed to protest now? =) --Imp 09:01, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
              • Here's a concept: Who cares? :P -- Riffsyphon1024 09:05, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
                • That's not very helpful. =) --Imp 09:08, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
              • No, just noting that it doesn't seem to have been confusing to users in that timeframe. jSarek 11:24, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
      • To be "more encyclopedic" though, let us now drop terms like "Mofference" and "Senate Hall." Oblivion has a major point here. You won't go onto a Wikipedia article and find, say, a picture of Charles Dickens with the words:
        It was the best of times, it was the worst of times. Parts of this article are self-contradictory.

I think blast and shield add atmosphere, and let's give ourselves some credit; did anyone really have a problem figuring out what it means when an article is "blasted"... how many interpretations are there, especially when the article no longer exists? Or what "shielded" means, particularly when it's already tied with the template we add to such a page? Should we do away with that template as well, since "shielded" is unprofessional? -BaronGrackle 12:40, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Because edit, protect and delete are the default of the MediaWiki software. Making templates "Star Wars-y" is something entirely different—they are user creations, not part of the software (Pardon the crappy phrasing, I hope I made myself intelligible). --Imp 14:18, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
    • So you're saying that we can't have any personality on our site, and should always stick to the MediaWiki defaults? If so, you're going to have a long hard battle ahead of you reverting all the changes that have been made to MediaWiki namespaces in the last 6 to 8 months. Back on track, I think that the modified tabs add character to our site, much like "Mofferences" and "Senate Hall" do. Before this no one had any objections to "destruction log" and "protection log", and having the tabs renamed to match them seems consistent to me. StarNeptuneTalk to me! 17:12, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
      • No, I'm saying we should stick to MediaWiki standard on something as essential to the site as this. The fact that no one brought it up before now is no reason not to discuss it. --Imp 17:24, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I have no problem with things like Senate Hall, Mofference, and the templates such Now that's a name I've not heard in a long time, since they are fun and add atmosphere. But when it comes to something as essential as Edit, Delete, and Protect, I think it's best to stick with the standard to avoid possibility for confusion.Valin Kenobi 16:30, 14 December 2006 (UTC)