Talk:Karen Traviss/Archive1

 '''This talk page has been archived and is no longer active. If you wish to leave a new message relating to the improvement of the article on Karen Traviss, please use the current talk page.''' Archived talk: 1 2


 * I removed several links to forum threads about the Guide to the Grand Army of the Republic. I don't think links to forum threads discussing just one of an author's works belong on an author page. Ywingempress 20:10, 24 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Proposed Controversy Edit
Does this fit the criteria for NPOV? "Currently there is a controversy surrounding her and her vigorous defense of her estimate of size of the Republic's Grand Army, an estimate that many fans consider to be too low."
 * I think it's more of a question of whether the whole 3-million squabble is encyclopedic enough to mention at all. --Azizlight 03:51, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Also, 3 million aren't her numbers - they're Lucasfilm's.  She wasn't given a choice in using them. jSarek 04:12, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, she was,. She stated that it was hers and that she had justified it on a spreadsheet.  Its amazing how often her story changes about what happened.
 * It should be really be on the clone trooper page, I think - just like any disagreements about star destroyers/endor holocaust/saxtonite/weg or whatever should be on those pages, rather than individual pages. QuentinGeorge 06:14, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
 * It's already been covered in great depth on the Grand Army of the Republic page (Behind the scenes section). --Azizlight 07:00, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Karen and wikis
Does anyone else think that maybe this should get a mention? CooperTFN 00:58, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * All I can say is...wow. -- SFH 01:26, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * So is that a yes? http://media.ign.com/boardfaces/9.gif CooperTFN 20:21, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Whoa. Just... whoa. I can see where she's coming from, though. But still... Doran 17:51, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
 * That blog's empty now. Does anyone have a copy of the text? mrobviousjosh 23:48, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Objectivity and Wikis
CooperTFN - Can I ask what about Karen Traviss' opinion of Wikis is germaine to the entry? Objective much?

This is the sort of thing that gets you the reputation as the Encyclopedia Subjectiva. Doesn't make you guys look trustworthy when you try to become part of the article itself.

Dark Moose


 * Can I ask why you are attempting to intimidate and threaten the people running this wiki, seeing as how you don't represent LFL in any way shape or form, and even if you did the Creative Commons Liscense it operates under makes them untouchable?
 * Because he's used to getting his way at the official site and is unable to understand a system where he can't ban users who say anything not perfectly in step with his own views. Kuralyov 22:39, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Karen Traviss's concerns and expansion

 * Ms. Traviss has brought up a few concerns about this article here. There definitely seems to be some NPOV concern from other parties regarding the aforementioned wiki opinion and the subtext of the mention of the tf.n situation.  At any rate, regardless of how that is handled, this page is really lacking, given the amount of information she has made available to us in various venues.  I'm still on a semi-Wookieevacation, so I'm not going to do a major article overhaul myself, but I think it would strongly benefit the article to bring in some of that information (e.g. from her biography) to flesh it out a bit. jSarek
 * Eh, found the energy to make some of the NPOV tweaks, but the main point of fleshing this out more still stands. jSarek 12:05, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Wow. I always knew she was an elitist snob, but I'm surprised at how much she tries to broadcast it. Kuralyov 01:33, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
 * *Cringes*. Insert "User comments do not reflect the beliefs of Wookieepedia" disclaimer here. --Azizlight 01:52, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
 * And Kuralyov... please do not post comments of that nature here. This page is to discuss the contents of the main article, nothing more. Please consider that by saying such things you are damaging the reputation of Wookieepedia and its community, in addition to your own. --Azizlight 02:08, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I think, while it is important to remain respectful of Ms./Mrs. Traviss, it is important to make a controversy section in this article.  While she is a popular writer (myself being a fan), she has left many of her readers frustrated for various reasons, such as contradicting previous known "facts" and writing certain things/plots in her stories that she seems to have done simply 'because she can'. Killing off Mara is a well-known example: while she could do whatever she wants with Mara if it's approved, (have her join the dark side, have her have an affair with Han, whatever) it was generally wordlessly accepted and believed by many fans that if anything were to happen to Mara, it would done by TZ, since it was *his* character in many people's views. It brings up an interesting psychological issue with SW, while anything *can* happen, certain things are simply not touched upon or made drastic changes to out of no reason other than the respect for the  creator of that thing/person/etc. Karen, in many cases, doesn't play by these unwritten, unofficial rules, which is frustrating for many because most writers do, and many perceive breaking the unwritten rules as selfish and disrespectful (myself included). To give an example, I really like some of her writing, but her tendency towards breaking these unwritten rules often leaves me quite miffed. As she stated herself (roughly) "because I bloody said so", yes, that *is* reason enough, technically, but it's still rather selfish in many fans' eyes. To an extent, the cause of all this controversy is that she gives many the sense of one who is abusing their power, killing off Mara and declaring that CIS army really isn't that big being two very good examples of this behavior. Again, she has done nothing "wrong", but many still see error in this sort of writing. I realize this entry is long, but perhaps it provides better insight into why her writing has upset so many. I'd appreciate it if no one removes this entry because while it may come across as ranting, I've put a lot of analytical/philosophical thought into this in hopes that someone else could better summarize what about her writing causes such controversies (sorry, I am not very good at condensing these sorts of things myself). 84.84.207.58 20:22, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Please don't restart topics that are two years old, nor make inflammatory talk page posts. Atarumaster88  [[Image:Jedi_Order.svg|20px]] ( Talk page ) 20:28, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Again - Relevance
Why, as an idle researcher turning to Wikis for information, do I care about anyone's opinion of your wiki? It's a lack of objectivity for the comment to even appear. No one cares, but who? Wookieepedia. It's not how real encyclopedias do it, I can assure you...

Dark Moose
 * That was part of a larger paragraph about her general activity on fan websites. Wookieepedia is a major Star Wars website, and thus it was a fairly relevant fact. But it's gone now. Also, Wookieepedia is just as "real" as any other encyclopedia. As free unofficial Star Wars encyclopedias go, we're unmatched. -LtNOWIS 03:39, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I'd say that CUSWE qualifies as a match :-) --Azizlight 02:39, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Having only just become aware of this, I simply want to say that none of my additions to the page were intended to be snide or disrespectful. I added the part about leaving TFN to correct a factual error, and as for the wiki stuff, I personally thought it was interesting, and could maybe even be helpful in getting our contributors to take their edits more seriously, hence linking to the blog itself in the mention. That said, I did give people a chance to object before I added it, as can easily be seen above, and no one did, so it's not like I had an agenda or anything. CooperTFN 19:10, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

KT database link
This should be a good read. Note, not all the quotes are from Traviss herself (most official quotes are in yellow, with fan-quotes in blue), but they should provide some interesting insight. I just love this one:

''jedi_haiku (Ryan Kaufman) and I are standing by for the inevitable wave of arguments that will follow the article, but we did it to set down the continuity about the clone army and put an end to a few debates. '''Common sense tells me this will never happen, and that folks wouldn't find it much fun if it did. But it does give us the ability to brandish the document, repel all boarders, and yell: "Because we bloody well say so!"'

Says it all, really. VT-16 09:33, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Education
Do we have anything about this author's education and how she started writing under the Lucas License? mrobviousjosh 23:48, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Good lord
(Inappropriate comment removed) Why is there no mention of her intimidation of fans, her trashing of the EU, and her other controversial actions? --66.19.201.165 03:10, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * NPOV. &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 03:14, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * NPOV means you can't take a side. Nothing wrong with stating fact, I.E. "Karen Traviss once threatened to choke people who took issue with her treatment of the size of the Clone Army", or "Karen Traviss has been accused of scientific ignorance in regards to her statements regarding the 'impossibility' of having a droid army in the Quintillions." etc. etc. If that violates NPOV you might as well take out anything accusing Hitler of commiting genocide on Wikipedia, or take out anything accusing Darth Vader of killing people here. --24.24.80.28 22:45, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Another issue is citations and referencing. A lot of the old blog posts and such have been deleted, meaning that there are no valid sources to cite. Regardless, we generally don't talk about fan perceptions and controversies for any author or artist. None of our current featured articles for individuals use the word "fan," nor do they have any "criticism and controversies" sections like Wikipedia articles might. -LtNOWIS 23:00, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I think the controversies are well worth mentioning. If you can mention them on George Lucas' page, you can certainly mention them on Karen Traviss' page. Not only do we have the issue with the size of the army, but now we've also got her killing off of Mara Jade, an act that angered many fans since they believed that such as responsibility should have fallen on the shoulders of Timothy Zahn. 24.3.94.134 04:54, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * (Inappropriate comment by anon removed) Welcome to Wookieepedia. We hope you enjoy this site and the articles contained here, but please refrain from making inflammatory statements; our talk pages don't exist to discuss the merits of the topic; in particular, real-world people. Thank you. Atarumaster88  [[Image:Jedi_Order.svg|20px]] ( Talk page ) 19:49, 2 July 2008 (UTC)