Talk:Holocron
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| This article is part of WikiProject Star Wars, which aims to build an encyclopedic guide to the Star Wars saga on Wikipedia. To participate, you can improve this article or visit the project page for more information. | |||
|
Article Grading: The article has not been rated for quality and/or importance yet. Please rate the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.. |
|||
[edit] Merge
Nah. Be painful to clean up all the redirects, and it is a substantial topic in its own right. --maru (talk) contribs 03:52, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
- What redirects need to be cleaned up? –Mipadi 04:54, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Holocron could just be redirected to List of Star Wars devices. Any page that links to Holocron would get redirected there. I checked; it doesn't appear than any redirect pages redirect to Holocron, so there'd be no double-redirect issues (which are simple to fix, anyway). – Mipadi 06:52, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
- Although the Holocron is seen in several Star Wars scenerios, it is still a minor fictional item. I'm torn between merging and not merging this one, myself. Deckiller 12:33, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- The thing to remember about Star Wars articles is how relevant they are to the series as a whole. Star Wars is certainly notable enough to have an article, and thus, vital parts of Star Wars, such as the Battle of Endor, or characters such as Luke Skywalker and Princess Leia are important enough to warrant their own article. Is Holocron, however, an important enough concept to warrant its own article? I'm inclined to say no. It's important to some novels, but even a person who has read Star Wars literature may not be familiar with holocrons—they're not really that vital to Star Wars as a whole. Hence, I fully support a merge. – Mipadi 14:28, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
- I completely agree. I just want to make sure we don't alienate any editors. Deckiller 16:47, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
- Plus, there's no information lost when bringing it into a list; it is still covered, just not on its own. It will also decrease the chances of fancruft. References can be footnoted, and external links can be put into sentence form. Deckiller 16:51, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
- The thing to remember about Star Wars articles is how relevant they are to the series as a whole. Star Wars is certainly notable enough to have an article, and thus, vital parts of Star Wars, such as the Battle of Endor, or characters such as Luke Skywalker and Princess Leia are important enough to warrant their own article. Is Holocron, however, an important enough concept to warrant its own article? I'm inclined to say no. It's important to some novels, but even a person who has read Star Wars literature may not be familiar with holocrons—they're not really that vital to Star Wars as a whole. Hence, I fully support a merge. – Mipadi 14:28, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- And the categories? --maru (talk) contribs 17:11, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
- That is a good point; some of the articles have several categories; this one is featured in both Jedi religion and star wars devices. We'll have to discuss the category issue further (I can't right now; in school :) ). Deckiller 17:17, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
- And the categories? --maru (talk) contribs 17:11, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
