Wookieepedia talk:Wookieenews

Time to stop with the 1000 increment milestones in new articles?
I guess it's looking a little silly now.... perhaps we shold just have 1000, 2000, 3000, 4000, 5000, 7500, 10000, 20000, 50000, etc? In any case, i don't think 11000 is a significant number at all. I know it's fun to be historic and sentimental... but we gotta stop somewhere... --Azizlight 06:32, 30 Aug 2005 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Now we only post even numbers like you have there. -- Riffsyphon1024 06:41, 30 Aug 2005 (UTC)
 * Maybe every 5000 articles? WhiteBoy 04:16, 28 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * Woohoo! 30000 articles!!!! -- Riffsyphon1024 02:35, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Is May 2006 a current event?
I was thinking about this page and Wookieenews. I think this page is not quite what it ought to be. I think that it has evolved into more or less a redundancy of the year pages. In my mind, we need to rework this to be something like what we're thinking about with Wookieenews. As an example, say Del Rey announces today that Legacy of the Force: Betrayal is scheduled for release on May 30, 2006. In my thinking it should go in a news entry for today, November 27, 2005, on the Current events/Wookieenews page; and as an expected release date entry (of May 30th) on the 2006 page. Maybe when/if the book is actually released have another "Current event" entry that day. But there's no way a future date would be a current event. "Current event" is more or less synonymous with "news." Thoughts? WhiteBoy 04:16, 28 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * The announcement of future releases is news isn't it? -- Riffsyphon1024 04:22, 28 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * Most definitely, but it's today's news. I.e. it's today's news not May 30th's news.  Re-read what I said, or maybe I need to re-write if it was that unclear.  WhiteBoy 05:02, 28 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * The announcement and the release are both news, however the announcement is currently a Current Event, whereas the release won't be one until May. Make sense? -- Riffsyphon1024 05:05, 28 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * Yep. Glad you understand what I was saying.  :)  WhiteBoy 06:03, 28 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * So, if we did that, do you see any differences with that and what you have in mind for Wookieenews? WhiteBoy 06:03, 28 Nov 2005 (UTC)

OK, let me rephrase my whole point like this. Why do we need a May 30th entry for Betrayal at both Current Events and 2006? They are exactly the same information. I am suggesting we transform Current Events into what you are intending with WookieeNews. WhiteBoy 16:35, 9 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree. Not only does this page not provide information on current events, but many entries (mostly those about publishing dates) are incorrect. Year pages should cover upcoming events, and we should replace this page with Wookieepedia related announcements (and subsequently replace it on the left bar). --SparqMan 03:35, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * Sorry I forgot about this discussion. In that case, then we should remove duplicates from the current events and move them to the year pages. Current events should really be the WookieeNews I was hoping to start correctly (however some felt they wanted to start it themselves). I want to see what's happening in the world of Star Wars right now. If there's a story on two fans electrocuting themselves with Force FX lightsabers, I want to see it on here with appropriate links to news articles elsewhere. Ongoing events, news of cast members, etc. If it needs to be renamed, so be it. -- Riffsyphon1024 07:52, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * Cool, sounds like we are thinking along the same lines. Riff and I decided to be bold and go ahead and get this started.  :)  WhiteBoy 09:11, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * I especially like "Wookieenews" being on the sidebar instead of the generic "Current events". Now if only we could decide on a good name for the community portal... --MarcK [talk] 09:21, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree. There's been discussion about that before, but I don't seem to be able to find it.  Maybe we need to start something at the Consensus track.  :) WhiteBoy 09:37, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)

When to delete objects?
There are things that have already happened here. What should be deleted?--Xilentshadow900 02:02, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * I suggest (see above) that we remove all the "future" stuff from this page. That would clean it up alot.  As far as how long to retain old events...hmm.  Six months or so?  Maybe longer until we get this section going better.   (I'm feeling the urge to be bold.  :) WhiteBoy 07:29, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * We can delete the stuff representing ahead of time, and I would recommend archiving all info dropped from the page after your set time limit. -- Riffsyphon1024 07:53, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * But shouldn't that info be put somewhere?--Xilentshadow900 14:19, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * Because I spent forever doing it.. :(--Xilentshadow900 23:02, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure Riff and I were the only ones who cleaned up future stuff; and we made sure the info was in the appropriate years page before removing it from here. WhiteBoy 18:46, 4 Jan 2006 (UTC)
 * Yea, don't fret Xilent. It wasn't complete deleted, only relocated. -- Riffsyphon1024 04:17, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)

New Main Page?
Why does it say a new Main Page has been chosen? Unlesss i'm wrong, no decision has been made yet, and the main page will be changed weekly until a cooncensus is reached. It is misleading to say that a new main page has been chosen when the final decision hasn't even been made yet! No wonder no new votes have been made regarding the new main page, since everyone thinks the matter has been settled, even though it hasn't.


 * What the Frack? There is no frelling reason to claim a new main page has been chosen until  it is officially chosen, which is hasn't been yet!
 * Yeah, really. it's stupid to lie and say it's been made official when the vote is still open. But there's nothing that can be done... The admins will let the false information stay. Oh well, screw it. let the lies of the dictatorship continue.....70.109.234.182 04:39, 25 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh well, I tried, and they reverted the truth once again. To hell with it, I give up, the shroud of the Dark Side has fallen, and the truth dies. All hail the Lies! all hail the dictatorship! There shall never be an official new main page, since everyone thinks the matter is settled, even though the vote is still open.
 * The style and the layout have been chosen, we are just trying to pick a color. And if you want a say in this, REGISTER and vote. -- SFH 05:16, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
 * To tell you the truth, nobody cares. When there's no need to get all bureaucratic, we don't. It was decided that since everyone wanted the old main page gone, it would be best to rotate until a consensus is reached. - Sikon [ Talk ] 05:22, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
 * The point, is that the statment Wookieepedia implements a new main page implies that the debate is over, and that everything is settled. Therefore, someone reading that will be mislead to believe that the voting is over, and that they therefore can't vote. Therefore, no one will vote, becuase they will be misslead into thinnking the main page has been finalised. Which is why I think it should not be announced in Wookieenews in utill the final decision is made.


 * Also, out of respect for the rules, you might as well block me as well... I am the guy who violated the 3RR rules under the other 2 IPs you blocked.
 * Already... - Sikon [ Talk ] 05:40, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Why am I still able to edit? I broke the rules, I deserve to be blocked, even though I stand by my belief that Wookieenews shouldn't announce a new main page until it is finalised.151.203.164.224 05:52, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Now you aren't. - Sikon [ Talk ] 05:56, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Credit for Wookieepedia concept
The very first entry on this page gives credit to an anonymous user for the idea of a Star Wars Wiki. If one looks at the link, the anon's idea was to make a Star Wars Portal, not a Star Wars Wiki. The wiki idea was Riffsyphon's. But I'm probably just confused about what a WikiPortal is… – Aidje talk 21:42, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * A portal is just an alternate main page on Wikipedia. So you're right, Riff was the first to propose a Star Wars wiki. --Imp 21:45, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I was? -- Riffsyphon1024 23:10, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Certainly appears so. You're a pioneer! --Imp 23:11, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Sweet; that's what I thought. Congrats, Riff. :-) If one of you hasn't fixed that already, I'm about to… – Aidje talk 23:40, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * You had not gotten around to it yet, so I fixed it. :)  WhiteBoy 00:38, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I lost my Internet connection right after I posted that. I didn't even have a connection for most of today thanks to the weather. I thought I would go mad. – Aidje talk 07:20, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Tense
I'm noticing some inconsistent verb tenses in these headlines. Is there a policy with Wookieenews? Seems to me it ought to be present-tense (being "news" and all)... Gonk 18:23, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Anthony Daniels
Anthony Daniels has signed on to appear in the Star Wars live action TV series as C-3PO! supergeeky1 The Cantina 19:22, 26 February 2007 (UTC)