This is a page to discuss the suggestion to delete "Stars and stellar bodies".
- If you are suggesting a page for deletion, add your initial rationale to the section "Deletion rationale".
- If you want to discuss this suggestion, add comments to the section "Discussion".
- If a consensus has been reached, an administrator will explain the final decision in the section "Admin resolution".
In all cases, please make sure to read and understand the deletion policy before editing this page.
Deletion rationale[]
On one hand, we have a perfectly neat list of stars in Category:Stars. On the other hand, easily half of this list is noncanon. This goes from extrapolating the star for a canon system, ie the canon Benzite system earns us an entry for the never-mentioned star "Benzite", to anything being seen on a map being interpreted as a star (Alpha Shiro, Ganino, etc), to even to expanded universe names (B'hava'el).
The list also indulges in giving never-mentioned alternative names for real stars, and some of the systems listed are redirects to the star. I guess an audit could be attempted (complete letters would end up cut), but at this level of disorder, and with a category alternative, what is the point really. -- Capricorn (talk) 20:25, February 18, 2016 (UTC)
Discussion[]
Not all of these entries are in the Stars category, and the non-canon(?) alternate names listed here aren't always mentioned/referenced on the destination page. It might makes sense to remove the pages in the stars category and see if the remainder, which seem to be in a number of different categories, might be better off in a new category or a reworked and narrowed version of this page. - Archduk3 01:46, February 23, 2016 (UTC)
- I'm not sure if I understand you correctly (but then again, maybe my rationalle could be clearer too). Are you suggesting removing all members of a decently researched list of stars from a horribly inaccurate list of stars? I'm not sure what you expect from that, but I expect it would leave one or two stars that we've forgot to categorize as such, hidden in a shitload of noncanon info. It's not that the things which would remain aren't stars, it's that they have no basis in canon. (also, if you're wondering what I meant with noncanon alternative names, the two alternative names for Alpha Centauri would be examples: they were never mentioned in canon) -- Capricorn (talk) 05:21, February 24, 2016 (UTC)
These pages are linked to from Stars and stellar bodies but are not in either the Stars or Star systems categories:
| Redirects: |
I'm mainly interested why these pages have links here, and if any of the non-canon info here should, if not already, be included at the relevant pages as bg notes. - Archduk3 05:39, February 24, 2016 (UTC)
- I didn't do a systematic audit before, I started but after gutting three letters it started seeming seemed very futile so I did this instead. (I hope you didn't work too long on that list, I'm starting to feel guilty). But I did systematically look at your list now. Well, at least at the first (see below)
- First list can be divided in two groups. Firstly you have labels seen on maps, which this page presumes to be stars despite there being no evidence that that's true. Those pages are under Category:Locations. The second group consists of canon planets for which the list postulates a noncanon star. For example Argelius II earns an entry for the never-mentioned star Argelius.
- Then there's a few oddities: Murasaki 312 isn't in the stars category because it is in the quasars category, and similarly Talos star group is in the category clusters. Kaelon isn't bc it was incorrectly linked. Archer IV is linked from the page because it is noted as being a planet of 61 Ursae Majoris, which is correct. 61 Ursae Majoris is in the stars category. Beta Capricus is also an odd one, bc it was incorrectly believed to be a star - but ultimately it's not.
- The second list, well, most of those seem to be pages merged with the redirects left intact. This might be due to misspelling (Tsugh Khaidnn), noncanon redirects (B'hava'el - redirects to bajoran sun which is in the stars category), or most commonly, due to that inexplicable itch of people to take a planet named in canon and extrapolate a never-mentioned system. The opposite also occasionally happens. Bellatrix is the odd one out here, that star was given two names in canon, so one has to be a redirect. Regulus does seem to be incorrectly redirected, I'll have to look into that. But really, I haven't looked at those as closely and systematically as the other offenders because frankly I believe second guessing the reasoning behind merge decisions elsewhere on the wiki just because they are linked here seems beyond the scope of this discussion. -- Capricorn (talk) 07:34, February 24, 2016 (UTC)
- I'm not looking to rehash old merge discussions, but I do want to make sure when this page is deleted, which I'm generally for, nothing of value is "lost". I only bring it up because this page has been here for awhile now and I'm assuming there must be something of value here since it wasn't deleted years ago when the category system was introduced. I've categorized Bellatrix, since both names are "valid". - Archduk3 14:04, February 24, 2016 (UTC)
- Heh I keep forgetting you can categorize redirects. Anyway, I think I sufficiently dealt with Regulus, and I did a (quick, but complete) additional check of all "stars" linked on the page, finding no further anomalies. so unless I overlooked something, I think there's nothing left that would be of concern to you. -- Capricorn (talk) 01:56, February 25, 2016 (UTC)
- Delete. I see no reason for this "Stars and Stellar bodies" list. There are many terms which have no reference in an episode or film. There are also a number of red links which also seem to have no in-universe reference. We had this problem before and an article like this is tempting for some users to add red links and create non-canon articles. Tom (talk) 14:44, March 5, 2016 (UTC)
- Some may be on okudagrams somewhere, but I agree, delete. Good thing I didn't find this list. I'm just the person who would add them, knowing my tendency to do so. --LauraCC (talk) 21:26, March 8, 2016 (UTC)
- Not to question moderation, but this page is close to a month old, there's now three delete votes and no keeps, and the last comment is a few weeks old. Is there a particular reason for this to not be resolved? -- Capricorn (talk) 01:01, April 2, 2016 (UTC)
There is, we're busy or lazy. You should handle it yourself. :) - Archduk3 04:04, April 2, 2016 (UTC)
Admin resolution[]
I've went through all incoming and outgoing links of this article and fixed them. All above mentioned pages are categorized correct. In addition, the categories we have for stars and star systems are definitly more complete than the article in question. With more votes for deletion, this page is now gone. Tom (talk) 19:42, June 6, 2016 (UTC)