Deletion of List of Star Wars creatures (2nd nomination)

Comment: per Hyperbole, Viperix, and AndalusianNaugahyde, as |a useful list.  This is ''so obviously'' notable as an idea to be covered by .  I'd go along with trimming - it should only include '''notable''' characters, whether major or supporting, in books or movies.  Get back to me if you want me to do the dirty work
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Lists (WP:LIST||WP:OUTCOMES)

Comment: many books have been written about the fictional Star Wars universe, meaning that lots of fictional Star Wars stuff should stay on Wikipedia. Some of these, such as ewoks and sarlaccs, are also very well known icons of pop culture. And, |you know
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:PAPER)

Comment: Per #DIR where is says "there is nothing wrong with having lists if their entries are famous because they are associated with or significantly contributed to the list topic" and per 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT||WP:SAL)

Comment: This article is just a giant plot summary (see #PLOT) with no analysis and nothing to indicate real world notability.  It is just info about characters with no real world context at all.   It has been tagged for a while and shows no signs of improvement.  It does not cite reliable secondary sources per  and is cannot be cited to meet the criteria of notability established therein (A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject).  Remember, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information (#INFO
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT||WP:FICT||WP:NOT)

Comment: per |Wikipedia is not paper.  Wikipedia has many lists very similar to this one; it seems to be consensus that sourced facts about notable fiction are encyclopedic, regardless of how trivial they may seem.  And, as
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)