Talk:Star Wars

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Former good articleStar Wars was one of the Media and drama good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
May 20, 2005Featured article candidateNot promoted
May 29, 2005Featured article candidateNot promoted
December 29, 2005Peer reviewReviewed
January 13, 2006Good article nomineeListed
July 15, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
December 18, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
February 21, 2007Featured topic candidateNot promoted
May 31, 2007Good article reassessmentDelisted
April 6, 2008Good article nomineeListed
April 17, 2008Featured topic candidatePromoted
July 12, 2008Featured article candidateNot promoted
October 18, 2017Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article

Portal bar[edit]

Template:Portal_bar Please note that this template does not belong in the "See also" section.

I recommend moving it down below the External links section. -- (talk) 02:36, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

I'd actually recommend dropping it. It serves practically no purpose. Canterbury Tail talk 02:42, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
Trimmed the portal spam...also removed fansite link as per previous not to link to a fan site in general ...but more importantly the site is packed with image copyright violations. be safe Contributory copyright infringement--Moxy 🍁 16:00, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
If you're dropping useless junk half of those Navboxes could easily go and nothing of value would be lost. -- (talk) 12:15, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
Agree with nav step should be charts turned into WP:Prose ...drop the kids charts.--Moxy 🍁 22:56, 25 September 2019 (UTC)


Lets take this here as it's starting to verge into edit warring territory. Wookieepedia was recently added to the article, after an absence of just over a year. It was removed as a fansite and reinstated. Now it's been removed again (and re-added) under the WP:COPYVIOEL which is quite clearly labelled "For policy or technical reasons, editors are restricted from linking to the following, without exception:" (emphasis in the policy article.) I've removed it again under this policy ad per WP:BRD (which I know is not policy.) Lets discuss. Canterbury Tail talk 21:58, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Agree as per above Contributory copyright infringement They freely admit the copyright is not theirs.... and indicate that in no way do the have the rights our article on the fan site is linked in see also already. --Moxy 🍁 22:15, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Game of Thrones creators trilogy cancelled[edit]

I don't know what to add/what to remove, but as per this Deadline source, the trilogy from the GoT creators is no longer happening, or at least the writers are exiting. Magitroopa (talk) 03:56, 29 October 2019 (UTC)


This has been brought up a few times ....that is the article is full of unsourced charts and one of the reason of GA demotion....yet we have even more now causing the whole article to need side-scrolling.--Moxy 🍁 23:24, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

I transferred the Television section to the SW Television series article, which fixes the side-scrolling problem. Now, if we could only get Disney to stop diluting the franchise ;) GoodDay (talk) 23:50, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
GoodDay, I have reverted your edits at List of Star Wars television series. All your edit there did was duplicate the tables already included in the article (why are we transcluding the tables in that article to the same article?), as well as the content on all the television series - they already have their own sections detailing the respective series; see here. -- /Alex/21 00:57, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
I'll let you figure out how to respond to @Moxy:'s concerns. GoodDay (talk) 00:59, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
Charts should just be a generalization of the content, a summarization; the sources should be included in the prose and the relevant articles. The current format matches the standard practice at multitude of franchise articles. -- /Alex/21 01:01, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
I still don't see, however, how moving the Television section to the SW Television series article fixed the issue. All you did was bloat the television series article with information that's already included there. Why did you duplicate the table and lists? -- /Alex/21 01:25, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
Didn't know there was another list there. GoodDay (talk) 01:49, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
Then please check what you're copying across and editing next time, otherwise such edits could be considered disrputive. Everything you copied across was already in that article; it was meant to exist in this article to summarize that article. -- /Alex/21 02:38, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
The only chart that bothers me is the one for theme park attractions. Most of these are closed and only relevant to a minimal audience. Plus, they're easily available at the linked article. UpdateNerd (talk) 03:58, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
That's why it's only transcluded here. Also, 9 out of 24 isn't "most". -- /Alex/21 04:40, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
Whether it's transcluded or not under the hood doesn't matter to the reader. Yeah technically not 'most'. Maybe a shorter table of just the open attractions would work better here instead. UpdateNerd (talk) 05:12, 20 November 2019 (UTC)