Talk:Solo: A Star Wars Story

Don't change this to space opera

As the sources say, Han Solo is conceived as a western style character and so is boba fett. I'm not sure about chewbacca/chewie, but those two are confirmed western characters. I'll even provide the source for it.--Taeyebar 23:14, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

[1] here is the source.--Taeyebar 23:17, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Here's another one [2]--Taeyebar 23:18, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

A character inspired by a particular genre is not the same as a film written as a member of that genre. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 23:45, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Then why do sources say Star Wars includes elements of Space Western? I've seen many people even call it a SW.--Taeyebar 23:53, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

That's an discussion for the main article, and if I recall correctly, it's one that's already taken place somewhere. I'm just pointing out that the genre inspirations for a character doesn't necessarily translate to the genre of the film itself, and seeing as the film itself has yet to start production, there's no point in making statements about the genre of the film. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 00:22, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Too Soon?

There isn't a reason for an article to be split about this film right now. There's only one paragraph of production information. Additionally, the notability guideline for films states in its section about future and planned films, emphasis not mine: Films that have not been confirmed by reliable sources to have commenced principal photography should not have their own articles. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 23:45, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

There's lots of coverage for it online.--Taeyebar 23:51, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

The lots of coverage, from what I've seen, is repeating the same information over and over. Also, as I said, the guideline is that until the project begins principal photography, it does not warrant an article. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 00:14, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because principal shooting has started. --Hektor (talk) 19:39, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

It needs to be in order to move the draft at Draft:Untitled Han Solo Anthology film here. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 19:53, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Article title suggestion

Resolved

 – Have made the move until we have an official (or semi-official title). Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 17:15, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

I suggest that we just call it Untitled Han Solo film per WP:PRECISION. It is unnecessary to have Anthology in it when it is not explained until later in the lead section. Not to mention that while Rogue One was an "Anthology" film, this was not really used universally and is thus not going to be recognizable by readers. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 21:51, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

• Agree per Erik's reasoning. Though Anthology is mentioned in many of the sources, this is branding that adds unnecessary detail, as we are not disambiguating from another Han Solo film. Besides, we know this will not be the article's final title.— TAnthony^Talk 23:20, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
• Agree with Erik as well. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 02:07, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

  Great, if there is no objection, we can move it once the history merge is done. I didn't want to move it again in case that proves problematic. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 02:37, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

  My thoughts too! - Favre1fan93 (talk) 02:42, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

No bolding for descriptive title

"Untitled Han Solo film" is essentially a descriptive title for lack of a better one right now. Per WP:BOLDTITLE, "If an article's title is a formal or widely accepted name for the subject, display it in bold as early as possible in the first sentence." We do not have a formal or widely accepted name, so we should not use bold formatting in the opening sentence. This is further confirmed by WP:BOLDITIS, "...in the case of purely descriptive titles, we should not bold the article title in the introduction, and there is no need to repeat it verbatim at the beginning of the article and fit an awkwardly worded sentence around it." If you agree or disagree, feel free to comment below. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 17:11, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Semi-drafts elsewhere

Below are links to the older versions of semi-drafts elsewhere (sections in other articles) in case they have details that this article does not have. I have since revised these sections to be simpler and to point here:

• Han Solo § Spin-off film
• Star Wars § Untitled Han Solo Anthology film

Thanks, Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 17:18, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

tense

Firstly, the opening sentence to the article as it stands today ("An untitled epic space opera film about the Star Wars character Han Solo is in production") Is obviously meant to read like a line from a Star Wars crawl, not an encyclopedia entry. Secondly, due to the status of this entity as something that does not yet exist, but likely will in future, the article written in a future tense, ie: "The film will be the second installment of the Star Wars Anthology series" as opposed to the current "The film is the second installment of the Star Wars Anthology series". I would rewrite it myself, but due to my status as an unregistered member, my revisions would likely be reverted within the hour.122.107.170.39 (talk) 13:51, 1 February 2017 (UTC)