Talk:Darth Vader/Archive 4

Volcano? I thought that Anakin became Darth Vader when he battled Obi-wan over a pit of acid and got knocked in, thus meaning he needed the suit to survive. Daveryan 18:21 19 May 2003 (UTC)


 * I've always heard that it was a volcano, though apparently there is no official (canonical) evidence one way or another. Several fan sites claim that a fake prequel (fan fiction, perhaps) script is what started the volcano story. One site I found says it was either a volcano or a giant blender. Heh. Then again, as you say, I was able to turn up a few sites that say it was a vat of acid. I really have no idea :) I will have to ask my wife (big SW fan) to see if she knows whether there is an official version... -- Wapcaplet 18:28 19 May 2003 (UTC)


 * Funny thing is, I remember from back when I was young, reading the (non-canonical, I know) comic books that followed from the then-existing movies, there was an issue in which Darth faced off against a cyborg, because such creatures were outlawed in the Empire, or something like that. (It's been twenty years, give me a break.) And to top it off, Vader won by dipping the borg in a lake of acid (that happened to be very lava-coloured in the artwork). Now, you can take that as inconsistency, or as irony, or assume it's being retconned, I suppose. All depends on how you look at it. -- John Owens 18:44 19 May 2003 (UTC)


 * Actually, those comic books are canonical. The cyborg in question was a bounty hunter named Valance. It has not been retconned, and I don't know how anyone could see it as being at all inconsistent.


 * What I've always heard is a combination of the lava and a duel with Kenobi. I thought it was from the novelization of RotJ (or another of the OT novels). My Star Wars reading has never gone into the novelizations of the films, though. Aidje 16:43, 2005 Mar 8 (UTC)


 * It is a pit of lava. Anakin duels his master, and he falls into the pit. Then he's rescued by droids or something of that nature. I saw it in a preview for Episode III when they were shwoing how they remade the mask of Darth Vader. (It's gonna be a long duel!) KFan IISunday, March 20, 2005, 5:08 PM

Hmm, I wonder if having Darth Vader link here isn't a spoiler in itself, and an inevitable one to boot... -- Emperorbma 18:41, 31 Dec 2003 (UTC)
 * no, totally evitable. crazy redirect, really.  they could easily have two very differently-tomed articles, both werll-written.  It would be less jarring, really; since we never learn much about the transition that takes place in his mind [and hardly can, in the one bridging episode remaining].  I have this horrible sinking feeling that Verbal and Kaiser Soze share a single page as well... +sj+

Meaning of the name
"Anakin means warrior"; in which language ? Rama 06:21, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * You tell me. This website just says the name is "American." Based on this website, it might be Hindu. Of course, you can't trust everything you read on the internet, but multiple "baby names" websites say "Anakin" means "warrior" so I'm sure it's true.

Anakin dies whole
It has been mentioned by me many times before on the Wikipedia site, and I'll say it again...go back and watch the end of "Return Of The Jedi". When Anakin dies, he does not disappear as Yoda and Ben do when they die. Therefore, he dies whole, and is cremated whole, just as Qui-Gon Jinn did in "Phantom Menace". Some Jedi disappear when they die, others do not. Lucas will, at some point, explain all of this. - Hiphats 22:41, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Actually he did. See this page on the offical website.

That page really didn't explain anything at all, it just said pretty much what Hiphats said, "some jedi disappear when they die, others do not." Hopefully this won't be another thing Lucas overlooks in the last movie... -shane613

It said, towards the end of the fist paragraph; And when Darth Vader sacrifices himself in the end to save his son, he too becomes one with the Force (it is his armor that burned in the Endor funeral pyre). Since this is from the offical website, then Anakin must not have disappeared.

Darth Vader shouldn't redirect here.

Same person
Darth Vader and Anakin Skywalker are one and the same person, so there shouldn't be separate articles about any of them. - John V--Ed Telerionus 17:35, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

They should not be considered the same person, since their personlaities are so totally different. In Star Wars terms, every fan considers these two different people since one follows the light side of the Force, and the other, the dark side. www.starwars.com/databank has seperate entries for them both, and rightly so.

Mistakes

 * There must be mistakes in this article. He was obviously more than 22 years old when he became "Darth Vader," and 45 is not an elderly age.

Out of control
Jesus christ, this article is a mess. Two days ago the article was merged with Darth Vader, yesterday it was separated and now somebody merged it again.. Can we please cut this crap and talk about it before this becomes a full-grown edit war? Switcher (talk) 09:15, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

On the official Star Wars website, Anakin Skywalker and Darth Vader are listed as seperate entries. The reason for this is simple: whilst they may be the same person in physical terms, in terms of the personalities and who they truly are, one is a troubled Jedi Knight who clings to the light-side, the other is a full-blown Dark Lord Of The Sith. The pages on Anakin Skywalker and Darth Vader should be made separate.

They are the same person since Anakin becomes Darth Vader in ROTS, i don't see any difference between them because they're not different persons. By the way Ace-o-aces merged these articles - John V--Ed Telerionus 13:37, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

As the guy who first merged these two I of course feel they are the same person. First of all, just because a character changes his name doesn't make him a differant character. One could argue that his personality so drasticly changes that he is in effect another person. However, there are hints of Vader in the portrail of Anakin in episode I and II, and in ROTJ it's shown that there is still good in Vader. And lastly, having two separate articles causes needless duplication of background information. And now I realize there are separate articles for Darth Sidious and Palpatine...though I think I'll wait untill the movie is released for that merger. -Ace-o-aces


 * The new ending for ROTJ on the DVD's shows Hayden Christensen instead of Shaw because Anakin died when he became Darth Vader. Darth Vader killed Anakin, Anakin himself was consumed by evil by turning to the dark side. This is Lucas' vision of it, and we should follow that. Switcher (talk) 00:30, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

The philosophic debate over whether Anakin Skywalker and Darth Vader are the same person is irrelevant. What is relevant is whether Anakin Skywalker and Darth Vader are properly considered two separate encyclopedia subjects, and if so, under which title. As the name Darth Vader is infinitely more notable than the name Anakin Skywalker, any merged article should be at "Darth Vader". I'm moving it there and fixing the article tonight if no one objects. &mdash; Phil Welch 22:57, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

While the name "Darth Vader" is better known, "Anakin Skywalker" is hardly an obscure referance. Also, with the prequel trilogy, the character now spends more time as Anakin then he does as Vader. He's born as Anakin, he dies as Anakin. I don't want to start a editor fight over this though, so lets discuss more before any further switches. Ace-o-aces 16:47, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

The name "Darth Vader" is better known. Naming conventions (common names) says, "Use the most common name of a person or thing that does not conflict with the names of other people or things." "Darth Vader" is the proper location for the article. &mdash; Phil Welch 19:09, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Google reports 1,500,000 results for "Darth Vader", 712,000 results for "Anakin Skywalker". &mdash; Phil Welch 19:14, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

OK, I'll withdraw my objection to this being under "Darth Vader" Ace-o-aces 03:46, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

You know what, I think you should had left Anakin Skywalker and Darth Vader in two separate articles. Even if they are the same person, Darth Vader is sorta like an evil persona of Anakin Skywalker. Thus, there should be just two articles. One which is of the good side that is Anakin Skywalker and the other which is the evil side that is Darth Vader. Anyway, you said that Darth Vader is more common but even before he became Darth Vader his original name is still common, especially in the prequels and during the Clone Wars due to his accomplishments when he was a Jedi. Besides that, this article wouldn't be so messed up like now. Jill Tan 20:32, 11 May 2005

Spoilers in Intro
The intro spoils the plot with out any spoiler warning. I suggest the parts about Anakin becoming darth vader and the father of luke and leia be removed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dark567 (talk • contribs).
 * It doesn't help that you removed it before even waiting for a reply. Anyway, this is no longer a spoiler. Almost every piece of advertisement and official stuff from Lucasarts gave away the secret and the secret has become part of popular culture. Either way, Wikipedia does not omit spoilers. His fall is an integral part of his character. I would suggest moving the spoiler tag up but even that seems gratuitous. Gdo01 04:22, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

John Walker Lindh
I noticed there is only one article for the American Taliban, "John Walker Lindh". However, John Walker Lindh was a young American boy. The person who was found in Afghanistan was called "Suleyman al-Faris" - the name he adopted when he changed his beliefs. Why is there not a separate article for this name? Gone John Lindh is, consumed by Suleyman al-Faris.

Oh yeah, and there should be separate articles for "Joseph Alois Ratzinger" and "Pope Benedict XVI" as well. "Pope", like "Darth" is a title, and "Benedict" is a different name than "Ratzinger", just like "Vader" is a different name than "Skywalker".

Don't forget to split Pee Wee Herman and Paul Rubens up too.
 * Don't forget to keep in mind that most of the world doesn't know that Anakin and Darth are one and the same / have the same origin. For spoiler reasons alone there should be two articles. I live in Korea and watched Star Wars with a girl I know who had never seen it before, from Episode I. Let's say she came home after episode I or II and looked up Anakin Skywalker and was directed to Darth Vader. That would be irresponsible. Having two articles lets people like that look up a bit of info on Anakin for example (maybe up to Episode I or II if they forgot something from the movie and wanted to check before seeing Episode III) without knowing the whole story. Mithridates 12:58, 14 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Fair enough, since the no-spoiler or spoiler-warning thing seems to be part of Wikipedia's policy. Having said that, I think the entire policy is a little strange. If I hadn't seen a movie, the last thing I would do is look up specific people, places, and things about it in an encyclopedia. I was *assume* an encyclopedia would tell me things about the plot, including spoilers. But that's a long debate I won't worry about.  I should note, however, that there is no separate article for Darth Tyrannous, and it even gives this as Dooku's name BEFORE the spoiler warning.  If you'll recall Episode II, we learn that Fett was recruited by a man named Tyrannus early on. Then we're later introduced to Count Dooku. Only at the end of the film is Dooku called Darth Tyrannus by Sidious.  And Sidious may have a seperate entry, but it's extremely weak.  Not only that, but looking up Palpatine you get a pic of Sidious, making it obvious who will be whom. If one were to watch 1-6 in order, knowing nothing else, it wouldn't be obvious until Episode III that Palpatine is Sideous OR that he becomes an Emperor (since you wouldn't know the Republic was going to become an empire).


 * I notice there is no separate articles for Keyser Soze and his other identity either. In that case you have one entry, but suppose someone wanted to look up the other name? There's no article for it and there should be.  Perhaps there should be an official Wikipedia rule saying "there should always be multiple entries for the same character going by different names when it is a matter of being a spoiler." so this is all more consistent.

--72.20.146.98 21:30, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Pictures
I added some pictures. -KdogDS

There isn't any pictures with info... I'd do it myself, but i don't know how... plus... i can't even spell anakin's portrayer in II and III, lol

Short article
I've made this a short article with a spoiler warning and a link at the end explaining that a full article is at Darth Vader. Since we have a merged article, a simple redirect would be a spoiler, so I've gone ahead and copy-and-pasted some of the Anakin Skywalker content from that article with an italicized explanation at the bottom. &mdash; Phil Welch 02:20, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

If you want this to be a simple redirect, please justify that and explain how that can be done without spoilers. &mdash; Phil Welch 19:52, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Well, which movie it's a spoiler to depends on whether one watches them in the order originally released, or in the order suggested by the episode numbers. By original release, The Empire Strikes Back is the one that's "spoiled", but by episode number, the relevant fact is revealed in Episode III: The Revenge of the Sith. *Dan* 19:44, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)

Indeed. Still, it is a spoiler either way. Does this article seem biased as to which way, and if so is that a problem? &mdash; Phil Welch 19:50, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I guess it was. I fixed it. &mdash; Phil Welch 19:54, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

This is not really an article
This article is more of a glorified redirect than anything. I don't want to fork the Darth Vader article so I'm keeping this as short as possible to ensure that editors get the point that this isn't supposed to be an article in itself. So four sentences of content and two self-referential sentences. That's it. &mdash; Phil Welch 03:36, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

By saying the following lines: "Since Darth Vader and Anakin Skywalker are the same character, they are covered in the same article, titled Darth Vader. This short article exists because a redirect would have revealed, without warning, Vader's original identity." are you not revealing the fact that Anakin and Vader are the same person, why not have information about Anakin from Episodes 1,2,3(until he is dubed Darth Vader) and 6 (after he is Anakin at the end)on this page, and info on Vader on his own page, even the movies say Anakin "Died" and Darth Vader was born: in Wikiquotes you have the line Yoda tells Obi "Twisted by the Dark Side, young Skywalker has become … The boy you trained, gone he is, consumed by Darth Vader."


 * It's largely a question of point of view when he is Vader and when he is Skywalker, and when he is both. (Throughout all of Episode III, at least until he's encased in the suit, he seems to go by both identities.) It's just better to have a merged article, and having it at the most common name for the character "Darth Vader" instead of perhaps the most appropriate, is the policy. The article does reveal his identity, but at the same time it also has a warning beforehand, something that would be impossible with a redirect. (Someone types in "Anakin Skywalker" and ends up at Darth Vader). So the soft redirect is the best decision here. &mdash; Phil Welch 21:19, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Not true about when he's Vader he becomes Vader after Mace's death and the Emperor dubs him Darth Vader, from that point on Anakin Skywalker is "DEAD", he remains that way until Return of the Jedi when a "shadow" of Anakin saves his son.


 * That's true..."from a certain point of view". &mdash; Phil Welch 01:42, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

- Yes but the "certain point of view" is that of George Lucas, and his point of view over the Star Wars universe is law, should we not follow his feelings about Anakin and Vader being two people. go to the star wars: databank, on the Starwars.com web site it states:

"As turmoil engulfed the galaxy during the transition from Republic to Empire, Anakin fell to the dark side of the Force. Consumed by evil, Anakin abandoned his past and his humanity. He became Darth Vader, Dark Lord of the Sith, apprentice to the evil Emperor Palpatine."

it also lists Anakin being in Episodes 1,2,3,and 6, if Lucas wanted them to be one person then it would have said Episodes 1,2,3,4,5,6

under the Darth Vader link on the Starwars.com site it clearly states:

" Anakin was grievously wounded in the fight. His burning anger kept him alive, and he was forever scarred not only by his wounds but also by betrayal. He abandoned his former identity. When metal coupled with flesh in the form of cyborg implants and enhancements required to sustain him, Skywalker's transformation was complete. He was no longer Anakin. He was Darth Vader." it also lists Vader being in Episodes 4,5,and 6, if Lucas wanted them to be one person then Vader would be called Anakin Skywalker in 4,5,6 not Darth Vader.

Plus you "Philwelch" stated my point about Anakin and Vader under the Vader talk section: Your Words about the Bio box for Vader/Anakin to be separate: "Enough of the information changes during the transition from Anakin to Vader that having two separate boxes makes sense. The story seems to make a big point of the two being two different sides, two different personas inside the same person, so I think the separation makes sense."

the two being two different sides, two different personas sounds like two different minds in one body so Anakin should be listed as a separate person !!!!!! (Sithlord)

It's the point of view of Obi-Wan, but not quite the point of view of Luke. This decision was made a LONG time ago. One person who changes his name when he's in his mid-20's does not make for two people. &mdash; Phil Welch 20:22, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

It's the point of view of George Lucas, not of two fake people (Obi-Wan & Luke)or the actors that played them, true about changing ones name does not make for two people but it was more then a name change for Anakin Skywalker he lost 80% of his body and GAVE UP HIS LIFE AS ANAKIN.

I like the new super-short version Ace-o-aces 17:55, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

Two-line version
Genius! Great job there. — Phil Welch 00:32, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

This is amazing! -- user:zanimum

does it count as a spoiler if a link that says "chosen one" send you to the Anakin Skywalker page? I followed that link from the Sith page, so maybe that link should go somewhere else? --CallmeNiel 06:21, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Well... yes... but then that's why it's below the Spoiler warning on the Sith page, isn't it? --Stoive 23:11, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

I changed this article
Don't hate me. -Silence 10:12, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Way to go! Great job on creating this new article. However it still needs some editing here and there. After all, I have to agree that the Darth Vader one is getting WAY too long. - DivineLady 16:31, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, both articles will need a lot of editing. I crashed after summarizing this article in four paragraphs on Darth Vader, I'll work on trying to improve the two articles when I'm alive again. -Silence 20:53, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Please discuss this sort of thing before making major changes. This has been discussed in the past and you need to have a consensus. I'm reverting back to the redirect. — Phil Welch 22:12, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
 * DivineLady, Wookieepedian, and igordebraga have all specifically stopped by to compliment the pages on their new format thanks to the change, and I think it's a vast improvement too. You're the only person who seems to oppose it at this point in the discussion, so while I fully agree that we should, I think your revert was a tad premature; we can always revert it later, if a consensus does arise to keep the previous version, rather than just one person's opinion (which is not to say that it's a bad opinion, but I think we should give the new format a bit of a chance so more people can see the new proposed style and thus more people will come to visit the Talk page and discuss this; if we leave it as-is, fewer people will be aware of this debate and come to voice their opinion on it, both potential supporters of your version and of mine), so I don't think we should be in such a hurry to revert all of the changes, a large number of which were clear improvements even if you disagree with the overall layout change..
 * If you disagree very strongly, I'll go and find another alternative to having the page buried in the edit history or having it on the main page, since I don't want this to turn into an edit war, but if you can stand having the page in a way you don't like it for at least just a day or two while we discuss this, I think that would be for the best. -Silence 22:50, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Under discussion at Talk:Darth Vader, other participants please go there so we can centralize the discussion. — Phil Welch 02:35, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

RfC/poll – Darth Vader/Anakin Skywalker: one article or two?
What do you think? E Pluribus Anthony 19:35, 7 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Please direct any comments to the RfC/poll (above), where significant discussion is underway in the interest of centralizing discussion. — Phil Welch Katefan's ridiculous poll 21:18, 7 December 2005 (UTC) / E Pluribus Anthony 02:08, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Podracing
Why is there nothing of podracing? Dark jedi requiem 02:06, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Changed
I think Lucas sould of stayd with the original player being the force spirit of Anakin ( see at the bottom) instead of changing it with the new one. --I.W 18:39, 12 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Yeah, a lot of people do. It really doesn't matter to me either way. The Wookieepedian 19:27, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Is there an intentional reason the creation of Anakin is not discussed?
One of the interesting ideas brought up in episode iii was the idea that the sith actually created anakin by manipulating the midi-chorians. Although Palpatine does not state this explicitly in the movie, it was implied even more strongly in earlier drafts, and I recall Lucas or someone saying that he intended to leave the issue unresolved. I have also read that some belive that the sith not only created anakin, but they also created the so-called jedi prophesy to aid their long term goals. Any reason this information should not be added? --Ctachme 05:11, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * See Darth Plagueis. --Zoz (t) 16:42, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia says 41BBY and Wookieepedia it says 42BBY, which one is it?

-Somewhere throughout the myriad of the expanded universe i read once that shmi was enslaved upon naboo, and that her owners were in fact the Palpatine Nobelship. It is never stated outright, howvever it is implied that she was the housemaiden of the twenty something dantius Palpatine, aka the emperor. does anyone know where this was????, it was posted on the net somewhere to, albeit for a short while..anybody?

After the now famous subtle dialouge within the private box at the show, when Palpatine talks with Anakin about the many abilities of Darth Plageius the wise, it can be infered that Dantius used these said powers to spark the life of Anakin. Making Anakin Skywalker the force child of Dantius Palpatines focused meditation, as well as all the subsequent lineage; I.E. Luke, Leia, Cade, Ben..etc. etc.

Furthermore the supperficial features of Dantius bear an uncanny resemblance to Anakin. Light eyes, long wavy hair, and a high hairline...this can all be seen as speculation until we can refrence the book or the website...HELP! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.170.60.22 (talk • contribs).


 * Never heard of such a thing. If it existed, I'm pretty sure it would have been noted on either Anakin's or Shmi's Wookiepedia article. EVula 19:35, 9 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, but all this stuff about Darth Plageius creating Anakin is pure fan speculation, and nothing more. It's baseless and wild. All that we know about Anakin's origin is that his conception was the Will of the Force. The Force created him; that's the extent of our knowledge. Perhaps some things are meant to remain mystery. --Doncroft 03:08, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Balance
The article says that Anakin brought the force into balance when he killed the Emperor, but after that battle there were only light-side Jedi left. That isn’t balanced. It seems that the two sides of the force came into balance when he killed the Jedi. Arctic Gnome 16:04, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Incorrect. The Force is balanced in and of itself. The Dark Side is a corruption of the Force, an inbalance if you will. Therefore, the Dark Side must be eliminated for the Force to be brought back into balance. There is no "Light Side" of the Force. There is the Force, and there is the corruption, the Dark Side of the Force.--Doncroft 02:25, 22 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Luke was untrained, he was........ barely a Jedi. A Jedi in principle you could say, but not all that powerful. Luke is kind of the rebirth of the Jedi. The Filmaker 03:50, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Spoiler Warning
Am I the only one who finds it ironic that the single most major spoiler (that Anikin=Darth) is a bold link directly under the spoiler warning, rendeing the spoiler warning ineffective? In other words, by looking at the spoiler warning, the reader's eyes are involuntarily drawn almost immediately to the very spoiler against which they are supposedly being warned? Dirk Amoeba 19:02, 30 May 2006 (UTC)


 * What!!!! Anakin is Darth Vader? Guess that ruins it for me. But seriously, everyone knows that that's true, as it's been known in the Star Wars franchise since the 80's. Facts aren't spoilers that long anyway. Besides we are writing an encyclopedia, not a fan magazine. The integrity of the article should not be compromised by changing around the order of things written just to appeal to the few fans who don't know the stuff yet. The spoiler tag is (bad) enough. Ch u ck(척뉴넘) 19:19, 30 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Just because something is common knowledge to you doesn't mean that it is common knowledge to everyone. However, I will concede that this particular spoiler is extremely well-known; that doesn't mean we should throw convention to the wind and ditch the spoiler tag, though. There is a similar issue on the Palpatine article. EVula 19:31, 30 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I've moved the Darth Vader paragraph to below the "Transformation into Vader" section header. Like it better? I too dislike when the spoiler warnings are useless... what if someone wants to learn about Anakin before they've seen Ep. III (and they are watching the films in I II III IV V VI order)? – Xolatron 19:37, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Separating Anakin Skywalker and Darth Vader articles
I think it's silly that we have all of Vader's history in the Anakin article and all of Anakin's childhood in the Vader article. These were separated to reduce the size, but instead we now have two nearly duplicate articles. I'd like to propose ending Anakin Skywalker after the "Transformation into Vader" section, and then putting a link to the Vader article, and then doing something similar on the Vader article, and starting it after Ep. III, with a link such as: For information about Darth Vader's childhood, please see the article Anakin Skywalker. Comments? – Xolatron 19:47, 30 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree with, at the very least, drastically shortening the Vader contents of the Anakin article. I agree that it is very redundant. Removing it altogether may not be necessary, but shortening it to about 2 or 3 paragraphs, at the least (while, yes, directing users to see more details at the Vader article), would be beneficial. -Silence 20:12, 9 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I concur. The problem with two articles on is that there are minor differences creeping into each. What we end up with is two slightly different articles on the same subject. The Anakin article should break off and refer to the Vader article at the point of the transformation and then return to explain the redemption. -- User:Malber (talk • contribs) 20:21, 9 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Correct. This is actually the exact layout that was suggested back when this split was proposed, in order to avoid redundancies. I don't know way the actual implementation strayed so far, but it should be fixed; "Anakin Skywalker" is, properly, a daughter article of Darth Vader, a near-synonym for an "Early life of Darth Vader" article, albeit a bit more complicated than that in practice. -Silence 20:25, 9 June 2006 (UTC)


 * That's good. The Darth Vader article should have a summary (see WP:SS) of this article, with the details of the early life of Anakin kept in this article. --GunnarRene 09:34, 20 July 2006 (UTC)


 * They are two different people "from a certain point of view" LOL Smiloid 01:30, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
 * We should do what they do over a Wookieepedia. Have a small introduction to the Darth Vader article covering the events on Mustafar, whilst on the Anakin Skywalker article (at the end) have a brief description of the events. Jasca Ducato 07:51, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Training as Jedi
This whole section doesn't come from the movies; could we have a cite as to where it does come from? I've said it's 'expanded universe' but more precision would be good. DJ Clayworth 16:59, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Its from various EU books. The jabitha bit is from Rogue Planet for example! Jasca Ducato 13:37, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Transformation into Vader section
I've tidied up the last paragraph of the Transformation into Vader section but I'm not convinced its needed at all. What do people think? --Tim (talk), (contribs) 15:40, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Is it possible to retitle this section to avoid having a spoiler in the TOC? Maybe just ==Conversion to the Dark Side==, which is slightly more ambiguous and doesn't ruin the effect of the spoiler tag directly above it. -- nae'blis (talk) 19:41, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * "Fall to the Dark Side" I think would be an appropriate renaming of the section. EVula 21:57, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Talents and prophecy page
There should really be a talents and a prophecy article, don't you think. I mean he was the most powerful and the Chosen One. Someone should really put them in there. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.131.142.96 (talk • contribs).


 * The prophecy is mentioned in the Episode 1 text, with a link to a more detailed discussion about it (although the link was broken; I've since fixed it). A "Talents" section, though, would be a good idea. EVula 17:38, 22 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Someone should really write the talents section because this article is an outrage!!!!!! TOO SHORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Origin of Anakin Skywalker
I think the Origin of Anakin Skywalker section from the Darth Plagueis article should be here (afterall, it's about Anakin). There could be a short paragraph and a link pointing here from Darth Plagueis. The section would need some cleanup, but I think the origin of Anakin Skywalker definitely belongs to the Anakin Skywalker article. --Zoz (t) 16:49, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Something to add to the notes
Re: the note on the change of Anakin to Hayden Christensen - I'm not sure if I should be changing the note so I'll leave the note here on the talk page. One issue commonly neglected is that for those who have never seen Star Wars before (here in Korea most haven't, and the majority of the world has never seen them either) the sudden appearance of some old guy near the end of Episode 6 would be confusing after two movies with Christensen as Anakin. I just saw Episodes I through VI with somebody I know here and were the original picture to have been shown it would have just been confusing. There's Yoda, Obi-wan, and...er...some other dude? IOW there was really no choice. This point should be condensed and added to the ref. Mithridates 19:28, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

No, it's not confusing at all. No more so than replacing Ewan McGregor with Alec Guinness halfway through the series. Anyone who can recognize Shaw as Anakin when he dies on the Death Star can also accept him as the ghost later on. Dark Side or no, Anakin's ghost ages the same as any other character, and the Shaw ghost proves it. Reversing aging just so the audience can recognize a younger actor is ludicrous.Kenobifan 14:58, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Listen. I don' know wh you are that emailed me, but the Anakin skywalker page contains incorrect info, I was correcting that and expanding on the page more. I'm Sorry about the image thing, my comp' glitched. But the article needs editing. ~ All That Jazz

Anakin's Age in the Prequels
It's a very minor thing, but I corrected Anakin's age. As of the beginning of the film version of Attack of the Clones, Anakin was 20 years old, not 19. It's on the Star Wars Databank for Anakin, in the movie novelization, and all other official Lucasfilm information. Attack of the Clones takes place 10 years and a few months after The Phantom Menace. Since Revenge of the Sith takes place 3 years after Attack of the Clones, Anakin is 23 there, not 22. Feel free to check any source; Lucasfilm canon backs me up. - Imadra Blue

Centrality of Anakin
I was rather surprised to see someone change the statement about Anakin's centrality, to state that he is merely "one of the central characters". Lucas has, of course, himself made that clear, and I think that the only people who might fail to recognize it are those whose primary memories are from the first couple of movies. Indeed, when viewing the original trilogy, this isn't apparent, but taken as a whole, as Lucas has said, it is.

So I just tossed on a few citations on the statement, but I must say, I think that they are ugly and unnecessary. Some things are so obvious as to not require citation. If, in the article on North Carolina, it said, "North Carolina is one of the 50 states which comprise the United States of America", I think a citation "proving" that fact would be ghastly and absurd. I feel almost as strongly about this, but I'm putting them in there (and we can find dozens more, if necessary—these were found in less than 45 seconds) in case someone questions this.

Ideally, I'd like someone else to just delete the citations, in recognition of the patently obvious fact of Anakin's centrality.

And if you, reading this, doubt the statement, ask yourself: Who plays a central role in every single one of the six Star Wars movies?  Answering that makes it clear how obvious this statement is. Unschool 08:05, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Edit 128710087
I undid this edit because a) it changed matters that had been discussed on the talk page without so much as an edit summary, and b) the capitalization used indicated a lack of understanding of Wikipedia standards, and c) many of the changes seemed capricious. If the anon editor wishes to discuss the matters, I would be happy to do so. Unschool 21:48, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Question about the Star Wars novels
Does anyone know of (or IF, for that matter!) any novels were written where Anakin's spirit plays a role? I'd find it very interesting, if further exploration of Luke getting to know his father after his redemption was never explored.
 * Uhhh... see Darth Vader. Any novels written where Anakin's spirit plays a role is all in the Expanded universe. Greg Jones II 19:03, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Question
As the article for Darth Vader discloses no data about Anakin in the prequel trilogy, why does this page give data about him in the original trilogy? Shouldn't any information on him redirect to the Vader page? The Clawed One 03:23, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Uuuuuhhhh.......
Shouldnt we MERGE this with Vader's article? Clonetroop125
 * Also is this Protected? Clonetroop125

Personal Theory
I think it is extremely obvious that Darth Sidious created Anakin out of a sith incantation and this is explained in "Revenge of the Sith" when palpatine reveals some of his past to Anakin. Why is there no mention of this anywhere? Anakin is a sith abomination created out of dark side energy by the emperor himself. It is a subtly in the movie that Lucus leaves for true fans to understand. This leaves the entire 6 movies a familial story that encompasses 3 generations. It also expands on the theme Lucas started in Empire Strikes Back about discovering one's origins, as Luke did from Vader. Think about it.

Centrality
The fact is, every statement on Wikipedia is not documented, nor can it ever be so. There are such things as general knowledge. I think every statement that is sincerely questioned can be expected to have documentation affixed. That is why my edit, which stated that Anakin is the central character in the Star Wars saga, has four pieces of supporting documentation listed. I wrote it, someone questioned, it, and I supported it.

But the statement, "Anakin is found on the planet Tatooine by Jedi Master Qui-Gon Jinn", is uncontestable. Placement of a general tag at the top indicating the need for supporting evidence paints this statement with the same brush as every other sentence in the article. This is injudicious and unnecessary. Frankly, I do not profess to have any expertise whatsoever on this topic. But I am willing to say, as a casual fan, that the general gist of this article looks okay to me. Show me what needs support, and I will support that demand. But don't trash the whole article without laying down some specific expectations. Either place a Fact tag at the places needed, or else come to the talk page and let us know what you find inadequate about the article. That's my 2¢. Unschool 05:39, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Please read our manual of style guideline on writing about fiction, and WP:NOT. Wikipedia articles need references that appear in reliable, published secondary (=third-party) sources. The in-universe tag draws attention to the fact that this article lacks any real world perspective, e.g. aspects of the creative process (regarding e.g. character traits, appearance in the movies, or specific story elements). Tagging with plot would also have been appropriate, but I'd particularly like to draw the attention of editors to our style guideline, which exists for good reasons.
 * Tagging individual statements is not an alternative, because in-universe style is a matter of the stance the whole article takes. Even if all individual statements are attributable to a source (primary or secondary, for that matter), that doesn't make for the necessary real world perspective. —AldeBaer 12:19, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

The fact is, Anakin Skywalker is the central character only of the prequel trilogy. The original trilogy has Luke as its central character, therefore the saga is only half about Anakin. While Anakin is redeemed at the climax of the original trilogy, this event is not the goal towards which the rest of the story is directed. The original trilogy is obviously about Luke's ascent to Jedi Knight. Up until 1995, Lucas himself acknowledged that Luke was the central character in the original trilogy. Only in 1995 did he begin insisting that Anakin was the central character throughout, and all other assertions of this are merely unchallenged repititions of Lucas's claim that he always saw Anakin as the central character. -Kenobifan —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kenobifan (talk • contribs) 22:13, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * That Luke may be regarded as the central character of the original trilogy does not negate that Anakin is the central character of the entire saga; these two concepts are not mutually exclusive. Unschool 02:58, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

That Luke is the central character of the original trilogy cannot be changed by making prequels; and the fact that his journey, not his father's, is the focus makes Anakin not the central character in that half. Lucas can't change that just by magically saying, twenty years later, that Anakin is the central character. The articles cited here are opinions; repeating Lucas's revisionist statements doesn't make them true anymore than claiming that "Greedo always shot first." The original trilogy is not really focused on redeeming Anakin, hence they are not ABOUT him. If he's not the central character in three out of six films, then he can't be the central character in all six. -Kenobifan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.31.128.203 (talk) 03:12, 9 November 2007 (UTC)


 * First of all, to dismiss the citations as "mere opinion" is a bit disingenuous; the average Joe's opinion does not carry equal weight with George Lucas's "opinion". But more importantly, let me repeat what I said above:  I am not disputing (nor has anyone else, as best as I can tell), that Luke is the central character to the original trilogy.  But I repeat, the statements that Luke is the central character to the original trilogy and that Anakin is the central character to the Star Wars saga are not mutually exclusive. Unschool 03:40, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

In-universe
Anyone seriously interested in improving the article should consider adding some real world related info, e.g. regarding the concept, creation, and/or function of the character within the Star Wars narrative etc. Please consult our writing about fiction guideline, which also includes a list of exemplary articles.

There are currently three featured articles on Star Wars characters: Palpatine, Padmé Amidala, and Jabba the Hutt. What sets them aside from most of the other SW character articles is the effort to write from the real world perspective. Pay particular attention to paragraphs like Jabba the Hutt, Palpatine, and Padmé Amidala.

Also take a look at Darth Vader, which despite its lack of reliable, published third-party secondary sources features interesting sections on e.g. #Character creation and concepts and Darth Vader as a #Cultural figure.

Even though reliable sources may be tough to come up with, any effort to introduce coherently written real world aspects will be greatly appreciated, because it contributes to the depth of the article and accurate coverage of the topic, and thereby makes for an improved reading experience and increases the encyclopedic value of the article.

—AldeBaer 15:53, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Potentially useful online sources for adding real world perspective

 * BBC search "Anakin Skywalker"
 * Danny Graydon for bbc.co.uk: Looking for Anakin - some info on the casting
 * BBC newsround : Hayden Christensen interview
 * Anwar Brett for bbc.co.uk: Hayden Christensen - Star Wars: Episode III - another Christensen interview


 * CNN seach "Anakin Skywalker"
 * Paul Fischer for girl.com.au: Hayden Christensen interview
 * Claire E. White for writerswrite.com: A Conversation With Alan Dean Foster - interview with Alan Dean Foster
 * Cristopher Hennessey-DeRose and Michael McCarty for scifi.com: Terry Brooks' many magic kingdoms are still for sale - interview with Terry Brooks
 * David Welch for scifi.com: The cast and crew of the latest Star Wars flick aren't cloning around - interview with George Lucas
 * Jimmy Akin for decentfilms.com: The Star Wars films: Moral and spiritual issues - features e.g. a section on Mythic symbolism
 * Steven D. Greydanus for Catholic World Report magazine (link is at decentfilms.com): An American Mythology: Why Star Wars Still Matters - more commentary including Anakin

—AldeBaer 10:04, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Anakin Picture
I just logged onto the page and noticed that the photo in the text box had not shown up. Now because of the possible bad connection it simply may not have loaded on the computer. But can this be confirmed by another connection from another location please. I started to see if there were any mistakes in coding but saw none so it may be my connection period. Thanx! JCSR —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 10:18, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I think that there is a need for 2 separate articles for them. It has been discussed many times before on here. They are essentially 2 different characters. --Vertigo315 00:42, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Merging with Darth Vader article
There's no reason why this article should exist. It could be perfectly be merged to Darth Vader. | DUKERED FREE SPEECH 01:51, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Given that Darth Vader represents a portion of Anakin's life, it would make equal or superior sense to merge the Darth Vader article into this one. Unschool 02:59, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Darth Vader is the more well-known identity of the character. More people would know who Darth Vader is before Anakin Skywalker.  King Zeal 13:27, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * This has been discussed ad nauseam. This pair of articles is analogous to Clark Kent and Superman articles, and is entirely appropriate for similar reasons. Many noteworthy real people have multiple articles too, with each one dedicated to separate portions of their life; in the same way, this highly noteworthy fictional character has different articles focusing on different portions in his fictional life. There is no rule that each entity must have only one article devoted to it (especially when that entity is imaginary anyway!); Charles Darwin, for example, has nearly a dozen articles devoted to his life. It allows details to be delved into that wouldn't fit in only one article. -Silence 20:33, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Clark Kent and Superman are alter egos- Anakin Skywalker becomes Darth Vader- they are not two sides to the same coin. These articles should be merged, though I am undecided which should be the title and which the redirect.  Gabrielthursday (talk) 02:56, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Neither article is particularly large, it wouldn't hurt to merge the two. The question of title, however, is tricky. Is it against wikipedia policy to create a title such as Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader, or perhaps Darth Vader (Anakin Skywalker)? --Venomaru 2.0 (talk) 20:13, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

This has been debated time and time again here. There needs to be 2 articles as they are essentially 2 different characters and there is a need for 2 articles to explain them. Instead of wanting to merge them if you think the articles are to small then expand them.Vertigo315 (talk) 20:50, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * How exactly are they two different characters? Are Spider-Man and Peter Parker two different characters? After all, he wasn't Spider-Man until he was bitten by the radioactive spider. Just as Anakin wasn't Vader until he turned to the dark side. By that logic all characters who have an alter ego or an assumed identity should have separate articles for both sides of the coin. If I decide to change my job and name, am I not still the same person in every other respect?


 * The only precedent set for this particular issue is Clark Kent/Superman, and I disagree even more strongly on that distinction than I do on this one. As stated before, I'm for the merger, and as far as I can tell the only reason (if you can call it that) for people to disagree is that they have some sort of vendetta against the prequel trilogy. Anakin Skywalker and Darth Vader are one and the same, as such they should have the same article. --Venomaru 2.0 (talk) 06:36, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Again this has been debated for years on here... they are 2 separate chacters in the Star Wars universe even though they are the same person. This point has been basically addressed by Lucas himself on many occasions.Vertigo315 (talk) 16:08, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, these are two different characters. At one point, you have a very good farm boy. Then he has many tragic events that make him think he should avenge himself or avenge the the person-example his mother and the sand people. Then you have a dark lord in hidding that is trying to ease him into the dark side. It also doesn't help that Anakin wants more power. So lets change the plot for a moment; lets say Quigon got Anie's mother out of Tatooien. He would not have killed the sand peolpe. He would be happier. He probably wouldn't have married Amidala either. So the whole plot changes and you don't have the Empire in the end. You basically just changed Star Wars right there. So why would you have these two characters the same when all Ankin did was make bad choices and have a dark lord heelping him make bad choices. Just take Luke in the last movie. Vader-That name no longer has any meanig for me. Luke-It is your true self you have forgoten. I know there is still good in you, the emperor hasn't drriven it from you fully. They are two different people fighting inside to show themselves. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.213.52.251 (talk) 14:31, 22 April 2008 (UTC)


 * MergeIt's the same person not two different characters. I mean would you then create two articles for comic book characters or other characters that go from good to bad. Just because a character was a "good" guy and then turned bad, doesn't really mean you should go create two articles for it.  Gman124 talk  08:57, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
 * based on this discussion there's only Vertigo315 ans Silence and an IP that think these articles should be separate, and there's like 6 others (DUKERED, Unschool, King Zeal, Gabrielthursday, Venomaru 2.0 and I) that want it merged. So based on that shouldn't this article be merged, since it's clear that more editors want it merged than the ones that want to keep it. Gman124talk  09:16, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

There is also a disscusion at Talk:Darth Vader on the merge, so I think you guys should discuss there since many people are discussing the merger there than here. Gman124 talk 09:43, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

In 2005 it was agreed upon to split these into 2 articles for the reasons that have been given. All of these points of view have already been discussed many times over the years. The bottom line is this, it was decided 3 years ago to make them 2 articles becuase George Lucas considers them to be 2 separate characters and this is canon. Until someone brings up a new arguement other than the fact that they are the same person then they need to be kept separate. --Vertigo315 (talk) 21:32, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Just because his "personalty" is different doesn't warrant a separate article. Anyway this article is nothing but plot and in my opinion should be redirected just like the tv episode articles. There is nothing on this article that makes it notable. This page is like a Star Wars fan page, with fans like you wanting keep this article. It would be much better to merge it with Darth Vader article since it would improve that with more info to that article. Anyway you said, " Until someone brings up a new arguement other than the fact that they are the same person then they need to be kept separate" Well arn't you basically giving the same argument as well saying because he had a "change in personality", so the articles should separate. Gman  124  04:38, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Prodigy
''While in Watto's employ, Anakin learned valuable mechanical and technical skills. He earned the reputation of being able to fix anything. So technically inclined was he that at the young age of nine, he cobbled together a working protocol droid -- C-3PO -- to help his mother.'' &mdash; Skywalker, Anakin, Databank

''A fussy and worry-prone protocol droid, C-3PO was cobbled together from discarded scrap and salvage by a nine-year old prodigy on the desert planet Tatooine. Young Anakin Skywalker had intended the homemade droid to help his mother, Shmi. With limited resources, the droid that Anakin built was truly remarkable.'' &mdash; C-3PO (See-Threepio), Databank

In Star Wars: The New Essential Guide to Characters, p. 164, "[Anakin Solo and Anakin Skywalker] excelled at mathematics and engineering."

In Star Wars: The Complete Visual Dictionary, Anakin is described as a "podracer engineer," and it reads that he "quickly understands how things work."

--68.224.247.53 00:39, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

He's still cool!

 * Talk pages are for discussing the article, not for general conversation about the article's subject. dorftrottel (talk) 09:27, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Even if he turned evil, I still like him. But in the 6th episode, he turned good again! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.184.186.62 (talk) 14:23, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Excuse me, what has this got to do with the context of the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by ADBandicoot (talk • contribs) 17:43, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

I have no idea but (s)he's right--22:21, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

who's cares....Anakin is sooooo hot..!!! i <3 Anakin Skywalker...i'm gonna marry him!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.104.163.123 (talk) 17:16, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry Miss but his Padmé's--Angel David (talk) 00:27, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Vader march.jpg
Image:Vader march.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 10:49, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:AnakinEp2.jpg
Image:AnakinEp2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 03:53, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

info
Shouldn't we put the part where he dies in this article as well as the DV one. He was born as anakin and died as anakin, not vader.--Jakezing (talk) 20:16, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure if this is what the previous person was talking about, but i think the scene of Anakin as a force ghost should be with Sebastian Shaw, not Hayden Christiansen. As seen with Obi-Wan and Yoda, people don't revert to their prime as force ghosts and despite Lucas making the change, i feel that original scene is more appropriate, at the very least to show Anakin in his old age. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.45.64.176 (talk) 02:01, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Anakin was about 39 when he died, as Episode 1 took place 30 years before episode 3. We should put that down, shouldn't we? Also, in one shot in episode 3, it shows Anakin's eyes turned yellow like Palpatine's. Maybe all Sith Lords' eyes turn yellow if they fully embrace the dark side or something.

The issue isn't whether you "feel" it's more appropriate, it simply is. Sorry but that's the breaks. If Lucas changed it then we have to live with it. You simply can't simply deny that it's been changed because you didn't agree with it. If anything both should be included. Secondly why was James Earl Jones not credited as an actor for him? Considering voice over work does make one an actor he should be properly credited as well. Not mention that David Prowse was the actor who was in the Darth Vader costume, he is not mentioned either. But none of this even matters since there should not be two seperate articles for Darth Vader and Anakin Skywalker. We might as well make seperate articles for all aliases of other characters. We could make two for Obi-Wan Kenobi and Ben Kenobi, or four for Senator Palpatine, Chancellor Palpatine, Emporer Palpatine and finally Darth Sideous. Seriously people get rid of this article. -Scarlocke —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.48.250.215 (talk) 13:20, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

No actual description of him
I think it would be appropriate if there was an actual description of him, his life and so on, it is significant. Also it would help better understand him, a summary would be perfect. Its to hard for someone completly new to star wars to read 4 differnt sections of the movies he was in where he is totally changed everytime. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.227.154.176 (talk) 23:51, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Not the Chosen One's Fault!

 * Talk pages are for discussing the article, not for general conversation about the article's subject. dorftrottel (talk) 20:16, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

It is not Anakin's fault that he has turned to the Dark Side. He was seduced by Lord Sidius. He only wanted to save Padme, so it was for good that he turned to the Dark Side. Also, he was angry because he wasnt powerfull enough to save his mother.

Also, the prophecy is true becuase in Episode six, he does kill the Sith, also killing himself, so he is the Chosen One.

by Bartholomew Solo —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bartholomew Solo (talk • contribs) 20:44, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
 * OK. Your point is? Jasca Ducato (talk) 18:52, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Rank
When he turned to the dark side is he a Dark Jedi? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.129.62.2 (talk) 03:08, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
 * no.--Jakezing (talk) 20:34, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Episode 1 description
In the description for Episode 1, it states he was conceived by Darth Maul. I'm not that in tune with the ins and outs of Star Wars history, but I've never seen this anywhere else on the site (or on Wookiepedia). Is this fact or did some idiot just add in his own fanon?--68.193.114.116 (talk) 00:47, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Ew! No, wrong! I am a DIE HARD star wars fan and I feel that I am certified to say that some idiot has gone and put that. Completely disgusting. Unless, of course, there's been some book that's been published that defies all that George Lucas has to say on the matter. ~ The Rebel's Gone   Pokeynuts   LOL  05:38, 19 July 2008 (UTC)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rebel Queen Pokeynut (talk • contribs)

I removed a part of the description for Phantom Menace where it begins to state Darth Plagueis may have conceived Anakin etc... because it is not fact and only speculation that has no proof. If you disagree, then I can write that many fans believe when he leaves his mother, it was the defining moment in his eventual transformation to the dark side. Mines only theory and no proof as is the Plagueis part. Also, there is no need for expanded universe material in the phantom menace description. Any mentions of such should be relegated to the EU section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.83.80.13 (talk) 08:45, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Claims of being a loner
I have taken out the claim of Anakin being a supposed loner under the tutelage of Obi-Wan. Where is the evidence to support such a claim? A Prodigy (t&bull;c&bull;m) 18:32, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * In Coruscant Nights I, Jax (a fellow Padawan) remembers him as being a loner68.43.207.114 (talk) 21:51, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I suppose thats one of the multiple games about SW? Isn't there a chance that Jax may simply be prejudice against Anakin? I may be sounding predantic or whatever, but how can we be sure that was the case?  A Prodigy   ~In Pursuit of Perfection ~ 16:05, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Dave Prowse in portrayed by section.
Should Dave Prowse go in the "Portrayed by" section? Arguably, Darth Vader is Anakin again from the point that he turns against Palpatine (at which point he is played by Prowse) Also, all the blokes who've voiced him need listing e.g. Clone Wars movie. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Whoviangeekdude (talk • contribs) 09:19, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Hello there, actually David Prowse did not portray Anakin in ROTJ. Sebastian Shaw (a British actor) played him. ZEM (Hankengine) (talk) 04:11, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

I know about Sebastian Shaw, but while he was still in the suit he was Dave Prowse. he was Anakin again as soon as he killed the Emperor.