Wookieepedia:EduCorps/Meeting 14/Log

[23:00:10] 	Welcome to meeting 14 [23:00:19] 	I'll be fading in and out [23:00:22] 	Record setting attendance [23:00:41] 	Old articles [23:01:08] 	We can probably do all the old planets together, right? [23:01:15] 	Yes [23:01:25] 	Where's preem and Tope [23:01:38] 	I'll list the old articles so you can review each one: [23:01:53] 	http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Aaghra [23:01:55] 	nvm then Tope :P [23:02:08] 	http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Aar [23:02:16] 	http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Abanol [23:02:24] 	http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Abatrarg [23:02:52] 	http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Abregado-dai [23:02:56] 	http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Abregado-fus [23:03:02] 	http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Abregado-san [23:03:07] 	http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Abregado-taki [23:03:12] 	http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Affavan [23:03:18] 	http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Aylayl [23:03:23] 	http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Darkon_III [23:03:29] 	http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Dirha [23:03:39] 	All of these had Atlas speculation [23:03:57] 	I'll give us all a few minutes to check them over. [23:04:27] 	Aar has atlas grid coordinates in main article [23:04:40] 	I'll kill it [23:05:02] 	Excised [23:05:26] 	Going to fix a minor reffing prob there, sec [23:05:37] 	Keep all I think [23:06:09] 	I confess I didn't actually look at them. [23:06:16] 	I will vote keep if you guys are satisfied [23:06:18] 	Wait, is the Aar system supposed to be sourced to Atlas, or companion? [23:06:28] 	Infobox and body are sourcing to diff things [23:06:41] 	It probably shouldn't matter [23:06:47] 	Both have it. [23:06:51] 	The Atlas index is mostly identical to the Companion [23:07:01] 	But it's nice to keep them the same for consistency [23:07:06] 	Should I change it for consistency, so the system is sourced the same way both times? [23:07:12] 	Atlas is usually the first, since it was first [23:07:26] 	Change it to Atlas, provided it's in Atlas [23:07:55] 	It is in the Atlas. [23:07:57] 	did so [23:08:06] 	EJ has my vote if I don't respond. [23:08:55] 	dai had coordinates, killed them [23:09:15] 	Good catch [23:09:33] 	well, I will when my internet isn't being naughty >.> [23:10:28] 	Whoever fixed these missed the coordinates. [23:10:34] 	taki had em too [23:11:55] 	Whenever you guys are ready. [23:12:05] 	2 to go [23:13:09] 	Dirha might benifit from 25-29 aby being added in the body, but that's not a reason to kill it [23:13:57] 	Keep all [23:14:13] 	Yep, keep all [23:14:49] 	I kind of disagree. [23:15:00] 	Yeah, that last one needs to be fixed. [23:15:08] 	The years should be in the body if they're in the infobox [23:15:19] <Toprawa>	It should be a simple matter [23:15:25] 	I can do it [23:15:28] <Toprawa>	ok [23:15:40] <Cade|Mobile>	Actually, wait [23:15:49] <Cade|Mobile>	Should that population even be there? [23:16:03] 	Where? [23:16:21] <Cade|Mobile>	Ah, never mind :P [23:16:50] <Cade|Mobile>	Confused it with the population ones [23:17:48] 	dogma? [23:18:11] 	yep? [23:18:21] 	Are you fixing it? [23:18:23] 	Fixing it now, but I think the date can further be refined [23:18:54] <Toprawa>	How so? [23:20:05] 	The vong only hit hutt space after Fondor I believe [23:20:22] <Cade|Mobile>	Ah, he's right [23:20:23] 	I'm seeing where the information is and it doesn't mention when it happened. [23:20:34] 	Which was in 25 ABY, but near the end [23:20:44] <Cade|Mobile>	But we know when they started attacking Hutt space [23:20:52] 	How do we know it was part of the main Hutt Space invasion? [23:21:25] <Toprawa>	It's a bit of an extrapolation, but I think it's sound [23:21:42] 	I'll vote to extend this, but I don't want to spend 15 minutes trying to fix it now. [23:21:50] 	Wait, what is sound? [23:22:00] <Toprawa>	Extend [23:22:09] <Cade|Mobile>	Extend [23:22:09] 	k, extend [23:22:13] 	Extend Dirha, keep the rest [23:22:19] 	I fixed it without the new dates [23:22:19] <CorellianPremier>	Sure, extend [23:22:31] 	Keep all but dirha [23:22:39] <Toprawa>	Keep all others [23:23:04] 	All right, all kept but Dirha, which was extended until next meeting. [23:23:15] 	One left: http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/BARC_speeder_%28two-person%29 [23:23:26] 	http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Wookieepedia:EC/BARC_speeder_%28two-person%29 [23:23:59] <Toprawa>	Keep [23:24:04] 	Keep [23:24:22] <CorellianPremier>	Yep, keep [23:24:34] 	dogma or Cade? [23:24:34] 	keep [23:24:51] 	All right, speeder kept. [23:25:08] 	Onto new articles: [23:25:09] 	http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Diyu [23:25:11] <Toprawa>	I'm assuming nothing was done to the new articles other than the two Winterz says he kept? [23:25:19] <Toprawa>	We could just group these to save time [23:25:22] 	Okay [23:25:28] <Toprawa>	They all have the same issue [23:25:33] 	per tope [23:25:47] 	All but Evas VI and Greater Galam [23:25:49] 	Let's do winterz's ones first [23:25:55] 	Okay, sure [23:26:09] 	http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Evas_VI [23:26:43] <Toprawa>	Look's ok [23:26:45] <Toprawa>	Spare [23:26:47] 	Spare [23:26:49] 	yep, spare [23:27:02] <Cade|Mobile>	Spare [23:27:12] 	Evas VI spared. [23:27:31] 	http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Greater_Galam [23:27:50] <Toprawa>	um [23:28:05] <Toprawa>	Nevermind [23:28:20] 	mention of coordinates in BtS? [23:28:47] 	Primary terrain - gas giant? [23:28:49] 	:P [23:28:58] 	I'd say that stuff about native flora and fauna not existing is speculation unless it specifically states that. [23:29:02] <Toprawa>	Remove that terrain [23:29:02] 	Is that acceptable? [23:29:07] <Toprawa>	That's unnecessary [23:29:35] <CorellianPremier>	Yep [23:29:38] 	Yeah, it could have had floating thingies in the atmosphere [23:29:38] <Toprawa>	Yeah, per EJ [23:29:44] <Toprawa>	Indeed [23:29:48] <Toprawa>	Bespin does, for example [23:29:51] 	I'm voting probe. [23:29:57] <Toprawa>	Probe [23:30:05] 	probity probe [23:30:25] <CorellianPremier>	Probe it [23:30:38] 	Greater Galam probed. [23:30:54] 	All of the rest: [23:30:57] 	Probe [23:31:04] <Toprawa>	Probe the rest [23:31:17] 	^ [23:31:19] <CorellianPremier>	Definitely [23:31:28] 	Rest of the new articles are probed. [23:31:48] 	Now, for my proposal. [23:32:01] 	Here is the first part. [23:32:20] <CorellianPremier>	Gotta go [23:32:57] 	Only members of the Inquisitorius, AgriCorps, or EduCorps are allowed to archive comprehensive article nominations. [23:33:29] 	Cade: Here is part one of my proposal. [23:33:37] 	Only members of the Inquisitorius, AgriCorps, or EduCorps are allowed to archive comprehensive article nominations. [23:33:44] <Toprawa>	Support [23:33:47] 	Support [23:33:56] 	Meh, archiving CANs before I was EC is what taught me how to do them [23:34:11] 	I guess I'll support though [23:34:11] 	SE gave me his support. [23:34:38] 	CP said that he would be fine with changes. [23:34:46] 	So, part one is passed. [23:34:54] 	Part two [23:35:14] 	You may not archive your own comprehensive article nomination. [23:35:32] <Cade|Mobile>	Support [23:35:45] 	Support [23:35:56] 	Well, I trust some to do it, but not others, so support [23:36:17] 	CP and SE also support. [23:36:20] 	Tope? [23:36:25] <Toprawa>	I abstain. [23:36:42] <Toprawa>	Unless there's something specifically going on with the CAN, I don't think it's much of an issue [23:36:51] <Toprawa>	I wouldn't like to see the same measure enacted for the Inq and AC [23:37:01] <Cade|Mobile>	Actually, yeah [23:37:11] 	But, you can't archive your own nomination, can you? [23:37:18] <Toprawa>	You can [23:37:24] <Toprawa>	There's nothing restricting it [23:37:32] <Toprawa>	It used to be an unwritten rule in the early Inq, when people were dishonest [23:37:48] <Toprawa>	But I think people today are more trustworthy, so it's not an issue [23:37:58] 	I thought I saw a rule somewhere. [23:38:43] <Toprawa>	The problem used to be that you didn't need to have all objections stricken for a nom to be successful [23:38:51] <Toprawa>	As long as you got the number of votes needed, you could archive it at any time [23:39:02] <Toprawa>	So nominators used to archive their own noms and ignore objections [23:39:02] 	Well, I'll just drop part two then. [23:39:11] <Cade|Mobile>	Cool. [23:39:15] 	Part one was my main concern. [23:39:23] <Toprawa>	I have a small thing I wanted to bring up before we end. [23:39:28] 	Okay. [23:39:35] <Toprawa>	Just a reviewing note for everyone to keep in mind. [23:39:59] <Toprawa>	Now that the Legends continuity is ended, many articles' BTS sections are written incorrectly as if there might still be new sources coming. [23:40:05] <Toprawa>	Example of a change I just made: http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Greater_Galam?curid=177554&diff=5310217&oldid=5240684 [23:40:23] 	cool [23:40:25] <Toprawa>	Phrases like "first mentioned" if there's only one Appearance/Source, or "only mention in canon to date," etc. [23:40:31] <Toprawa>	Watch out for this and change it when you see it [23:40:35] 	Well, there's still TOR and FFG. [23:40:40] <Cade|Mobile>	^^ [23:40:47] <Toprawa>	Yes, but the vast majority of things will never be mentioned or appear again [23:40:57] <Toprawa>	So it's safe to just assume they won't be [23:41:10] <Toprawa>	If something is mentioned in FFG, then we can make changes in the rare instances it happens [23:41:16] 	first mentioned doesn't really say that it will be mentioned again. [23:41:59] <Toprawa>	It's redundant to say something was first mentioned if it was its only mention [23:42:10] <Toprawa>	It implies there are or could be more mentions [23:42:19] 	Okay, I guess I have articles to fix then. [23:42:35] <Toprawa>	That's not so much the issue as phrases like "only mention to date" [23:42:39] <Toprawa>	That's what I'm really talking about [23:42:45] <Toprawa>	You guys know what I mean [23:42:49] <Toprawa>	Change it when you see it [23:43:27] 	All right. [23:43:35] 	Anything else? [23:43:48] <Toprawa>	Not from me [23:44:16] 	Nope [23:44:19] 	If there is not anything else, here are the duties: [23:44:25] 	I'm on scheduling. [23:44:26] 	Who's on paperwork and scheduling? [23:44:34] 	SE is on paperwork. [23:44:41] 	k [23:44:48] 	Thank you all for showing up.