FANDOM


Forums > Senate Hall archive > SH Archive/New anonymous stormtrooper articles

Darthtyler has recently created several anonymous stormtrooper article in protest of Anonymous Cloud City stormtrooper. I feel he is clearly violating WP:POINT, and the articles should be deleted. He disagrees, as does Ozzel. I think that we can keep Anonymous Cloud City stormtrooper but in no way is the keeping of these articles violated. I think we should delete them and add more concrete boundaries to POINT. If we keep these, what's to stop someone from creating junk such as "anonymous stormtrooper (Luke kill I)", "anonymous stormtrooper (Luke kill II)", "anonymous stormtrooper (Luke kill III)" etc, "trees on Endor with Ewok bridges", "kamikaze Vulture droid I (Labyrinth of Evil)", "kamikaze Vulture droid II (Labyrinth of Evil)" and so on. Graestan and AdmirableAckbar agree with me on the deletion, BTW. Thoughts? Chack Jadson (Talk) 22:10, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

No! I told you on Ozzel's talk page that I changed my mind on the topic!—Darthtyler Scuba_Diver.gif Talk 22:12, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
  • They still should be deleted, something Ozzel disagrees with. Chack Jadson (Talk) 22:13, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
    • I agree but am still a touch unfamiliar with the unwritten rules of Wookieepedia yet to know what should be done. I see the policy and it looks pretty clear to me. What are you proposing, then? How can this be refined? Also, shouldn't this then become a CT vote? Master Aban Fiolli (Alpheridies University ComNet) NR Seal 22:16, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
    • Since Anonymous Cloud City stormtrooper exists and was not deleted after a TC discussion, I think these articles should be allowed to stay for the time being. However, I think that we should hold off on creating any further similar articles, and perhaps start a CT thread to try and set a clear policy on what kind of "unnamed bla bla bla" IU articles we actually want on this wiki. —Silly Dan (talk) 22:16, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
  • For the record, I'm not particularly opposed to the articles being created (but I think they're a massive waste of time), just that they were not (I think) created in bad faith. I do find it hard to believe that you've suddenly changed your opinion when you were so outspoken about it previously, Tyler. -- AdmirableAckbar [Talk] 22:18, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
    • Huh...? What do you mean by that last part?—Darthtyler Scuba_Diver.gif Talk 22:19, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
      • I guess Silly Dan's idea is the best solution. Should we create that CT now and if so, who wants to create it? Chack Jadson (Talk) 22:20, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
        • I'll create it. If you guys want, of course.—Darthtyler Scuba_Diver.gif Talk 22:21, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Darthtyler: I meant that I don't think you really have changed your mind, since you were very unhappy with the Anonymous guy being kept in the first place. -- AdmirableAckbar [Talk] 22:22, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
    • As I said before, I looked at the further discussion on the forum and saw everyone's opinion on the subject. I have changed my mind.—Darthtyler Scuba_Diver.gif Talk 22:23, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
      • Darthtyler: Yeah, you can create it. Just please mention something about tightening our policy as to what kind of conjecture characters are allowed, and thus, should the anonymous stormtroopers be kept or deleted. Chack Jadson (Talk) 22:25, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Ad blocker interference detected!


Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.