Talk:Black Spathi Squadron

Hold up! How come you merged the BSS article into the main spathi article? They are 'legendary characters', I think they deserve their own page. -Fadookie 01:36, 25 Oct 2004 (CEST)

They are characters of legend... but they only come up once, in a conversation with Commander Hayes. I tried to keep the redirect page in the Legendary Characters category, but I guess it didn't work. I don't think they need their own page because there's not more than 2 paragraphs that can really be said about them, except maybe community theories and fan artwork. I'm not opposed to them having their own page on principle, just that I don't think there's enough information to warrant a whole page. You can revert if you really want to ;) --Jacius 05:30, 25 Oct 2004 (CEST)

There are plenty of articles shorter than this one (The Grand Master Planet Eaters get their own page, etc.) I just wish you would have asked before merging- in smaller or more obvious edits this isn't neccessary, but your actions seem arbitrary. I was thinking about reverting, but let's see what the other denizens have to say. -Fadookie 08:31, 25 Oct 2004 (CEST)

I agree it deserves it's own page. In particularly because they are legend. They're not just some Spathi sub-branch. -- SvdB 09:42, 25 Oct 2004 (CEST)

To be honest, I don't see the need for a separate page for the Grand Master Planet Eaters either. I'd rather see a page about all the known Umgah pranks, which listed (for example) the GMPEs, Dogar and Kazon on Hyperwave Channel 44, switching the colored sticks to make the Spathi battle thralls, etc. My actions aren't arbitrary -- I happened to be working on Spathi, and I was going to mention the BSS on that page, but when I was done typing a short description of them, I realized I had basically replicated the BSS page! As for asking first: I was being bold. It's trivial to revert the pages, if necessary.

There is no information of substance about the BSS, or the GMPEs, so why should they have separate pages? I would merge the other small pages, such as the very minor characters (the crewmen who die when you meet Fwiffo, for example) into pages by group too, but I haven't gotten around to it yet! IMO, there aren't enough substantial "Legendary Characters" in SC2 to justify having a category for them. --Jacius 02:46, 26 Oct 2004 (CEST)

Meh. I like the legendary characters category and can see no reason to abolish it. Anyway, such drastic action (consolidation of all legendary characters into one page) should not be taken without a general consensus, which has not been reached. I'm going to revert the BSS article, and we can go from there. -Fadookie 05:07, 26 Oct 2004 (CEST)

Preserving good article flow is important. Blatantly out-of-fourth-wall info *should* be separated from in-story info, and the square brackets are a good way to do it. Besides which -- why are we giving special treatment to fan stuff about the BSS at all? In terms of the number of people who know and care about it, the Star Control 3 content is a lot more important to the Star Control universe than the BSS, but we're not including it. Why include stuff that a small number of fans found funny, and privileging those people's contributions?

Actually, yeah -- I'm taking the fanwork stuff off this article and recommending it go in a separate page about fan fiction.

I can see how an article devoted to fan fiction could be appropriate, but please don't just delete stuff and expect someone else to re-incorporate it later. I'm putting the text back in with brackets to be moved at a later date, or dealt with in some other way.

Also, see Talk:HyperSpace for Svdb's position on material which breaks the "fourth wall".

-Fadookie 06:39, 14 Jan 2005 (CET)