Talk:Katran (Myst)

This article was nominated for deletion on January 28, 2008. The result of the discussion was keep.

I always thought that Katran's name in Riven's language sounds something like the European or Latin style way of saying "Katherine" -- "Katareena", approximately. My evidence is from the first second or so of Nala's speech in Riven. --24.106.177.36 03:30, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Merger proposal

Since the article has already been boldly and physically merged into to Characters of Myst already. I propose a more official merge to the article, if those that have been reverting the merger of the article would be willing to oppose, please explain why. The original article was both unneeded and unsourced. Rehevkor ✉ 01:46, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support full, formal merge, because the character has no notability outside the Myst series. The original article contains more information than is necessary (things that can be should be part of the Riven and Myst: The Book of Atrus plot sections). — OranL (talk) 20:45, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment (definitely not a support or an oppose) The argument "...has no notability outside the Myst series" is not a particularly valid one. For example, a character in Heroes, say Noah Bennet, has absolutely no notability outside Heroes, yet there's no question of such articles being deleted/merged/whatever. _Talk Islander 20:59, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps there should be discussions about merging articles like this. Anyhow, that example article has a lot of information in it, while "Katran (Myst)" does not have much information in it. But, by that standard, James C. Duff should be merged with Administrative Office of the United States Courts. I guess I just think that in this particular case, Katran (Myst) is not necessary. If enough information develops about this character, then perhaps they should get their own page. In the present situation, I think that documenting the relevant character information, major plot points, and the more important details should give readers what they're looking for without going into every minute detail about the character. If people want to learn about what the character's third word was during the player's first encounter, then they can play the game or go to a more specific wiki. — OranL (talk) 21:33, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support per my comments on the other talk pages. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 17:28, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll need someone to fill me in on these topics before I can offer an opinion.

AfD: I get the part where when an article is deleted, it's gone (forever). But if an article is decided to be kept, how long does that last? This article was considered for deletion six months ago, and now here we are again. I understand that Wikipedia has mainly become a forum for discussions about content. If it is kept this time, how soon (and how many times) can it be reconsidered for deletion?

Notability: Is there an objective definition for this, or is it just a collective (or individual) opinion? I previously justified the notability of this character by simply saying that I had looked for information about Katran, and couldn't find it. But who the hell am I? Is a subject not notable if just one reader thinks so, or visa-versa? If Katran is not notable enough for her own article, why is she notable enough for a combined article? Does it matter that this article was being viewed about 25 times a day before it was deleted? What if it was only being viewed once per day? Per month? And what does "...no notability outside the Myst series" mean? If Britney Spears is determined to have no notability outside of the entertainment industry, can I delete her article? Please?

Deletion: Why is it necessary to delete the individual article once it has been 'merged'? Would the mere existence of a detailed article confuse a person reading the merged information? If Wikipedia is not paper and old versions are saved anyway, what is the advantage to removing (or redirecting) the individual article?

Format: Does the 'merging' of this information limit it's current or future expansion? If some future editor decides to write a 10 paragraph character analysis for Katran (or for all of the major characters), could that be done in a combined article without making it a mess? Doesn't Wikipedia's recommended summary style format actually encourage a combined article of introductions, linking to individual detailed articles? G. Thomas (talk) 23:47, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just to correct you on one point: "AfD: I get the part where when an article is deleted, it's gone (forever)." - no. The page is still maintained, just not visible to non-sysop users. It can be restored at any point, say, after a deletion review. _Talk Islander 17:57, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey guys, please check out the idea I wrote up on User:David Fuchs/workshop #Goals. Add comments there, please. — OranL (talk) 19:32, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]