This article is within the scope of WikiProject Star Wars, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Star Wars saga on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Star WarsWikipedia:WikiProject Star WarsTemplate:WikiProject Star WarsStar Wars articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about
television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can
join the discussion.
To improve this article, please refer to the
style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles
Did you know nomination
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as
this nomination's talk page,
the article's talk page or
Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
... that
Emily Swallow did not know she was auditioning for a Star Wars television series when she tried out for the part of The Armorer?
ALT1:... that The Armorer and other costumed characters on the Star Wars series The Mandalorian were often bumping into or tripping over each other during filming?
Article moved from user space over redirect on 11 February 2020. Plenty long enough at 32586 characters (5487 words) readable prose size. It cites reliable sources with inline citations and meets other core policies. Earwig's Copyvio tool indicates a possible violation but this is caused by direct quotes in the article [
[1]]. All hooks are shorter than 200 characters and are cited in the article. I couldn't access all the sources however, hence the AGF. Are they interesting to a broad audience? Star Wars is a popular thing so I suppose so. I'm not into Star Wars but I am a martial artist so my preference would be ALT2. Whatever nominator and co-ordinators think though.--
Ykraps (
talk)
12:10, 16 February 2020 (UTC)reply
"deliberately-paced movement" (see also - Conception). Seems a bit odd. The source(s) says "deliberateness of movement", which I'm not sure is entirely the same thing.
"among the creators of the Armorer" (see also - Conception) So who were the other creators?
Well, it's worded that way specifically because the source identifies Favreau as one of the creators, but it doesn't specifically state he is the only creator. So I thought it was safer and more accurate to describe him this way rather than calling him the creator, which indicates it he and he alone created the character. But let me know if you think this should be reworded. —
HunterKahn21:25, 4 May 2020 (UTC)reply
"She is the leader of a tribe of Mandalorian warriors on a secret enclave on the planet Nevarro" Not sure about this, maybe "She is the leader of a tribe of Mandalorian warriors on the planet Nevarro, who [hide or live?] in a secret enclave"
"kills all five of the troopers in" Think you can just say "kills all five in" as you've already established that the Armourer has been approached by five stormtroopers in the previous sentence.
"a casting associate at the audition itself gave" -> "a casting associate at the audition gave" (remove repetition of "itself" and don't think it's needed here)
"a sublety to the part that she said was influenced in part" -> "a sublety to the part that she said was influenced to a certain extent" (avoid repetition of part within same sentence)
"the Aromrer doesn't really fangirl" -> "the Armorer doesn't really fangirl"
Cultural impact
Critical reception
"He particularly complimented Emily Swallow's ability to portray emotion despite her face being concealed, and was particularly" Two 'particularly's in same sentence
"impressed by fan art of the character that fans have sent" Given that it's fan art, I don't think you need "fans have sent her", maybe "impressed by fan art of the character that she has been sent"
Stunt performer
Lauren Mary Kim discusses the fight scene as the Armorer as part of a video reacting to other stunts.
[2] She repeats some things that have already been mentioned (that the figthing style was Kali/Escrima etc) but I don't think it has been mentioned elsewhere that the scene was filmed by the 2nd unit and directed by
Dave Filoni. The relevant part of the video runs from
5 minute mark to about 8 minutes, as the conversation moves on to other topics. --
109.77.210.97 (
talk)
09:44, 9 November 2020 (UTC)reply
According to Kim the it was the hardest fight scene she'd ever done (because of the armor) and it was filmed repeatedly from multiple angles but as as
one long single take.
I have not officially marked this article to be of questionable notability, primarily because I am a new editor and do not know how, but also because I do not think it is harmful for this article to exist. However, I would question why this particular character, who appears in only a handful of scenes, has such a detailed page compared to characters in this and other franchises.
Scansoriopteryx (
talk)
02:27, 30 December 2020 (UTC)reply
The Wikipedia idea of "notable" and what people think of as notable are not necessarily the same thing, but also pages are created by people who are interested enough to put in the time and effort. All the details are in the
WP:NOTABILITY guidelines. Editors have put in a lot of work find sources and to achieve "Good article" status and as you say there's no harm in this article existing. The lack of detail for other franchises or tv series compared to this one doesn't make this article any more or less notable, and plenty of editors already complain that pop-culture articles get far more care and attention than articles about science or important historical topics.
Good articles (and Feature articles) are often still far from perfect so if there are flaws you can still point them out, usually by adding {{Citation needed}} (if something does not have a reference) or {{Better source needed}} (if something has a low quality reference such a fansite instead a more reliable source). --
109.76.214.105 (
talk)
18:22, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The following is a closed discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The Armorer → Armorer (Star Wars) – Per
WP:NCTHE, the leading "The" is discouraged. Specifically, If the definite or indefinite article would be capitalized in running text, then include it at the beginning of the Wikipedia article name. Otherwise, do not. In official sources, including
StarWars.com, the definite article in the character's name is not capitalized except at the beginning of a sentence, e.g. "A little like the Armorer herself, Cimino designs unique, highly-detailed, and often articulated pieces of jewelry". On
this page, the article is actually split from the noun as well, "Hidden far below the surface of the planet Nevarro, the deftly skilled Armorer's cryo-furnace still burns".
Axem Titanium (
talk)
14:48, 7 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Oppose: Per
WP:COMMONNAME, and
Talk:The Mandalorian (character). The credits do not say "Armorer", they say "The Armorer". That second sentence is basic grammar. One would not say "the deftly-skilled The Armorer", but that does not go against them being named "The Armorer". Pretty much all of the articles on the character also refer to "The Armorer" as portrayed by
Emily Swallow (with Lauren Mary Kim), not "Armorer".
MandoWarrior (
talk)
15:32, 7 March 2022 (UTC)reply
WP:NCTHE explicitly discusses this situation. Since "the" is not capitalized in the middle of a sentence when referring to the character, the "the" should be omitted from the title.
Axem Titanium (
talk)
19:39, 7 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Support mainly because the inclusion of disambiguator "(Star Wars)". The character's name is way too vague and generic that I wouldn't think the name "the Armorer" is exclusively for the Mandalorian character.
Neocorelight (
Talk)
20:07, 7 March 2022 (UTC)reply
I disagree the inclusion of (Star Wars) is making it less precise. If anything it makes the subject unambigous to readers before opening the article. I have no opinion on the inclusion of "the".
Neocorelight (
Talk)
01:45, 9 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Okay. The quoted argument about the page is: "Axem Titanium I remember you. You pulled this
in 2020 too. Paraphrasing the response from
JDDJS: "She is referred to as "the Armorer" in most media, not just Armorer. Also including "the" makes it clear that it's about a specific Armorer, and not just armorers in general."Poindextero (
talk)
01:11, 9 March 2022 (UTC)reply
The fact that this character is commonly referred to as "the Armorer", with a lower case t, perfectly fits the guideline in
WP:NCTHE to omit the definite article from the article title.
Axem Titanium (
talk)
01:28, 9 March 2022 (UTC)reply
PRECISION is a fairly long section. Can you point to the specific line in PRECISION that explains why "The Armorer" is the correct article title, in contradiction with the recommendation from
WP:NCTHE that I quoted above?
Axem Titanium (
talk)
01:28, 9 March 2022 (UTC)reply
If someone can name any specific characters that this could be confused with, I would not at all be opposed to adding (Star Wars) to the title. But as far as I know, there really aren't any other popular characters that this could be confused with. There's already a link for the actual profession, and I think that the number of people looking for the profession who would include "the" in their search is extremely small. JDDJS (
talk to me •
see what I've done)01:53, 9 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Not that there needs to be for this move to take place, but there appears to be a minor Marvel comics character, a character in No Man's Sky, a character in Person of Interest, etc. The move as requested is within policy regardless of the existence or nonexistence of other characters called "the Armorer".
Axem Titanium (
talk)
01:55, 9 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Support. It seems like the removal of the "the" is what policy dictates per
WP:NCTHE and I don't see adequate arguments why we should not follow it. Mirroring my comments over at
Talk:The Client (Star Wars), there should probably be a discussion about "The" Mandalorian too, since none of the discussions over there have specifically focused on the "The" besides a speedy revert after it was removed in December 2020. --
Cerebral726 (
talk)
13:53, 9 March 2022 (UTC)reply
I agree and I'm frustrated the speed of the discussion at the Mandalorian page because it was closed in under 24 hours without even getting a {{ping}}. People here are pointing to it as if I did something wrong but I (correctly) referenced
WP:NCTHE in my move rationale so I don't appreciate being painted as doing an "undiscussed move" without even a chance to respond.
Axem Titanium (
talk)
20:30, 9 March 2022 (UTC)reply
WP:NCTHE states "If a term with a definite article has a different meaning with respect to the same term without the article, the term with the article can be used as the name of a Wikipedia article about that meaning, and the term without the article can be used as the name of a separate Wikipedia article." Armorer on its own could just refer to anyone who makes armor in Star Wars. Adding "the" to the title makes it clear that the article is about a specific character. JDDJS (
talk to me •
see what I've done)18:34, 9 March 2022 (UTC)reply
WP:NCTHE cautions There are some situations where they are warranted, but many where they are not. When used inappropriately, they violate common usage, only serving as noise words. More importantly, this can cause problems with the length of the name, the quick search function, and sorting. Due to these problems, the default rule is to exclude them, which indicates that the potential for confusion must be extraordinary to warrant including an extraneous in/definite article in the title. By your own logic above, there would need to be at least one other character in Star Wars with the name of Armorer for there to be any confusion on the matter. If a reader were looking for armorers in general in Star Wars, then that confusion would be dispelled instantly by reading the first line of the article. Inventing an imagined reader who is looking for armorers in general, but not this Armorer, is a tortured line of argument.
Axem Titanium (
talk)
20:42, 9 March 2022 (UTC)reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Star Wars, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Star Wars saga on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Star WarsWikipedia:WikiProject Star WarsTemplate:WikiProject Star WarsStar Wars articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about
television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can
join the discussion.
To improve this article, please refer to the
style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles
Did you know nomination
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as
this nomination's talk page,
the article's talk page or
Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
... that
Emily Swallow did not know she was auditioning for a Star Wars television series when she tried out for the part of The Armorer?
ALT1:... that The Armorer and other costumed characters on the Star Wars series The Mandalorian were often bumping into or tripping over each other during filming?
Article moved from user space over redirect on 11 February 2020. Plenty long enough at 32586 characters (5487 words) readable prose size. It cites reliable sources with inline citations and meets other core policies. Earwig's Copyvio tool indicates a possible violation but this is caused by direct quotes in the article [
[1]]. All hooks are shorter than 200 characters and are cited in the article. I couldn't access all the sources however, hence the AGF. Are they interesting to a broad audience? Star Wars is a popular thing so I suppose so. I'm not into Star Wars but I am a martial artist so my preference would be ALT2. Whatever nominator and co-ordinators think though.--
Ykraps (
talk)
12:10, 16 February 2020 (UTC)reply
"deliberately-paced movement" (see also - Conception). Seems a bit odd. The source(s) says "deliberateness of movement", which I'm not sure is entirely the same thing.
"among the creators of the Armorer" (see also - Conception) So who were the other creators?
Well, it's worded that way specifically because the source identifies Favreau as one of the creators, but it doesn't specifically state he is the only creator. So I thought it was safer and more accurate to describe him this way rather than calling him the creator, which indicates it he and he alone created the character. But let me know if you think this should be reworded. —
HunterKahn21:25, 4 May 2020 (UTC)reply
"She is the leader of a tribe of Mandalorian warriors on a secret enclave on the planet Nevarro" Not sure about this, maybe "She is the leader of a tribe of Mandalorian warriors on the planet Nevarro, who [hide or live?] in a secret enclave"
"kills all five of the troopers in" Think you can just say "kills all five in" as you've already established that the Armourer has been approached by five stormtroopers in the previous sentence.
"a casting associate at the audition itself gave" -> "a casting associate at the audition gave" (remove repetition of "itself" and don't think it's needed here)
"a sublety to the part that she said was influenced in part" -> "a sublety to the part that she said was influenced to a certain extent" (avoid repetition of part within same sentence)
"the Aromrer doesn't really fangirl" -> "the Armorer doesn't really fangirl"
Cultural impact
Critical reception
"He particularly complimented Emily Swallow's ability to portray emotion despite her face being concealed, and was particularly" Two 'particularly's in same sentence
"impressed by fan art of the character that fans have sent" Given that it's fan art, I don't think you need "fans have sent her", maybe "impressed by fan art of the character that she has been sent"
Stunt performer
Lauren Mary Kim discusses the fight scene as the Armorer as part of a video reacting to other stunts.
[2] She repeats some things that have already been mentioned (that the figthing style was Kali/Escrima etc) but I don't think it has been mentioned elsewhere that the scene was filmed by the 2nd unit and directed by
Dave Filoni. The relevant part of the video runs from
5 minute mark to about 8 minutes, as the conversation moves on to other topics. --
109.77.210.97 (
talk)
09:44, 9 November 2020 (UTC)reply
According to Kim the it was the hardest fight scene she'd ever done (because of the armor) and it was filmed repeatedly from multiple angles but as as
one long single take.
I have not officially marked this article to be of questionable notability, primarily because I am a new editor and do not know how, but also because I do not think it is harmful for this article to exist. However, I would question why this particular character, who appears in only a handful of scenes, has such a detailed page compared to characters in this and other franchises.
Scansoriopteryx (
talk)
02:27, 30 December 2020 (UTC)reply
The Wikipedia idea of "notable" and what people think of as notable are not necessarily the same thing, but also pages are created by people who are interested enough to put in the time and effort. All the details are in the
WP:NOTABILITY guidelines. Editors have put in a lot of work find sources and to achieve "Good article" status and as you say there's no harm in this article existing. The lack of detail for other franchises or tv series compared to this one doesn't make this article any more or less notable, and plenty of editors already complain that pop-culture articles get far more care and attention than articles about science or important historical topics.
Good articles (and Feature articles) are often still far from perfect so if there are flaws you can still point them out, usually by adding {{Citation needed}} (if something does not have a reference) or {{Better source needed}} (if something has a low quality reference such a fansite instead a more reliable source). --
109.76.214.105 (
talk)
18:22, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The following is a closed discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The Armorer → Armorer (Star Wars) – Per
WP:NCTHE, the leading "The" is discouraged. Specifically, If the definite or indefinite article would be capitalized in running text, then include it at the beginning of the Wikipedia article name. Otherwise, do not. In official sources, including
StarWars.com, the definite article in the character's name is not capitalized except at the beginning of a sentence, e.g. "A little like the Armorer herself, Cimino designs unique, highly-detailed, and often articulated pieces of jewelry". On
this page, the article is actually split from the noun as well, "Hidden far below the surface of the planet Nevarro, the deftly skilled Armorer's cryo-furnace still burns".
Axem Titanium (
talk)
14:48, 7 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Oppose: Per
WP:COMMONNAME, and
Talk:The Mandalorian (character). The credits do not say "Armorer", they say "The Armorer". That second sentence is basic grammar. One would not say "the deftly-skilled The Armorer", but that does not go against them being named "The Armorer". Pretty much all of the articles on the character also refer to "The Armorer" as portrayed by
Emily Swallow (with Lauren Mary Kim), not "Armorer".
MandoWarrior (
talk)
15:32, 7 March 2022 (UTC)reply
WP:NCTHE explicitly discusses this situation. Since "the" is not capitalized in the middle of a sentence when referring to the character, the "the" should be omitted from the title.
Axem Titanium (
talk)
19:39, 7 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Support mainly because the inclusion of disambiguator "(Star Wars)". The character's name is way too vague and generic that I wouldn't think the name "the Armorer" is exclusively for the Mandalorian character.
Neocorelight (
Talk)
20:07, 7 March 2022 (UTC)reply
I disagree the inclusion of (Star Wars) is making it less precise. If anything it makes the subject unambigous to readers before opening the article. I have no opinion on the inclusion of "the".
Neocorelight (
Talk)
01:45, 9 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Okay. The quoted argument about the page is: "Axem Titanium I remember you. You pulled this
in 2020 too. Paraphrasing the response from
JDDJS: "She is referred to as "the Armorer" in most media, not just Armorer. Also including "the" makes it clear that it's about a specific Armorer, and not just armorers in general."Poindextero (
talk)
01:11, 9 March 2022 (UTC)reply
The fact that this character is commonly referred to as "the Armorer", with a lower case t, perfectly fits the guideline in
WP:NCTHE to omit the definite article from the article title.
Axem Titanium (
talk)
01:28, 9 March 2022 (UTC)reply
PRECISION is a fairly long section. Can you point to the specific line in PRECISION that explains why "The Armorer" is the correct article title, in contradiction with the recommendation from
WP:NCTHE that I quoted above?
Axem Titanium (
talk)
01:28, 9 March 2022 (UTC)reply
If someone can name any specific characters that this could be confused with, I would not at all be opposed to adding (Star Wars) to the title. But as far as I know, there really aren't any other popular characters that this could be confused with. There's already a link for the actual profession, and I think that the number of people looking for the profession who would include "the" in their search is extremely small. JDDJS (
talk to me •
see what I've done)01:53, 9 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Not that there needs to be for this move to take place, but there appears to be a minor Marvel comics character, a character in No Man's Sky, a character in Person of Interest, etc. The move as requested is within policy regardless of the existence or nonexistence of other characters called "the Armorer".
Axem Titanium (
talk)
01:55, 9 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Support. It seems like the removal of the "the" is what policy dictates per
WP:NCTHE and I don't see adequate arguments why we should not follow it. Mirroring my comments over at
Talk:The Client (Star Wars), there should probably be a discussion about "The" Mandalorian too, since none of the discussions over there have specifically focused on the "The" besides a speedy revert after it was removed in December 2020. --
Cerebral726 (
talk)
13:53, 9 March 2022 (UTC)reply
I agree and I'm frustrated the speed of the discussion at the Mandalorian page because it was closed in under 24 hours without even getting a {{ping}}. People here are pointing to it as if I did something wrong but I (correctly) referenced
WP:NCTHE in my move rationale so I don't appreciate being painted as doing an "undiscussed move" without even a chance to respond.
Axem Titanium (
talk)
20:30, 9 March 2022 (UTC)reply
WP:NCTHE states "If a term with a definite article has a different meaning with respect to the same term without the article, the term with the article can be used as the name of a Wikipedia article about that meaning, and the term without the article can be used as the name of a separate Wikipedia article." Armorer on its own could just refer to anyone who makes armor in Star Wars. Adding "the" to the title makes it clear that the article is about a specific character. JDDJS (
talk to me •
see what I've done)18:34, 9 March 2022 (UTC)reply
WP:NCTHE cautions There are some situations where they are warranted, but many where they are not. When used inappropriately, they violate common usage, only serving as noise words. More importantly, this can cause problems with the length of the name, the quick search function, and sorting. Due to these problems, the default rule is to exclude them, which indicates that the potential for confusion must be extraordinary to warrant including an extraneous in/definite article in the title. By your own logic above, there would need to be at least one other character in Star Wars with the name of Armorer for there to be any confusion on the matter. If a reader were looking for armorers in general in Star Wars, then that confusion would be dispelled instantly by reading the first line of the article. Inventing an imagined reader who is looking for armorers in general, but not this Armorer, is a tortured line of argument.
Axem Titanium (
talk)
20:42, 9 March 2022 (UTC)reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.