Forum:Proposal to Replace fan-made Titles

Many of the articles that have unofficial titles have mostly fan-made titles, such as Crow's Nest Bomb. So if this proposal passes then we can change these articles' titles:
 * Covenant Supercruiser to Unidentified Covenant Ship
 * Reason: Because the ship that was mentioned wasn't even confirmed to be a cruiser.
 * Crow's Nest Bomb to Unidentified UNSC Bomb
 * Reason: Because the name "Crow's Nest Bomb" sounds like someone just chose a random name.
 * Far Tower to Unknown Covenant Landing Tower
 * Reason: Far Tower was just a description of the tower not the name of the tower itself.
 * Legendary Planet to Unknown Planet
 * Reason: Because the name (like Crow's Nest Bomb title) looks randomly chosen and I haven't seen many people calling it "Legendary Planet".

Note: The reason why I did not include "Covenant Rope" and "Brute Land Mine" was becuase of what Dragonclaws said here which was that those titles are a bit of an accurate description.

I was thinking about doing the same thing with these articles: Hugging Elite, Cowardly Grunt, Final Grunt and Thirsty Grunt, but because they are marked as non-canon I am going to leave some discussion about them having their titles changed or not.

Also I will allow some discussion if there are better titles (mainly because "Unidentified Covenant Ship" doesn't sound much of a good title for a replacement for the "Covenant Supercruiser" title).

We could rename the "Unidentified Forerunner Planet" article to "Unidentified Forerunner Planet (Origins)" to make room for a disambiguation, but that would kind of go against this proposal.

We should also keep the "ArticleName" template on the pages to note that they don't have confirmed titles.

We can redirect the fan-made title to the currnet title to prevent confusion and edit-wars. --

Support (6/1)

 * 1) - As per above proposal. --
 * 2) - As per proposal as well. Would this proposal change the title of the Halo: Reach machine gun turret and solve the M6G variants arguement?-- Fluffy Emo Penguin  20:13, July 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure about that. --
 * The M6G's sub-variants are a fan-made speculation title, but they aren't a page title, so I don't know if it would change that.-- Fluffy Emo Penguin 21:21, July 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) per above. --Dragonc laws (talk ) 11:03, July 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) --  Specops306    Autocrat     Qur'a 'Morhek   01:32, July 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) Well spoken case. - DinoBenn says "Fight to the End,   Never Give In"  S4.jpg 03:17, July 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) - Point well made, you have my vote. [[Image:Noblelogo.png|27px]]  GySgt. Gonzalez   -Comm Open-   -Body Count-  02:43, July 8, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral (3/2)

 * 1) - I understand the proposal, but I could easily see the change causing some confusion between articles. I can't name similar articles off the top of my head other than the Forerunner planets you mentioned (Legendary Planet and the Unidentified Forerunner Planet), but just these two could cause said confusion, and you also mentioned how simply adding brackets would defeat the purpose of the Brackets Proposal - dehydromon 06:13, July 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Thats why I want to see some dispute about what article will get the brackets and the other won't, but because the Halo: Combat Evolved legendary ending is non-canon then it is more likely that the Forerunner planet from Origins will not get the brackets and the Legendary Planet will (mainly because  said in a comment on a discussion page about the most canon name not having brackets). --
 * 1) - Both sides have good points.
 * 2) - Ditto General. - Major.png  Nìcmávr  ( Tálk  ) 19:40, July 6, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose (7/0)

 * 1) - Not sure yet. I would vote neutral, but neutral votes have no impact so.. yeah. :) -  JEA13  [ iTalk  ] 10:50, July 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * But what is going to be your true reason for opposing? --
 * The fact that I am not sure on whether the proposal is helpful or the opposite. Example: let's say that there are three unknown-class ships in Halo: The Flood, two unknown-class ships in Halo: First Strike, and four unnamed ships in the Halo Graphic Novel (everything is random here, I am just pointing out an example). What will we need to do if we are to rename them according to the proposal? Renaming every unknown-class ship into "Unidentified UNSC Ship" and every unnamed ship into "Unnamed UNSC Prowler", for example, would automatically create a lot of unneeded and complex disambiguation pages, simply because there are too many of them. In addition, it would be extremely confusing to have such articles renamed just to add the word "unidentified". Articles like "Legendary Planet" and "Crow's Nest Bomb" indicate what the article is talking about. Renaming them into "Unknown Forerunner Planet" and "Unidentified UNSC Bomb" would make it difficult to realise what the link is actually about when stumbling upon it while reading another article, something that should be avoided when we don't know the proper name of them. - JEA13  [ iTalk  ] 16:30, July 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) - As per JEA13, the Halo Universe is full of ambiguity and this proposal will just clutter up the amount of "Unknown [INSERT FACTION HERE] {INSERT TYPE HERE}", plus it will most definitely confuse the readers/users/visitors. A simple title, even though it is fanon, would be enough if it matches its description. That's why we have that ArticleName template, to inform others that the title itself is not canon.-  Sketch ist 16:41, July 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * RE: -Ascension-: I am not saying that all the fan-made titles are going to be changed but the most rediculous ones such as Legendary Planet or Crow's Nest Bomb.
 * RE: JEA13: As per my statement to -Ascension-, and there is hardly any confusion if we do certain articles because this is an encyclopedia not a fan site. --
 * Sorry for talking about this under your post Ascension. Well Cally, I think you should explain a little better why are the ones you mentioned above ridiculous, why is it not confusing when we will have ten articles named "Unidentified Covenant Ship", how is the renaming of the Legendary Planet into Un. For. Planet (Halo 3) not contrasting the brackets proposal, and how do a couple of unofficial links placed there for convenience make our wiki a fan site. - JEA13  [ iTalk  ] 17:10, July 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Because Halopedia has loads of fanon in it when no one notices it.
 * RE: Legendary Planet: Because there is already a page called Unidentified Forerunner Planet and I have no other name but you can add a much better name that is not fanon. --
 * Are you saying that the planet canonically does not exist? Because that's what fanon means. Legendary is just at "complement" placed there for convenience. The other example you mentioned has almost to info on it, it's completely "Unidentified". See my point? My problem is not that you want to add the word "Unidentified". My problem is your wish to rename it. - JEA13  [ iTalk  ] 17:33, July 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * The planet in the legendary ending of Halo 3 has not been confirmed to be canon or not, but the planet in Origins is fully confirmed to be canon. My true reasoning is that some of the names hven't been confirmed but they should remain as if they were unknown otherwise the facts will be confusing. I do believe the Legendary Planet being canon but I am talking facts here not beliefs. --
 * lolwhut? Now you're saying the Legendary Planet is not canon? Halopedia's position on fanon has always been firm and solid; no fanon articles are allowed in the wiki. However, fanon titles are permitted as long as it fits the description and is a common title used in the Halo Nation. That has always been Halopedia's position since 2006. - Sketch ist 19:05, July 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Look at the proposal again, you find out that I only chose the ones in which the titles are not accurate descriptions and entirely fanon. --
 * And you need to make an official proposal in the forums to change those titles? Seriously... you could simply just ask for a request to change the title in the article's talk page... and you'll find most in support of a title change.. >.< - Sketch ist 17:00, July 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) - As per JEA13--ASEC 17:04, July 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) - As per JEA13 and -Ascension-. Things would be too confusing, and we have a template to show that the title of the article is conjectural. In addition, the proposal I made about bracketed addendums is somewhat defeated by this. - Black Mesa.jpg  Halo-343   ( Talk )   ( Contribs )   ( Edits )  17:13, July 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * I only chose a few of the articles with the fanon titles so that it causes less confusion and only one bit of the proposal goes against that proposal, thats what most of you keep ignoring. --
 * 1) - Take a look at this:[] No thanks.  ''Tuckerscreator'  20:58, July 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Thats from a different wiki. And you didn't see what I said above about keeping the "ArticleName" when the titles are changed. --
 * I know it's from another wiki. But there it was decided with a vote much like this one, then it got so large it got impractical and now they are planning to change it. (see here:[]) Besides, what's wrong with a fan name? There are no derogatory, over-speculatory, or tongue-in-cheek names, so what's the harm if it describes the object perfectly? Besides, whenever I see these measures added, it's always hailed as a "temporary" measure until Bungie reveals the true name, which, for many of these subjects, they probably won't. It's like the previous move to put Thel' Vadam's scenes from "The Package" into a page called "Thel' (The Package)" because "it was never confirmed to be Thel'"
 * For me adding this, while additionally impractical, goes against the entire spirit of the wiki when I joined. I joined because it felt like a great community of Halo fans who were eager to learn more about Halo. Adding proposals such as this feels like slamming it into our face that "you don't own Halo, so stop having fun speculating." Every wiki I've seen that has done this has hated it after a few months, and I've hated it too.
 * Oh, and the Legendary Planet is canon. It's mentioned shown in the Halo Encyclopedia. ''Tuckerscreator' 23:00, July 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) - Those page names have nothing wrong with them, besides, what if there is more than one UNSC Bomb we can't identify  FatalSnipe117 02:50, July 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * You should read the proposal again. --
 * 1) - So many proposals. It's distasteful and annoying. Commander Silver Leaf.PNG  Kougermasters   ( Talk )   ( Contribs )   ( Edits )  01:09, July 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * Are you opposing just because this was proposed shortly after other proposals? That doesn't seem like a valid reason. Proposals are basically to help Halopedia. --Dragonc laws (talk ) 02:21, July 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * That's not my reason; I simply felt like typing that. I suppose that if I must give a reason, I agree with what -Ascension- says. Commander Silver Leaf.PNG Kougermasters   ( Talk )   ( Contribs )   ( Edits )  06:27, July 9, 2010 (UTC)

Comments
You may wish to add Far Tower to the list.--Fluffball Gato 02:11, July 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * I can't think of other possible words for this specific one... - JEA13  [ iTalk  ] 18:47, July 7, 2010 (UTC)

Everyone is complaining that it is confusing or that it is done on other wikis but they are ignoring the fact that I have gotten around that. --
 * If the other wikis have done this, and it has been a failure, shouldn't that send a warning to us? How do we know that your idea is better? As far as I'm concerned, yours is not helping at all, and instead adds to the confusion. -
 * And have we seen any of those failures yet? And like I said above that if they follow a link to it then it will be redirected and just after the title will come: "(fan-named [Fan-name of article])". Also what I said above is that I am only doing fan-made titles that almost never contribute to the subject of the article. --
 * We haven't seen any failures because the proposal isn't even in effect. And we use so-called "fanon" titles to help name unnamed articles as accurately as possible, how you say they contribute nothing is beyond me. "Legendary Planet" is an accurate title in terms of description; it's a planet that only appears in Legendary difficulty, and that's what fans have some to call it, seeing as it has no name. - Black Mesa.jpg Halo-343   ( Talk )   ( Contribs )   ( Edits )  17:54, July 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't think that the Legendary Planet and the Crow's Nest Bomb belong to this category. - JEA13  [ iTalk  ] 17:51, July 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * See this link. -
 * Actually all the names put above do not contribute to the subject at all: "Legendary Planet" only describes that it is on the Legendary difficulty not much to do with the subject, "Crow's Nest Bomb" only makes it known that it is in a level or a base but that is not really contributing to the subject, "Covenant Supercruiser" really? It has not even been confirmed to be a cruiser or anything, "Far Tower" was only a description made by Cortana because it was a long distance away. And now all of you are saying that this causes more confusion but actuall the fan-names are what confuses users and they will think it is the real name butthese new names will notify users that it has no official name. Now you are saying they are not fan-made when they are. --
 * You know what? Tell me a name you could give to the Far Tower that keeps the title on subject. Just one. Yeah, that's right. There is nothing (though I'm pretty sure you'll come up with some "Unidentified Covenant Tower (Halo 3)" thing which gives ABSOLUTELY NO indication on what the article is about). And tell me what else do we know about the Legendary Planet's subject? Nothing. We just know that it's only on legendary, and that it is Forerunner, but there are so many celestial bodies in the Halo universe that are Forerunner and renaming it would just cause confusion to the readers when they come across its link. It's more obvious and still remains on subject while it's named Legendary. I do agree with you on the Covenant Supercarrier one though. - JEA13 [ iTalk  ] 07:36, July 9, 2010 (UTC)

I agree with JEA13, General5 7, and Halo-343 on this one. Kougermasters  ( Talk )   ( Contribs )   ( Edits )  06:31, July 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree too. As the above links show, removing fan names from articles and replacing them with "Unidentified Blank Thing 4" or whatever it calls for, only adds to the confusion of the article because, regardless if the current name is a fan name, it lets us know WHAT is being referred to when subject is mentioned in another article and when being searched. It's too cumbersome to write "Then Master Chief activated the Unindentified Explosive Weapon 8" when the current policy has it as "activated the Crow's Nest Bomb." Easy to search, easy to read, FAR LESS of a "smash-it-in-your-face." ''Tuckerscreator' 16:54, July 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * You do it like this: "The Master Chief then proceeds to activate the bomb ".-- ~

I will give up on this proposal not just because so many are opposing but mainly because if I were to make it to most of your liking it would only affect two or three articles. I still have those drafts because I might want to make a different proposal about replacing counter-productive titles but I will only make it if Halopedia is getting too many counter-productive titles. --