This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete and merge information into All Terrain Scout Transport. Toprawa and Ralltiir 02:43, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

All Terrain Scout Transport (Hoth) ( history - links - logs)Edit

This is what Culator once called VT-fanon. Just because the design is slightly different, there's no need to assume it is a different, still unnamed vehicle. In this case, the databank entry for AT-ST specifically says that the model from ESB received small cosmetic changes for ROTJ, simply because it had far more on-screen time in that movie. But that does mean it became a new vehicle altogether - they are still listed under the same entry in all official sources.

Merge and redirect into All Terrain Scout TransportEdit

1. Mauser^Comlink 20:08, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
2. Definitely. - JMAS ^{Hey, it's me!} 20:10, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
3. With extreme prejudice. —Master Jonathan^{(Jedi Council Chambers)} 20:10, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
4. Possibly a variant of the AT-ST, but should be merged with the main article. JangFett ^Talk 20:28, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
5. There is absolutely no point in keeping the redirect, though. --Imperialles 20:31, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
6. I agree with Imperialles. Also, do not merge the phrase "modified for polar climates", because "polar" should not be synonymous with "cold" (that is an Earth concept). - Esjs^(Talk) 20:40, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
   • Nice catch Esjs! -- Riffsyphon1024 07:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
7. Per Imp. Grand Moff Tranner ^(Comlink) 20:41, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
8. Per Imp. Green Tentacle ^(Talk) 20:59, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
9. "VT-fanon"? I don't recall having called it that. You may be confusing me with Toprawa. Certainly fits though. -- Darth Culator ^(Talk) 21:00, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
10. Chack Jadson ^(Talk) 21:09, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
11. Merge any relevant information, but maintaining this as a redirect is just unnecessary. Toprawa and Ralltiir 21:19, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
12. Grunny ^(Talk) 00:37, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
13. Jonjedigrandmaster ^{(Jedi Beacon)} 03:58, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
14. Yes! Redirect. Gmalek 21:00, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
15. Oh no! Some in-universe mechanic slightly tweaked an AT-ST to work better in the cold! Quickly, fashion a new article! In all seriousness, merge, both with the above-suggested article and with Blizzard Scout 1. jSarek 02:19, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
16. Yet the AT-STs from the Hoth level in Battlefront II look exactly like the ones from ROTJ... SoresuMakashi^{(Everything I tell you is the truth)} 08:52, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
17. IFYLOFD ^{(You will pay the price for your lack of vision!)} 03:50, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
18. Gee, this is really splitting hairs here. -- Riffsyphon1024 07:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
19. Merge, no redirect. Common sense occasionally does apply. Atarumaster88 ^{(Talk page)} 15:54, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
20. Pranay Sobusk ~ Talk 15:22, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
21. -- AdmirableAckbar ^(Talk) 19:17, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
22. QuiGonJinn ^(Talk) 13:24, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
23. Cylka^-talk- 02:39, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Keep as it isEdit

CommentsEdit

Please do not any third, vote-splitting options. Mauser^Comlink 20:08, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

• The Titanium model gives no indication that this is a different vehicle to the Endor one, does anyone know what the Technical Journal says? -- I need a name (Complain here) 20:52, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Nothing there either. Green Tentacle ^(Talk) 21:01, 16 July 2009 (UTC)