Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Star Wars/Archive 7

The expanded universe and original research
When reading wikipedia articles about star wars too often it seems that there is an original research component of "synthesising" information between the movie and expanded universe sources.

The easiest example I can think of for that is the article on the dark jedi. Although the article explains that it is essentially a plothole that a lot of books were written using the "dark jedi" as a term for the bad guys and then lucas started using "sith" as a term for the bad guys in the phantom menance, the article itself only pretty much discusses the term as used after the phantom menance. The article should discuss the term as used in books prior to the phantom menance, and then how it was used after. To clarify about what I mean about synthesizing, it seems the editors of this article thought "ok, if lucas started calling the main dark side bad guys sith, what would dark jedi mean? i guess it would mean jedi who started to use the dark side but didnt go over to the sith". But even if later expanded universe books startede using the term in that way, it would be unencylopedic to ignore the old usage just because it is a plothole in the expanded universe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Special:Contributions/ (talk)

CFD notice
Removed cfdnotice, cfd has completed. --Kbdank71 14:53, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Please also note Deletion review/Log/2007 February 20 for a review of the decision regarding Category:Actors by series. Tim! 08:08, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

CFD notice
Removed cfdnotice, cfd has completed. --Kbdank71 14:53, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Obi Wan Kenobi
This article is currently under Good Article Review. LuciferMorgan 23:48, 22 February 2007 (UTC)


 * It has now been delisted, so is a former Good Article. LuciferMorgan 14:55, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Non-canon Star Wars
I just noticed Non-canon Star Wars. How notable is any of this? Do all of these entries belong? i.e. sourced by multiple non-trivial publications? And with that, shoudl they even be linked togther? There's absolutely no relationship between them except that they weren't officially made by George Lucas. Hbdragon88 02:55, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

SuperShadow
I just noticed that the first vote on this for AfD was rigged, in fact there is an 8 to 7 majority for deletion when you clear out the the people that voted more than once and the smurf votes from the same IP. The second vote on the article for AfD doesn't explain anything, no real information is given and that still seems rigged! I really don't see how this article is contributing to wikipedia and secondly this isn't encyclopaedia material at all. Also I would like to note that I put the discussion tag up requesting why this should be kept and not deleted about a week or two ago but that by a non-admin, non top contributor user. I have been through the article and read it and I still truly believe this should be deleted. Govvy 13:03, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

AfD notice (lightsabers)
Articles for deletion/Lightsaber combat (4th nomination) - Denny 15:16, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Can anyone more knowledgeable about Star Wars lore give me some information about this article?
Het Nkik claims to be about a character from Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope, but I don't believe any of the backstory in the article (or indeed, the character's name) are actually in that film. Can anyone on the WikiProject provide some context (or references!) for this one? Is this character sufficiently important in some other canon publication for a separate article, or should it be merged somewhere? JavaTenor 09:36, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * No, this character does not deserve its own article. I have merged it into List of minor residents of Tatooine. Dmoon1 19:46, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Two pages
I came across two pages that I do not think are required and should be deleted or fixed they are:

Star Wars Episode 7 and Star Wars episode 8

Help would be greatly appreciated, thanks. Whstchy 15:34, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Sequel trilogy (Star Wars)
Comments welcome... Is there enough meat here for its own article, or should the salvageable stuff be merged somewhere? Zagalejo 01:22, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Possible merges?
I've noticed that there are several articles about characters from Episode IV whose only appearance came in a deleted scene. I will confess here that I'm not familiar with much of the Star Wars Expanded Universe beyond a few of the video games, so I may not have a full sense of the importance of these characters, but would it make sense to merge any of the following articles somewhere?
 * Laze “Fixer” Loneozner
 * Camie
 * Deak
 * WED-15-77

Thanks, JavaTenor 00:57, 19 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, merge them all into the appropriate list (List of minor residents of Tatooine and List of minor Star Wars droids). -- wacko2 20:20, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

K-wing
The article K-wing was deleted at AfD but a new version has been created. Unless it can be properly sourced it should probably be deleted or at least merged into List of Star Wars starfighters since it is at most a minor part of the universe. Eluchil404 22:39, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Redirecting Template:sww
Would it cause any problems if I redirected Template:sww to Template:Wookieepedia box? I'm trying to put these boxes (similar ones can be found at Template:BabylonProject and Template:TardisIndexFile) into use as ways to point towards more fannish, in-universe types of articles and to generally promote free content, and since Wookieepedia is one of the best fan-wikis out there I'd really like to put its use out. It also solves the problem that the sww template has, which is that it's a template pretending to be plaintext, which is explicitly discouraged. But I know the template is in use on a lot of articles, and I don't want to accidentally break them making the change. Phil Sandifer 22:35, 26 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I've done this now. The only problem I can see is cases where our article is at a different name than Wookieepedia's article. These cases can probably be most easily corrected by just creating a redirect at Wookieepedia, though if you wanted you could probably create some template jiggery-pokery that would, if there's an argument given in the template call, change the destination from PAGENAME to the argument call. In any case, if this caused any headaches, my apologies - it doesn't look like it should. Phil Sandifer 14:22, 27 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Have now fixed the problem when our article and Wookieepedia's article have different titles. Phil Sandifer 19:56, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

New Userbox(?)
I made a userbox that is slightly different than the one currently being used as the userbox signifying membership of the Star Wars WikiProject. Take a look; if you think it's pretty good, you might want to add it to the list of Star Wars templates. - PhishRCool Talk Contribs 00:37, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Template:Star Wars Wikiproject User

Fan fiction
An army of sockpuppets is adding fan fiction to a host of Star Wars-related articles, such as at List of Star Wars cities. I'm not familiar enough with the series to determine what is actually fan fiction, so it would be best if someone more familiar with it had a look. &mdash;Xezbeth 05:46, 2 June 2007 (UTC)


 * The problem doesn't seem to be so much that the entries are fanfiction, but that they are entirely in-universe and need to be edited to place them in an out-of-universe context. For instance, what works do these cities appear in (book, film, comic, videogame)?, how were they created?, etc. This information seems to be missing entirely. There seems to be little difference between this list of fictional cities and a list of real cities. Dmoon1 19:38, 2 June 2007 (UTC)


 * No, I think there's some actual fan-fiction going on. I would think Velreone would show up more places than this if it were an actual location from somewhere in Lucas canon, for example. JavaTenor 05:59, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Spoiler Warnings
The discussion on the status of spoiler warnings are at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Policies/Wikipedia:Spoiler warning. Any comments or opinions in that RFC are welcomed. Thanks. Sjones23 13:56, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Articles_for_deletion/Trispzest
I've put this on AfD, feeling that its mention in Lightsaber Combat is sufficient for Wikipedia-particularly since there isn't even full articles on the seven forms (which had been merged into Lightsaber Combat quite some time back) -- GJD 19:50, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Featured topic deadline
Per the new resolution at Featured topic criteria, the Star Wars featured topic will be eligible for removal after 1 January 2008 if a satisfactory GA or FA level lead article (presumably Star Wars) is not found. See also Wikipedia talk:Featured topic candidates. Thanks.--Pharos 03:15, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Star Wars character-box template colors
Ok, I found the current colors a little bit restrictive and overlapping&mdash;I think they should be updated a bit. It could use some work and/or change, but please tell me what you think. Arwen Undomiel talk 20:32, 8 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I think that should be good. Anyone else? Sjones23 02:40, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
 * If no one has any objections to the colors, could someone else implement it here? My computer has decided it doesn't like me and is messing up some of my edits today.  Thanks!  Arwen Undomiel talk 19:08, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

AFD notification
Please see Articles for deletion/Star Destroyer. Yechiel Man 03:55, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Template:Databank underused no more!
Okay, so I just spent a lot of time going through the six episode templates (Episode V and the like), replacing regular links to the Star Wars databank with properly filled-out databank tags (which was only used on about 15 pages before). I also added sww to a few articles that didn't have it, rearranged the links on a few pages (databank should be above sww, as official websites should always trump third-party websites in order), and ended up adding external link sections (with both the aforementioned templates) to several articles.

I tried to hit all the major characters and planets, but there are probably several dozen or so articles that I've missed. If someone else could help finish it up, that'd be swell... I've already done 100+ articles, and I'm really tired of doing it now. :) EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 04:44, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Plat Mallar
As part of the Notability wikiproject, I am currently considering the article Plat Mallar. Since I am not too familiar with Star Wars, I could use help from someone who is. If you can spare some time, please read the details at the article's talk page. Thank you! --B. Wolterding 10:43, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Wookieepedia is a reliable source?
I'm currently making a series of improvements to Star Wars Jedi Knight II: Jedi Outcast, and for the plot/setting section there's some stuff which I'd like to include, but I can only find on Wookieepedia as a source. I'm quite hesitant about using Wookieepedia as a source - it's a wiki, so any pages referred to could be vandalised. If Wookieepedia is not reliable enough, are there any other reliable sources I could use instead? Thanks, UnaLaguna 21:02, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Wookieepedia is not a reliable resource (even Wikipedia is not a reliable resource). But since it's a wiki, I suggest just asking on their talk pages where they got the information.--Pharos 21:09, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Wookieepedia itself is not a reliable source, but you can use whatever sources their articles use. EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 21:13, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * As I suspected. Thanks for the quick replies. UnaLaguna 05:51, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I disagree. Actually, Wookieepedia is more reliable than Wikipedia. I remember seeing a lot of weird fanon stuff at Wikipedia, stuffs that get reverted on sight at Wookiee. - 81.182.81.219 21:39, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Return of the Jedi
In the Return of the Jedi article, I've added a "copyedit" tag. Also, there needs to be some additional citations. The reaction section also needs to be expanded. See Talk:Star Wars Episode VI: Return of the Jedi. Anyone who wants to copyedit this article, add additional citations or expand the reaction section for FA is very much appreciated. Thanks. Sjones23 01:47, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Star Wars
This article is in a really bad condition and definitely needs to be looked at in order for it to be back into a GA or even an FA. Sjones23 20:13, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Expert review: Zachariah Jensen
As part of the Notability wikiproject, I am trying to sort out whether Zachariah Jensen is notable enough for an own article. I would appreciate an expert opinion. For details, see the article's talk page. If you can spare some time, please add your comments there. Thanks! --B. Wolterding 12:44, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

TIE articles
I've been doing some work on TIE fighter and am wondering whether it would be to fold and redirect TIE interceptor and TIE bomber into TIE fighter. They other two contain almost entirely in-universe information and plot summary, and I've not seen online or in my print materials a whole lot of real-world information about either of them. Thoughts? --EEMeltonIV 16:42, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

ROTJ
I need some help getting the ROTJ article to featured status. Most of it looks good. I need some help finding verifiable sources and additional sources and expansion in the reaction section. Any help on this article should be greatly appreciated. Thanks. Greg Jones II 16:52, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Deletion proposals
You Star Wars guys, you are losing the fight. An admin has put up for a second deletion request Kuat Drive Yards as well as

I think these are all important pages but I simply don't have the time or knowledge to save them all. Would someone with access to some source books and some real-world connections clean up these pages to save them and note those changes on the deletion pages? I hope they have time to be saved! – Whale y  land  (  Talk  •  Contributions  ) 17:39, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * You seem to be a bit confused. Deckiller, an administrator who voted for the deletion of the articles, is the founder of the project here. This isn't a "fight". --Deskana (banana) 17:42, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * We must tell Deckiller about these situations, now. Greg Jones II 17:48, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Considering that Deckiller already voiced his opinion a couple of days ago, I doubt this is an issue... EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 17:51, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * People seem to be misunderstanding the philosophy of Wikipedia. Deckiller is the founder of the project, but he has no more or less authority over Star Wars articles than anyone else on all of Wikipedia. --Deskana (banana) 17:55, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

An admin has put up for a second deletion request Kuat Drive Yards - And as a truly minor aside, I (who put these up for deletion) am not an admin., and consider myself part of the Star Wars wikiproject. --EEMeltonIV 18:05, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * And if anyone's curious, this isn't a random "campaign" as one person commented at an AfD. There's a lot of worthwhile, real-world Star Wars material out there, some of it even on Wikipedia. But, these nuggets that meet Wikipedia's writing-about-ficton and notability standards are sometimes buried in in-universe plot summary. While "useful", it isn't appropriate for this site. Hence, deleting those things that haven't had a palpable real-world influence. Besides these companies, I successfully nominated for deletion lists of clone trooper units/commanders, and there are currently open AfDs for List of Galactic Empire ranks and Mon Mothma (starship). And since I imagine there's some Star Trek overlap, also open is Admiral (Star Trek), plus almost all the other individual Starfleet rank articles. Please chime in. And on the flip side, I've done what I can to spruce up Star Destroyer, Super Star Destroyer and TIE fighter -- feedback there is also welcome. Anyhow, it'd be nice to see the in-universe plot summaries and trivia -- which I love, especially since I haven't had time to jump into the EU since the end of the NJO -- mostly at Wookieepedia, and the real-world material mostly here. Anyhow, my two credits. --EEMeltonIV 19:03, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Another note, I am also not an admin. and also consider myself part of the Star Wars WikiProject as well. Greg Jones II 18:41, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Yet another note, I'm a part of the project as well (though I am an admin). EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 18:52, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

I took an indefinite leave to work on other areas of Wikipedia (namely WP:FF), but when (or if) my WP:FICT rewrite (or a variation) is established, then I'll feel obligated to return here. There's still a ton of potential in this project. Last year it was with the merges, and this year it will be with sifting through those merges and beginning the process of quality construction. &mdash; Deckiller 23:08, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Just noticed this
Hello, I noticed on the article about the Army of the Republic two internal links both leading to redlink redirects: Clone Commander and Commander Bly. I'm not sure what would be the best way to fix it, so I thought I inform you people and leave it to your capable hands ;) --  21:04, 9 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I think Sjones23 and I cleared out the links that redirect to the deleted List of Star Wars clone trooper commanders article. The redirects themselves have been RfDed. --EEMeltonIV 22:00, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

You guys work quick, impressive! By the way, I located another one: The InterGalactic Banking Clan, which I originally spotted on the article about the Magna Guards. --  18:48, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Sith
I recently posted the following to the Sith talk page but that hasn't prompted any action, so I thought I'd put it here also. I'd rather somebody from the Project deal with it, because I know if an IP like myself makes the attempt somebody is just going to revert it and call it vandalism, but if nobody else takes it on soon I will start making the necessary edits.

''I've added the rewrite tag and taken away two of the unreferenced tags for a number of reasons. ''That should take care of most of it - have fun. :)''
 * 1) ''The article obviously uses references, but most of them are not readily apparent. They need to be teased out and cited properly.
 * 2) ''Too much of the article is written from an in-universe perspective, treating these as real people (well, Sith). I know it's difficult to write out-of-universe perspective, but there are areas where it should be easier than others; the development that Lucas put into them, the cultural influence the Sith have had, etc.
 * 3) ''Excessive use of quoted material. The Philosophy section is a good example of this. While it may make a nice impact to start with a recitation of the tenets, it's not very encyclopedic.
 * 4) ''Too many lists. This is most obvious in the timeline and the Ancient Sith sections. Any dates of importance should really be in the text of the article, and I'd suggest spinning off the members of the Sith into a "List of..." article (properly sourced, of course).
 * 5) ''Tone. There's quite a bit of personal commentary worked into the wording that needs to be expunged.

-- 24.6.65.83 06:59, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

X-wing series
Let me know what you think about me edits on X-wing series! I think its a good example of the kind of star wars articles wikipedia needs but doesent have enough of, in terms of format (really im not bragging). Your thoughts? Basejumper123 02:48, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Loads and loads of in-universe articles out there
These articles need to be merged and redirected. Deletion should be performed only as a last resort (this is a volunteer project, after all). Most of the books and games have no plot summaries in their articles; instead, the plot is spread out and inflated on numerous articles and lists on characters, starships, etc. We need to start sifting through this information and finding where to include it in succinct plot summaries within articles on the works. The only subarticles on fictional things that should exist are those that establish at least some real-world notability (per WP:NOT, WP:FICT, and WP:WAF). It's not an impossible task. &mdash; Deckiller 02:58, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Note to project members: WP:FICT has recently been revised, with a stricter interpretation regarding notability for sub-articles on fictional topics.  Deckiller was one of the primary authors of the new guideline, and I applaud his reasonable stance here that deletion should only be performed as a last resort.  As an editor who regularly edits fiction, however, I am uncomfortable with WP:FICT as it stands today.  If enforced, the new guideline would likely result in the deletion and/or merging of hundreds of articles on fictional subjects, such as fictional characters, television episodes, fictional locations, etc. Certainly many Star Wars articles as they exist today could be affected.  There is active discussion / disagreement related to this issue at Wikipedia talk:Notability (fiction), and in the interests of ensuring the topic is fully discussed by interested editors, I would invite members of this project to participate in that discussion (whether you agree with the new guideline or not). Fairsing 22:17, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

ROTJ up for FAC
Hi. I just want to let you know that a user has put up Return of the Jedi for FAC at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Star Wars Episode VI: Return of the Jedi. Any comments there will be very much appreciated. Thanks. Greg Jones II 03:07, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Cultural impact of Tantive IV and Star Destroyer
I have vague recollections of hearing multiple people in documentaries, retrospectives, etc. talking about being amazed and awed by the opening of A New Hope, when the tiny corvette is chased by the huge Star Destroyer. But, I'm drawing a blank on a specific recording or writing to cite for the Tantive IV and Star Destroyer articles. Can anyone think of anything specific? --EEMeltonIV 02:51, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I'll go one better than that

 * (cross-post from here

This article needs citation, and badly. I would hate to have to begin removing unreferenced statements, as I think it would leave the article an essentially empty page. Therefore, we should wait about a week, to see if some citation work (remember, reliable, verifiable, non-OR references, please) begins making its way into the article. If the article doesn't get more citable, we will have to start removing uncited statements. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arcayne (talk • contribs) 18:22, August 26, 2007 (UTC)
 * The removal of non-cited information will begin midnight CST. - Arcayne   (cast a spell)  19:54, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

As an FYI
Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. -- GJD (Talk to me|Damage I've done) 17:46, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace
Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Greg Jones II 20:09, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Something that must be brought to your attention
Hi, I'm not a member of this project but I think the article Operation:Knightfall must be re-written. For those who don't know Operation: Knightfall was Vader's raid on the Jedi Temple, mainly depicted in the Star Wars Episode III video game. I cleaned up the infobox but I can't strike the right tone for the actually article..Thanks! Speedboy Salesman 16:42, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Proposed deletions
How come this project doesn't have a space on the main page to list proposed / articles for deletion? I suggest you search for "deletion" at other wikiprojects e.g. this active one for examples of how to do it.

Anyway, if anyone here cares about them, get defending. 2 days gone, 3 to go: - A Trekkie! Fayenatic (talk) 21:48, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Sith Sword
 * Sith alchemy
 * Prophets of the Dark Side
 * Inquisitorius (Star Wars)
 * Galactic Economic Expansion and Investment Authority (Star Wars)
 * Dark side marauder
 * Apple Barrier
 * Cularian System
 * Mining colonies

Oh, man! We need to fix these articles up ASAP. Any comments or objections? Greg Jones II 22:19, 12 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I nominated/prodded these. They are all trivial aspects of the saga with no significant coverage by third-party sources; they fail to meet Wikipedia's notability standards. Let these be axed so that Wikipedia can focus on those aspects of the franchise that have a modicum of real-world significance; let Wookieepedia cover trivial things/concepts like these. --EEMeltonIV —Preceding unsigned comment added by EEMeltonIV (talk • contribs) 02:01, 13 September 2007 (UTC)