Wookieepedia:Trash compactor/Unidentified bounty hunter (Level 1313)

Unidentified bounty hunter (Level 1313)
This is a classic example of people creating articles for things which are only unidentified because the article creator was too impatient to wait for further details to be revealed, specifically the very name of the character. It's highly unlikely that the character will remain unidentified when the game is released, so I suggest deleting the article until the name is actually known. At least then we'll have an article like "Bob McBountyhunter was a guy who did stuff that's not yet been revealed" instead of "Bounty hunter whose name hasn't been revealed yet did stuff which also hasn't been revealed".

Delete

 * 1) As nominator. --  I need a name  ( Complain here ) 12:57, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) Extremely premature. &mdash; DigiFluid(Whine here) 13:33, June 2, 2012 (UTC)

Keep

 * 1) We should keep it because when the actual game comes out, we can rename the article and add more details. We already know this character is the main one, so what's the point of deleting this article and making a new one on the exact same topic? --Video Gamer1 13:15, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) *Because when the character is eventually named, I can guarantee that someone will come to the wiki looking for info. They'll type in the name and see that there seemingly isn't an article, so they'll make a new one. Then someone else will notice we already have the same article at Unidentified bounty hunter (Level 1313) and we'll go through the usual rigmarole of merging/moving. At no point will the creator of the properly named article bother looking through all the random unidentified articles we have, and why should they? What purpose does this article serve, other than to exist just because it can? Except it can't even do that properly, since the very first thing that's needed to create a wiki article is a name, so we have to cheat our way around it and declare the character unidentified out of ignorance and impatience. --  I need a name  ( Complain here ) 14:52, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 3) **Except that (1) when the character is eventually named, I guarantee you we will move the article immediately to its appropriate name, as we have done in the past for other "unidentified" subjects. And there should be no amount of "rigamarole" at all; it's really a very simple function of the wiki to move a page. Your whole "someone's going to come looking for the article after its named and we won't have the information" is a completely invalid argument for two reasons: first, with our round-the-clock user-base, we're more than likely to move it first; and second, someone is just as likely to want to look up info about the bounty hunter now, so we might as well present what info we do have now. As to the argument about people not going to look up the unidentified name&mdash;of course they won't, but again: that's never stopped us from creating unidentified articles in the past, and people very well might be pleased to find a link for this guy on the Star Wars: 1313 article. I've said it a million times, and I'll say it again: we exist to present every single piece of canon information about Star Wars. This is canon information about Star Wars. By neglecting to create this article, we are neglecting to do our job. And I'll say this again, too: if we can't have articles like this, then nor can we have articles like this or this&mdash;because for all intents and purposes, we already know just as much about this bounty hunter as we do about those characters. Also, to your argument about unique info below: unique info we already have about this guy includes his appearance, the fact that he uses exotic weapons, and the fact that he uncovers a criminal conspiracy. That's more unique info than we have about a lot of other unidentified characters. Jonjedigrandmaster  ( Talk ) 15:15, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 4) ***Considering the mess people managed to make of moving various ships which were identified in The Essential Guide to Warfare, I sincerely doubt the ability of people here to move pages properly. But it's OK, we can all sit around and babysit assorted unnecessary articles for future characters, it's not like we have other things to be doing on the wiki. You're right on track about documenting canon though. Your two examples of unidentified characters are a perfect example of this. It's a canonical fact that neither of them are identified in their appearances. Unlike this bounty hunter, however, their appearances have actually been released and it's easy to verify that they are not, in fact, named. The only basis for saying that this bounty hunter isn't named is because people are too impatient to wait for their first and only confirmed appearance to be released and name them. There's no canonical basis for saying this character is either named or unidentified, and no name = no article. --  I need a name  ( Complain here ) 16:18, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 5) ****I don't know how this point still hasn't gotten across, but no name has never ever been equated to no article. This guy existed. He has an appearance we can describe. He has taken actions which we can describe, and as more information becomes released with the release of the game itself, we'll be able to add to it. That's how we do things here. We don't neglect to make articles just because we don't know everything about the characters yet; we never have, and I doubt we ever will. Jonjedigrandmaster  ( Talk ) 23:35, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 6) Absolutely not. The information we have about the game clearly states that there will be a bounty hunter (that's a single, identifyable character) doing unique things. We don't delete other articles just because we only have limited information about the subjects&mdash;limited information happens all the time. If we delete this because the guy's name isn't yet known and the stuff he did has "not yet been revealed," then why don't we go and delete every other unidentified article for characters about whom we don't yet know everything? That would be adverse to our purpose of documenting all canon information. Jonjedigrandmaster  ( Talk ) 14:19, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 7) *Yeah, unique information, other than the character's actual name, which is needed for making an article in the first place. We definitely delete speculatory unidentified articles, we've been doing it since at least season 3 of The Clone Wars, when people were making "Unidentified character I saw in the trailer" articles. The difference is between making an article for a character who's made an appearance and wasn't identified and making an article for a character who hasn't been identified because they haven't made an appearance. If I started making articles for characters from a video game and claimed they were unidentified because I hadn't bothered playing the game, the articles would be rightly deleted. So why is it acceptable to do the same thing with a game we can't possibly play yet? --  I need a name  ( Complain here ) 14:52, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 8) **This isn't speculatory; whether or not something is named has never had any effect on whether or not we make an article on it; and this isn't just some random guy created based on a silly claim from someone who hasn't yet played the game&mdash;it's hard, concrete, canon material. We obviously can't fill in all the blanks yet, but that's never stopped us before. We just include what info we can, and leave out the rest. Simple. Jonjedigrandmaster  ( Talk ) 15:19, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 9) ***Oh, so you know for a fact that this character is unidentified then? No? Then it's speculation to say they are. Whether or not something hasn't been named may have no effect on whether we have an article, but whether or not something hasn't even been given the chance to be named certainly does. This is actually worse than someone being too lazy to play the game to find out the character's name, since it's physically impossible for any of us to do so until the game is actually released. As for lack of names for characters who've yet to make an appearance never stopping them from having articles, unidentified pink Twi'lek and unidentified Besalisk Jedi (or whatever they were called) disagree. --  I need a name  ( Complain here ) 16:18, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 10) ****"Oh, so you know for a fact that this character is unidentified then? No? Then it's speculation to say they are." That's just an argument against all unidentified articles. You take that stance, you're saying we should kill them all. They're what we've use since in place of canon names for years. There are characters all the time who appear in TV shows and books who aren't named, and who have been "given the chance" to be named. And what happens when they're named later? All hell breaks loose and the Wook falls apart? No. Of course not. The articles get moved to the newly given name. Crying out loud. Jonjedigrandmaster  ( Talk ) 23:35, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 11) *****No, it isn't and no, I'm not. The key difference between this so-called unidentified article and those ones is that they're actually unidentified in their appearances, whereas this character is unidentified because their appearance hasn't even been released yet for you to confirm whether they're identified or not. How you keep missing this point is beyond me. --  I need a name  ( Complain here ) 23:42, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 12) I don't think deletion would be averse to our documenting all canon, but since he's been identified as the main character, imagine saying "the main character will be a bounty hunter" in the Star Wars: 1313 article without a link when we have this character depicted already. It just wouldn't feel right. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 14:23, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 13) Per Jon. -  JMAS  Jolly Trooper.png Hey, it's me! 15:23, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 14) Waah? ... Per Jon. (goes back to sleep) Cade   Calrayn  StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit.svg 15:28, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 15) 501st  dogma ( talk ) 16:26, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 16) Per Jon. grunny &#64; wookieepedia :&#126;$ 16:29, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 17) Per Jon. --The Lampshade... (talk) 20:52, June 2, 2012 (UTC)Lamp774
 * 18) Per Jugs. Just to add to (or reiterate) what he's already said, this article is canon; it is individual; it is factual. Apart from what others have speculated, I do not believe that this bounty hunter is Boba Fett or any bounty hunter we've seen in the past. StarWars.com has described this bounty hunter as if he's a totally new and unique character. As Jon said, when the character is named, it will require a whole ten seconds to move the article to the actual name. In the meantime, we have an official article on an official character. On the comment of it not having enough information, as Jugs said again, there is unique and separate information pertaining to this character that is not speculation. Also, there are many, many CAs that have less information than this. If they can be Comprehensive articles, why can't this guy just be a regular article? Lastly, also as Jon said, Wookieepedia is a well for every little bit of Star Wars information. With the official announcement of this game coming up, people will expect us to have an article for this guy. From the start, we need to keep up with new material as much as we can.&mdash; Cal Jedi Infinite Empire.svg (Personal Comm Channel) 22:27, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 19) *Where are people getting this idea that I want the article deleted because it isn't long enough or that it doesn't contain enough information or some other misnomer like that? At no point have I mentioned anything about the information in the article. The article could be one sentence long or it could be fifteen paragraphs long, it doesn't matter. I haven't claimed anything in the article is non-canon or non-factual, only its title, because there is no canonical basis whatsoever to claim that this character is unidentified. Ignorance of what happens in the game because it hasn't been released yet is not a valid reason to say they're unidentified. You say you don't believe the character is Boba Fett or anyone else, but how do you know they aren't? Do you have a copy of the game to confirm it either way? Of course you don't, which can only mean you're speculating. Speculation isn't allowed in articles, which means this article would no longer have a title. Without a title, it's physically impossible for the article to exist. --  I need a name  ( Complain here ) 23:25, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 20) **Per Jugs above.&mdash; Cal Jedi Infinite Empire.svg (Personal Comm Channel) 23:36, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 21) ***... In no way addresses what I've said here. But I'm glad you can admit that. --  I need a name  ( Complain here ) 23:45, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 22) I really don't see anything bad in keeping this. 1358  (Talk)  22:31, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 23) ' Biggestleo ' (Meeting Room) 22:32, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 24)  Exiled Jedi  Oldrepublic crest.svg (Greetings)  23:12, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 25) The whole argument for deletion is that it currently doesn't have a name? You should talk to Dantescifi.  Stake black   msg 23:19, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * No, my argument is that it's speculation to treat the character as unidentified without waiting for the game that will likely name them to be released. --  I need a name  ( Complain here ) 23:25, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) **I understand. But, then again, what's so bad about moving it to its proper title or merging it later on? This issue will sort itself over time.  Stake black   msg 00:02, June 3, 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) Plagueis327 23:26, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 3)  IFYLOFD  ( Floyd's crib ) 23:51, June 2, 2012 (UTC)