BIONICLEsector01 talk:Articles for Deletion

Shortcut: AFD
From BIONICLEsector01

Rename "Dekar-Hydraxon" to "Hydraxon (Duplicate)" and "Hydraxon" to "Hydraxon (Original)"

Most articles covering subjects whose names changed during the story use the subject's new name. Examples include "Jaller," "Takanuva," and "Treespeak" (back when it was a full article). Renaming "Dekar-Hydraxon" to "Hydraxon" would match that convention. With this change, we could also remove the Nickname template from that article--"Dekar-Hydraxon" was a term made up for BS01.

Of course, then we'd have two "Hydraxon" articles, so we could turn "Hydraxon" into a disambiguation page and distinguish the character articles with the titles "Hydraxon (Duplicate)" and "Hydraxon (Original)." -- Morris the Mata Nui Cow (talk) 17:46, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Votes for renaming "Dekar-Hydraxon" and "Hydraxon"

  1. -- Morris the Mata Nui Cow (talk) 17:46, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
  2. -- Dag (talk) 18:26, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
  3. ~ Wolk (talk) 20:39, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
  4. --Surel (Talk) 08:04, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
  5. - Toa Jala Converse 21:48, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Votes against renaming "Dekar-Hydraxon" and "Hydraxon"

  1. I agree with Dorek's reasoning below. --Angel Bob (talk) 20:04, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Comments on renaming "Dekar-Hydraxon" and "Hydraxon"

I vague remember we having a very similar poll already. And we've made the changes, that was the time when we merged Dekar's and the Dekar-Hydraxo pages I believe, only to Dorek rename the page back to Dekar-Hydraxon. So I'll only vote if he's okay with the changes lol --Surel (Talk) 20:19, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Here's what I found.[1][2][3] Also, if the pages do end up being renamed, we should have a "Hydraxon" disambiguation page. Dag (talk) 20:56, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Ah, I knew we'd talked about the page name a while back but had forgotten we'd actually voted on it. My bad (and thanks for bringing up that info). Also, agreed about the disambig. -- Morris the Mata Nui Cow (talk) 04:54, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

I'll be honest, I'm still not sold on it, although it is the least obtrusive solution (aside from what it is now). Functionally, he's still Dekar, and it feels remiss to have his name just be a redirect. It's too unique to compare to Takua or Treespeak.

We could also just make it Dekar =P -- Dorek Talk 02:55, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

I see what you mean. Since the article is about two identities (rather than a single identity/concept with two names, as in the other examples), there's a good argument for mentioning both identities in the title. Personally, I still lean against "Dekar-Hydraxon" since it's a nickname while "Dekar" and "Hydraxon (Duplicate)" aren't. In that case, since the new Hydraxon doesn't remember his past, I think it'd make more sense to title the article with his new identity instead of his old one. None of my opinions are strong though, and I'm curious to hear others. -- Morris the Mata Nui Cow (talk) 04:54, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
I think we should create a separate page for Dekar. Once he becomes Hydraxon, he's no longer Dekar. Dekar essentially no longer exists (RIP). Like Morris said, they're two different identities, but I agree with Dorek as well: it's too unique to use Takua/Takanuva as a model, so we need to do something else in this case. When Takua became Takanuva, he was still the same individual, so it makes sense to give him only one page. Either way, I support the name changes being proposed here. - Toa Jala Converse 21:48, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

If I'm not mistaken, that's how it originally was, waaaaaay back in the day. I think the argument for fusing them (maybe I did that? idk it's been 15 years) was because he IS still Dekar; mind readers can access those parts of his brain, and literally any time he appears in the story people go "this guy's a phony!" so being Dekar is still central to the character and his arc. It's not like we would have had two pages for amnesiac Takua and regular Takua, or Metru Nui Nuhrii and Mata Nui Nuri, etc. etc. I think having two "Hydraxon" pages doesn't really capture the complexities of it, although at some point I get that it's just semantics. -- Dorek Talk 18:07, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Merge Professional Contributors to BIONICLE with BIONICLE

I've never quite liked the real people page, not that it doesn't provide useful information, but it was always a bit hodgepodge. I think the information would do well on the BIONICLE page itself, with a bit of tweaking (probably bullet lists instead of sections, but I'm not opposed to some kind of table if we wanted to sort them by what they did, rather than alphabetically?).

ALTERNATIVELY we could use the new Meta page system (I'll have examples soon!) and, like, split the information, but I feel like that might be hard to do without ripping a lot of information off the BIONICLE page as it is. -- Dorek Talk 16:33, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Votes for merging Professional Contributors to BIONICLE with BIONICLE

  1. -- Dorek Talk 16:33, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Votes for using the Meta tag

  1. I think having a list of the people who have contributed to the theme is great, but I personally would rather see it be part of the new Meta plan than merged into BIONICLE. -- TheRocketRacer (talk) 00:11, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
  2. Right! This was the thing, I forgot. ~ Wolk (talk) 01:45, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Votes for doing nothing

  1. --Gonel (talk) 18:16, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
  2. I still don't know what'll be the point of the meta tags, and until then, I think it worth to be a separate page.--Surel (Talk) 18:36, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Comments on merging Professional Contributors to BIONICLE

I'm not sure how the Meta pages will work, so I'll refrain from voting for now.

I feel like there's too much information to squeeze it into the BIONICLE page, and I also know the contributors page is horribly incomplete / out of date. Kind of a hazzle to maintain, but I do think it is a necessairy page to have, and it's certainly better than making seperate pages for each person. Keeping track of what they did is a very important aspect.

I guess, ultimately I would need to see what these options would look like. ~ Wolk (talk) 17:33, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

I'm in the same boat as Wolk. I don't really think that information belongs tacked on to the BIONICLE page (we finally got a space for the Fan Community section that had already been there). Outside of maybe an out-of-universe BIONICLE cameos section, the BIONICLE page is pretty complete and self-contained, whereas the "Professional Contributors" section serves a pretty different purpose. For me, it would be like merging the "Other Toa" page with "Elements."
I'm very curious about the Meta examples, and seeing what they'd look like may motivate me to both change my vote here and vote on the Meta tag in AfC. I'd also definitely be keen on revising the Contributors page. But for the time being, out of the three options I'm inclined to the status quo. --Gonel (talk) 18:16, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
Meta:Tahu is up. As for other pages I'm still thinking of examples; I wholesale moved Meta:Fan Community, but others might require a bit more tweaking. Ultimately I don't think it would be as good a fit for the real people article, but at the same time, I still think there's a better way than just "here's a list of randos in no particular order". Maybe I'll recategorize the page if nobody likes the idea of merging. -- Dorek Talk 12:23, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
To anyone who doesn't understand what the new Meta tag is for, it's for real world information outside of the story as well as fan-created concepts, or at least I think that's what it's intended for, let me know if I'm wrong. -- TheRocketRacer (talk) 01:43, 6 July 2022 (UTC)