Talk:Quote:Karen Traviss

From Wookieepedia, the Star Wars wiki.

This article was nominated for deletion on 13:57, 25 July 2006 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep, with follow-up consensus track thread needed to settle issues on content.

I don't know whether to fall down laughing or slap a POV on this. -- SFH 17:17, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

• How is it anything but NPOV? There's no commentary, no links to "critical" pages, and every quote is sourced. Anyone is welcome to add to it, as long as they keep things in chronological order. -- Darth Culator 17:20, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
  • This is the greatest page ever. Kuralyov 17:31, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
    • Interesting. Some of the blog entries have disappeared. Can't say I didn't see this one coming -- Yay for Google Cache! -- Darth Culator 20:13, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Selection and context (or the lack thereof) can be as POV as anything else. Entertaining though it may be, I'm not convinced that we should keep this. RMF 02:13, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

• FWIW, I notice we only have one other real-person Wookieequote page: Quote:Chris Avellone. —Silly Dan _(talk) 02:16, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
  • I say it should be deleted. Pages like this make us look bad. It's not very encyclopedic, IMHO. Adamwankenobi^{Talk to me! My home.} 02:18, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
    • How? We aren't the ones saying these things. They are all fully sourced so people can see them in context. If you don't want to look bad, don't talk about wanting to kill people. Lowkey
      • That's not a very neutral point-of-view that your coming from, now, is it? I don't care if it is just quotes; I don't like the idea behind this page and I agree that we should get rid of it. Shall we continue this on a VFD page? -- Ozzel 02:24, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
        • Neither do I. They are arbitrary. A person can put any of her quotes up in order to push their POV of her. Or a quote can make her look stupid, like the one User:Lowkey just posted. Lowkey, did you even read Dark Moose's blog? Adamwankenobi^{Talk to me! My home.} 02:25, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
          • A VfD sounds good to me. RMF 02:29, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
          • Yes I did. I find it interesting that you think the opinion of a fan who pretends to work for LFL (as oppossed to being a volunteer) and tries to threaten you with their legal team (despite having no authority to do so and the fact you operate on a creative commons liscense) is worth listening to. And the simple fact is that he is full of it. These are not taken out of context, twisted, or edited like he claims. Ever last one of them is linked to the full text, where people can read all of it in context. I'd also point out he challenges to include that quote from her in his comments. Lowkey
            • ...Which some anon just did. StarNeptune^{Talk to me!} 02:38, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
              • Lowkey, we don't "operate on a creative commons liscense". Please learn the facts (starting with the disclaimer down the page_ before commenting on legal issues. - Sikon [Talk] 12:34, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
                • You liscense is a varient on theirs. As you are part of the wiki intellectual property, you are still covered. Wired did a big thing on this a year, year and a half ago. I suggest you follow your own advice. -- 205.56.129.194 05:47, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
                  • First of all, "intellectual property" is a swear word in the open source community, use copyright. And the GFDL is NOT a variant of any Creative Commons license. Seriously, read Wikipedia articles on these licenses, please, and stop misspelling the word "license". - Sikon [Talk] 07:09, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

The page was ostensibly protected because of a 3RR violation... However, the only one who has violated 3RR is Kuralyov, who is an admin and can therefore still edit the page. Tell me, what's the point? 69.210.88.78 21:30, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

• Obviously, he can edit it, but I had faith that he would not. The whole point of the 3RR rule is to give everyone a chance to calm down. So, by locking it I simply called attention to the fact that the 3RR had been violated and the page should be locked until things settle down. Just because you can drive 100MPH in your car, doesn't mean you do out of respect for the rules and the others around you. WhiteBoy 13:32, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

• Can we get a resolution on this so we can go back to editing this? Wiki pages shouldn't be locked for months on end. -LtNOWIS 01:38, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

All the LiveJournal and Galactic Senate links don't work.