Forum:CT Archive/Emergency Amendment to Modify the Terms of the Consensus to Label Social Media Posts as Non-Canon

According to the amendment to the new section to the Canon policy titled "What is not a reliable resource?"; per the vote in Forum:CT Archive/Social media posts as canon sources; I hereby submit a new consensus track to modify the language used in the new policy. This is NOT a vote to remove or repeal the former consensus track, but to clarify the language used.

Considerations
The reasons for this change is as follows:


 * Acknowledging that the inappropriate use of social media posts; while helpful for adding background information to articles, has been overused and taken out of context; and that the recently passed Canon policy policy, "What is not a reliable resource" is correct in its intent.
 * Aware of the tendencies for users to assume that anything posted on Wookieepedia is viewed as "canon," whether it actually is or is not.
 * Approving that the only social media posts allowed as independent sources of in-universe information are from official Star Wars brand accounts, such as the official Star Wars Twitter and Facebook page.
 * Recognizing that Pablo Hidalgo has set his tweets to auto-delete after a certain period of time, and has explicitly stated that his tweets should not be used to cite canon on Wookieepedia.
 * Alarmed that, while the former CT has stated it "will typically only apply to future page creation. Existing use-cases are generally grandfathered in, though tweets can be removed when found and admins can use their discretion to delete existing pages." Many pages that are both well-written and may meet current notability requirements through the Notability policy are simply being deleted before any discussion can occur.
 * Familiar with the Notability policy that specifically states that " the majority of subjects within the six original films that received names and backstories from Legends sources such as the Databank, reference guides, or trading card games will not be given articles for their new canon versions, so as to avoid a proliferation of unidentified subject articles." And that "Once a subject's name is established in a new canon source, whether that be new material or old material that has been designated as canon, it can receive an article detailing its existence in the canon continuity."
 * Admitting that such articles that have been created, as according to the new policy, should never have been created in the first place.

Proposal
I hereby propose the following amendment:


 * 1) That the Wookieepedia Notability policy have an amendment that states that per the passage of the Forum:CT Archive/Social media posts as canon sources, articles that do not meet current social media requirements and have been created before the passage of Forum:CT Archive/Social media posts as canon sources be spared from deletion.
 * 2) That articles that have already been created from these two 1 2 Leland Chee tweets be also spared.
 * 3) That such articles be changed to an appropriate "unidentified" title per the new addendum to the Notability policy exempting such pages from outright deletion.
 * 4) That an amendment to the Canon policy under the section "What is not a reliable resource?" be made that specifically mentions the amendment to the Notability policy exempting posts created before the passage of Forum:CT Archive/Social media posts as canon sources from outright deletion.

Further Considerations
Further reasoning behind this amendment include:


 * Being deeply concerned of the absurdity that some new canon articles, such as Vizam, should not even exist as according to the recently passed Forum:CT Archive/Social media posts as canon sources; and that many articles such as Vizam, which is in itself a Wookieepedia Good article and twice as long as its Legends counterpart; should be deleted solely due to the passage of Forum:CT Archive/Social media posts as canon sources, and not changed to an "unidentified" article.
 * Remembering that Leland Chee himself, among others, has stated that it is "[f]air to assume species names are the same unless you hear otherwise. Same goes for planets. And ship models" and that it is "[w]ay easier to keep the current names until there's an actual need to change them"; and therefore, it is fair to assume that the articles that are being deleted now have a fair chance of reappearing in the near future.
 * Lamenting that the deletion of such articles that do not meet the current policy outlined in Forum:CT Archive/Social media posts as canon sources, and that Leland Chee himself, among others, has stated that it is "[f]air to assume species names are the same unless you hear otherwise. Same goes for planets. And ship models" and that it is "[w]ay easier to keep the current names until there's an actual need to change them"; means that it is highly likely that the articles being deleted now will simply be forced to be entirely rewritten from scratch all over again.
 * Notes that while the Notability policy was formed to prevent the creation of unidentified articles in the new canon; that such articles it seeks to prevent as outlined in Forum:CT Archive/Social media posts as canon sources already exist as named articles, and thus by changing them to "unidentified" articles, they are technically not being created, but simply moved.
 * Anguish that social media posts, such as tweets, are being deleted and removed, and thus the information contained in them lost; instead of inserting those tweets and their references into the "behind the scenes" sections of articles as was recommended in Forum:CT Archive/Social media posts as canon sources.

Conclusion
Therefore, I propose that the exact wording of the Notability policy be extended in an additional subsection to include :


 * Additional exceptions to this rule include articles created before the passage of the Wookieepedia consensus track Forum:CT Archive/Social media posts as canon sources, and that such articles created before its passage shall not be deleted despite not being mentioned in a canon source.

Therefore, I also propose that the exact wording of the Canon policy "What is not a reliable resource" be extended in an additional subsection to include:


 * This policy does not allow for the deletion of articles created before the passage of Forum:CT Archive/Social media posts as canon sources for the reasons described in said consensus track, although the use of social media posts within the article as described within said consensus track does.

In conclusion, the passage of these amendments is to clarify the language used in the former CT; Forum:CT Archive/Social media posts as canon sources, that altered the Canon policy by adding the section, "What is not a reliable resource", and thus forced the deletion of articles as per the policy outlined in Notability policy.

- Commander Boots 03:13, January 26, 2018 (UTC)