This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed namespace change. Further comments should be made on the talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record.
The result of the debate was Wookieepedia. I have talked to Angela and she will be getting the appropriate changes made soon. WhiteBoy 03:06, 12 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Wiki-specific namespaceEdit

The wiki-specific namespace for this wiki is "Star Wars". This causes some problems: 1) Any article which should be named "Star Wars: NameX" is instead named "Star Wars:NameX" 2) Any article who's talk page should be named "Talk:Star Wars: NameX" is instead named "Star Wars talk:NameX". Would it be possible, practical, and desirable to change the "Star Wars" namespace to "Star Wars Wiki" (or something else better than "Star Wars"). I think that it would be desirable, but I don't know about possible or practical. – Aidje _talk 13:51, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• I've though of a third problem caused by the "Star Wars" namespace: it affects searches, since that's done by namespace. – Aidje _talk 21:48, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• It's possible that Angela might be able to help with that. -- Riffsyphon1024 02:41, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • But would other people agree that this would be a good thing to change? I'm hardly an authority to make such a decision on my own. – Aidje _talk 03:48, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • How about naming it "Wookieepedia"? It seems that is the most common term, anyway. "Star Wars" has to go. --Imperialles 20:31, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
      • I'd be all for "Wookieepedia", but I wasn't sure if others would agree since it's not "official".
        • I, for one, have always preferred that name. Gives us a unique identity, instead of being simply "Star Wars Wiki 01", if you catch my drift. Sort of like Memory Alpha. Anyway, a vote should be held--Imperialles 20:44, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
          • Very well. It shall be done. – Aidje _talk 20:47, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Perhaps, one day, we will be completely renamed to Wookieepedia. And hosted by Wikia on wookieepedia.org. A man can dream... --Imperialles 21:21, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Won't a name space of "Wookieepedia: The Star Wars Wiki" be a huge formating issue?
  • I suppose that would be the page title, but the web address would be wookieepedia.wikicities.com and the namespace would be "[[Wookieepedia:". -- Silly Dan 20:01, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• It's been over a week now. Close the vote? --Imperialles 23:21, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • We can close the vote, but even with more votes for Wookieepedia it hardly seems a significant enough majority for such an important decision. I think a more informed discussion should occur before any changes are made. These has deeper ramifications than simple cosmetics. --SparqMan 00:19, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • The advantages and disadvantages of each name must be carefully analyzed. -- Riffsyphon1024 15:36, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
      • I renamed the section "Other" to "Discussion". If discussion is what we need, let's get to it. :-) – Aidje _talk 03:37, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Vote to change the wiki-specific namespaceEdit

Let's vote on this. We can talk to Angela about it when we've come to a consensus. – Aidje _talk 20:47, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Keep as "Star Wars"Edit

Change to "Wookieepedia"Edit

1. For --Imperialles 20:49, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
2. For. See discussion above for my reasons. – Aidje _talk 20:50, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
3. For Silly Dan 21:17, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
4. For It's a dream, hopefully it won't FUBAR the tech side of things.--Eion 21:32, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
5. For Hopefully it won't muck up Google hits --Fade 21:34, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
6. For. I use "Wookieepedia" more than SWW, since its not quite a mouthful, and is a play on Wikipedia. Credit to WhiteBoy for coming up with the term Wookieepedia. The full title (not being used on these particular userspace pages, but in recognition) should be Wookieepedia: The Star Wars Wiki. Btw, has anyone noticed that we are usually the highest Google hit when we're the only ones with certain information? -- Riffsyphon1024 23:26, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
7. For — — Ŭalabio 01:47, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
8. For. I too think it should be Wookieepedia: The Star Wars Wiki. That way we get hits either way. Wookieepedia is just more creative and fun as a name. Star Wars Wiki is just boring in comparison. SeanR 09:23, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
9. For (changed my vote, just to be awkward) --Beeurd 09:40, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
10. For Good parallel to Wikipedia -- Lord Patrick 23:46, 9 Jul 2005 (UTC)
11. For It's easier to remember Kuralyov 00:15, 10 Jul 2005 (UTC)
12. For Wookieepedia just seems more appropriate. It sounds unique, fun, and Star-Warsy. Star Wars Wiki is just boring. Azizlight 09:35, 23 Jul 2005 (UTC)
13. For. A unique name, unlike "Star Wars Wiki". - Sikon 06:15, 24 Jul 2005 (UTC)
14. For. Star Wars Wiki = LAME ~ Wookiepedia = COOL Only for the searches, we could have both, though... --Master Starkeiller 16:34, 29 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Change to "Star Wars Wiki"Edit

1. For. This title will bring in significantly more traffic than "Wookieepedia", and what we need is more inflow. A group of 10-12 active contributors does not a good Wiki make. It's also more professional sounding. --SparqMan 17:40, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• I would like to add that "Wookieepedia" is more likely to be spelled wrong. --SparqMan 02:38, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

1. For. Makes sense, certainly anyone looking up star wars information will not immediately recognize "Wookieepedia." -- Falmarin 18:21, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
2. I'm actually For this as well, for the reasons those two gave^. I'm happy with either. --Fade 18:34, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
3. For. If only for the search engine traffic. Though I also kinda like Aidje's idea (see below). -- Shadowtrooper 22:04, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
4. For. "Wookieepedia" might be the dumbest thing I've ever heard. --[[User:Prime|_Prime]] 03:38, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
5. For It's better for attracting new fans to the site (see Shadowtrooper's comment about searching), though Wookieepedia is a cool name --Darth Mantus 11:58, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
6. For Having our own name is cool, but I think Star Wars Wiki would be easier to find, and it is more obviously a Star Wars Wiki. --Beeurd 00:58, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
7. For. I don't know why I haven't voted yet, but this is the name I prefer. It's easier to spell and say, in my opinon. But either choice beats no change.-LtNOWIS 22:43, 29 Sep 2005 (UTC)

DiscussionEdit

• Comment: I think that the best form for a name would be "UniqueName: The Descriptive Part", such as "Wookieepedia: The Free Star Wars Encyclopedia". That would be the form used by Wikipedia, by the way ("Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia". Wikipedia actually does it like this, now that I look back: "Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia". This form would give us "Wookieepedia, the free Star Wars encyclopedia"). Anyway, we're not actually voting on the name of the wiki.– Aidje _talk 21:22, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• To everyone voting "Star Wars Wiki" with the reason that it would be easier to find and/or recognize what it was: See what I said above. A sub-name would explain what we were, as well as help Google find us. I believe Riff also mentioned that good info brings hits as well, not just a descriptive name. Besides that, notice that the name of our beloved compendium of human knowledge is "Wikipedia" rather than just "Free Encyclopedia". How lame would that be? There is something to be said for a unique name, and Wookieepedia is certainly more unique than "Star Wars Wiki"... besides the fact that it's a ripoff of "Wikipedia", that is. "Wookieepedia" gives us a nice "brand name recognition" factor of sorts. Imagine if "Linux" was "Free Operating System", or if "Microsoft" was "Big Software Corporation", or if "Google" was "Very Complete Search Engine". People like having names rather than just descriptors. – Aidje _talk 03:34, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Bravo, Aidje. My thoughts exactly. --Imp 09:53, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Ripoff? It's a great play on words. Would you like to copyright it now or wait until someone tries to rip us off? -- Riffsyphon1024 11:43, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • Riff, I didn't mean it in a pejorative sense at all; I'm sorry if it appeared that way. I use it only in the sense it is "clearly imitative of or based on" the name "Wikipedia". That's definition 4 on Answers.com. I did not mean to imply any of the other three definitions. It was merely a side statement noting that the name is not technically 'unique' since it is in fact derived directly from something else. I agree that it's a great play on words. – Aidje _talk 22:24, 27 Jun 2005 (UTC)
      • It's ok, Aidje, don't overanalyze it. But you know whos a real ripoff of Wikipedia? Answers.com. :) -- Riffsyphon1024 04:07, 28 Jun 2005 (UTC)
        • I thought... oops *stops analyzing* Answers.com is only a ripoff of Wikipedia when it's serving Wikipedia content; at other times it rips off a lot of other informational sites, which apparently makes it that much better. :-) It makes a good info-junction anyway. Well... back on topic; any comments from the "Wookieepedia" nay-sayers? – Aidje _talk 04:31, 28 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: I'm not convinced, based on experience, that good information will bring in hits, and therefore users and a better experience for all. Page title continues to be the most important part of the Google PageRank system after links, which we have few of (and for which there are few worthwhile opportunities). That aside, while I like Aidje's idea for "Wookieepedia, the free Star Wars encyclopedia", it would clearly be too long for the namespace. If a few users want to call this the "Wookieepedia", that's fine, but I find it prone to spelling errors, not particularly funny/interesting nor attractive. While a descriptive name is helpful, few are going to use it at full length. If I have to choose between calling our work, in short, the "Wookieepedia" or the "Star Wars Wiki", I'll go with the latter as it immediately conveys what it is with no further explanation. --SparqMan 21:42, 28 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Once again, I never suggested "Wookieepedia, the free Star Wars encyclopedia" as a namespace. In response to the rest of your comment: I would argue that anyone who knows what a Wookiee is would figure out what 'Wookieepedia' meant, and if it causes someone to learn how to spell 'Wookiee' properly, so much the better. – Aidje _talk 23:57, 28 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • I think about how Memory Alpha gets recognized. Anyone not familiar with it would not know it was a Star Trek Wiki. How exactly did they deal with this issue? Shall someone lead some Bothan spies on a covert operation into the lair of the Kirk? -- Riffsyphon1024 00:01, 29 Jun 2005 (UTC)
      • Apparently, they haven't had any problem being recognised, as I can find no debate on the name after a two-hour search. It seems they are instantly recognised by Star Trek fans. I'm guessing, however that we want to attract more people than just the hardcore fans. Most people would recognise "Wookieepedia" as a Star Wars encyclopedia, but they would also misspell it quite often. Other names should be considered as well, for example "Holonet", which is an in-universe equivalent to the Internet. --Imp 20:39, 13 Jul 2005 (UTC)
        • This has become a dead issue that I hope becomes resolved soon. Also I would like something more unique than simply the Holonet. This is a pedia. -- Riffsyphon1024 01:00, 17 Jul 2005 (UTC)
          • Yeah, I know. I think all points about both candidates have been made. It is time to act. --Imp 08:51, 17 Jul 2005 (UTC)
• Suggestion: Since there have been no votes for the name to stay as "Star Wars", we can at least change it temporarily to Star Wars Wiki. I really want to start correcting articles soon. --Imp 21:27, 10 Jul 2005 (UTC)
  • So, how about it? --Imp 23:10, 16 Jul 2005 (UTC)
• Ok, now let's all get this straight. This whole vote was really just to change the namespace in front of wikipages and not the name of the wiki itself, right? I think most of us might have been choosing the latter, but I just dont know. -- Riffsyphon1024 09:41, 23 Jul 2005 (UTC)
  • Yes, I brought this up because of the namespace issue, and that's what I meant for the vote to be about. I don't know where all of this confusion came from. Are the name and the namespace really that tied together? – Aidje _talk 07:17, 9 Aug 2005 (UTC)
• I don't see any problem with the Wookieepedia namespace being misspelled. People don't type it anyway, they just follow links. Redirects can be left in the Star Wars namespace for a time. - Sikon 06:15, 24 Jul 2005 (UTC)
  • So are we anywhere near officially changing the namespace? It's really getting annoying having pages titled "Star Wars:Starfighter" instead of "Star Wars: Starfighter." MarcK 06:55, 23 Sep 2005 (UTC)
    • Yes, I was wondering that too. "Wookieepedia" seems to be the consensus. I'm thinking about being bold and moving Star Wars: articles to "Wookieepedia:", even if it isn't a proper namespace yet. - Sikon [Talk] 17:35, 29 Sep 2005 (UTC)
      • We really shouldn't be begin implementing the change until it's been implemented in the software. I don't think any of us really know exactly what the software will do. It may even move all of the Star Wars namespace article automatically. In that case, the work will be in moving articles like "Star Wars: Starfighter" back to the appropriate title. – Aidje _talk 21:26, 29 Sep 2005 (UTC)
        • So then when's it going to be implemented into the software? *impatient* MarcK 01:43, 2 Oct 2005 (UTC)