Talk:Padmé Amidala/Archive 1

Archive 1

Irony

Is it noteworthy to mention the irony that the very fact that Anakin believed his prophecy to be true is what caused it to do so?

Don't give an Ameriflag 00:30, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

In Matthew Stover's novelization of the movie, he makes the point that Anakin has this thought process [paraphrased]: "What if, in attempting to save Padme from his nightmares of losing her, he actually brought about the very thing (i.e. her death) he was trying to stop?" Can someone please look up the exact phrasing? Thanks.Sdsures (talk) 17:55, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Japanese dub

"In the Japanese dub of the Star Wars Prequels, she is voiced by Maaya Sakamoto." - Who cares? Surely not important enough to be in the first paragraph.

Check the discussion in Palpatine's page.

From the Return of the Jedi shooting script:

                             BEN (continuing his narrative)
              When your father left, he didn't know your
              mother was pregnant. Your mother and I knew
              he would find out eventually, but we wanted
              to keep you both as safe as possible, for as
              long as possible.  So I took you to live with
              my brother Owen on Tatooine... and your mother
              took Leia to live as the daughter of Senator
              Organa, on Alderaan.

---

What does this mean:

"Padma" is Sanskrit for "lotus flower", and "Amidala" is the spiritual manifestation.

Okay, so "padma" is Sanskrit for "lotus flower", but what is this bit about "Amidala" being "the spiritual manifestation"? Of what? - Cymydog Naakka 20:40, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

The problem with going from shooting script to film is so very often that little things get left out, in order to make the film the right length, to avoid redundancy, etc. Perhaps these deleted but important plot points are included in the Return of the Jedi novelization? Lucas isn't the brightest crayon in the box, and he may not have realized that the films would leave some questions unanswered.Sdsures (talk) 17:58, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Timeline of the character

The article states that the character died at the age of 27. This seems inconsistent. "Revenge of the Sith" takes place no less than 10 years after the events of "The Phantom Menace" (but probably even later, since "Attack of the Clones" is already set 10 years after the first prequel). This would make her 17 or younger when she was Queen of her people. Sounds highly unlikely, since "Queen/King of Naboo" is an elective office. A teenager in the highest office of the planet? Doubtful at best, even if she was "the youngest Queen ever elected". What is the source for those dates? The movies never touch this, so I assume it must come from the Expanded Universe... In my humble opinion, the character could stand to be a little older than this, despite Natalie Portman's youth, but it just sounds like nobody wants Anaking Skywalker to have married a woman in [and probably beyond] her thirties. Maybe they don't want him to look like a pervert, but isn't he Darth Vader anyways?? ;) This could also work in the other direction: the younger they make the character, the less scandalous the fact that she married the 9-year-old from "Phantom Menace" — not when he was still nine, but still... Regards, Redux 03:18, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

(just to confuse you more) The episode I visual dictionary places her at 14 during the Naboo blockade,having been elected at 12. The only problem is, something else i read says she was 18 in episode I. 70.105.106.147 06:04, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

If she was eighteen, then boy she does like her boys young! I wonder if there are pedophilia laws as well in the Republic? The Wookieepedian 06:08, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

As far as I know, Padme was 12 when she was elected Princess, then was elected Queen at 14. In AotC, she was 24, Anakin 19. So she died at 27, as there are three years between AotC and RotS. Minami-chan 23:04, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

She was 14. The Visual Dictionary, the novelisation and the official Star Wars databank all say so. 219.88.179.183 06:27, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Maybe Lucas wanted to portray Padme as some kind of political child prodigy? That was the impression I got from reading R. A. Salvatore's novelization of Attack of the Clones.Sdsures (talk) 18:00, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

The age of Padmé Naberrie Amidala

---

To answer your question, she is born in BBY 46. She is 14 years old in BBY 32 when the Episode I occurs. In BBY 22 during Episode II, she is 24. In Episode III during BBY 19, she is 27. She robbed the cradle in the case of Anakin Skywalker because she is five years his senior. Anakin Skywalker is born in BBY 41.

As to why the people of Naboo elect children to royalty, I could not tell you. As near as I can figure (this is only my interpretation and could be totally wrong), the people elect a teenaged king or queen because it is part of their culture, like a the contest for Miss World. A legislative process exists for writing laws and treaties. The laws and treaties become official when the king or queen signs them. These childish monarchs are like rubber-stamps, legislatively speaking. This is why the Trade Federation tried to force Queen Padmé Naberrie Amidala to sign a treaty. This is not canon, but the way I pieced together the puzzle.

According to a book of The Phantom Menace told by Amidala's perspective, she had said that she could beat the former ruler, King Veruna at a debate anytime. This implies that she was also chosen because of intelligence/competence for the job. It's worth mentioning that King Veruna was a corrupt man who was overthrown and banished to labor in a mine. Bibliomaniac15 22:10, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

--

— Ŭalabio 01:45, 2005 May 30 (UTC)

I see, but is there a source for this timeline you've quoted?? I mean, if one could argue that Portman could not pull an older woman in Episode III (which would be unlikely, given the miracles performed by makeup artists), it would be even less likely that she could sell 14 in Episode I. Portaman was 18 when "Phantom Menace" was shot, and she does not look 14 in that movie, not by a long shot (I mean, just see what she looks like in Léon, when she was 12... she would have looked closer to that if she were 14 — or 15, tops). In Episode I she looks, well, like an 18-year-old). In Episode III, one could argue that she could be a young looking thirty-something years old. And as far as the plot is concerned, even if we accept that for cultural reasons the people of Naboo elect early teenagers for such a high office, there would still be the problem of her being a galactic senator for Naboo at only 24 (in Episode II). It keeps going back to experience, which is proven to be of some importance, given Padmé's tale of her first love having been someone she met in some sort of youth political program (as revealed in a dialogue of the character with Anakin Skywalker). So, the bottom line keeps being: says who that she was 14 in Episode I, 24 in Episode II and 27 in Episode III? Did Lucas write something on that regard? Is this coming from the Expanded Universe? Or, which I think is more likely, fans just extrapolated on this on some level? I still think that this age count is flawed... Regards, Redux 06:13, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

---

I hate to break it to ya, but your 'interpretation' is, um, sooo wrong. They elected Amidala because she was a politics prodigy, if you will, and she could best all of the other senior candidates. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.100.204.205 (talk) 13:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

She was 14 during the Phantom Menace, according to the databank. [1]

Various Episode I material also cites her as 14 at that time -- Cirdan 05:04, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

It should be noted that Naboo is kinda of an enlightened world; a utopia if you will :) Age doesn't matter there, so long as you're qualified. Which certainly, no one would argue that Amidala is not. You get a sense of Naboo's overall utopian feel in Episode 1; where you see how artful the structures and the technology is; yet how they are in harmony with their natural surroundings. You also get a sense of this utopian association when the Jedi visit the Gungan city, an "atlantis" if you will. And later on when upon discovery of this new race, the Naboo and Gungans work together; even to the point where the Naboo create another Senator, one to represent the Gungans. -- Cirdan 15:43, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Successor to Senator Padmé Naberrie

---

Dismas reverted some fancruft such as Padmé Naberrie should reappear iat the end of Return of the Jedi (as far as we know, only Force-Users can reappear after death). However, one thing was present which the fan might have got right:

The fan added that Jar Jar Binks succeeds Senator Padmé Naberrie as Senator for Naboo. I Attack of the Clones, Jar Jar Binks in Deputy Senator for Naboo (Palpatine manipulates Jar Jar Binks into giving a speech asking for emergency-powers for Palpatine while Senator Padmé Naberrie was away. This leads to a question:

¿Is Jar Jar Binks still Deputy Senator for Naboo in Revenge of the Sith?

If he is we should list him as the successor of Senator Padmé Naberrie for Senator of Naboo. ¿Does anyone know? We do know that sometime later, her Niece Pooja Naberrie becomes Senator for Naboo.

--

— Ŭalabio 03:23, 2005 Jun 8 (UTC)

Binks is another senator; he serves alongside Amidala. Binks acts on all of Naboo's behalf, only while Padme goes into hiding (while the assassination attempt against her is resolved). Once the Clone Wars begin, Padme goes back to the senate and continues her job; Binks goes back to being the deputy. It has not been established what happens after Padme dies. It's likely that Binks takes over for all of Naboo again, until a replacement is selected for Padme. -- Cirdan 03:40, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

---

I reverted it because A)Who in their right mind would have Jar Jar Binks as a full senator (bit of humor there) and B) I haven't seen any canonical source that says he took over after Padme' died. Granted he's filled in from time to time but I always got the idea that he was there as something of a token gesture to the Gungans. Basically just a figure head with no real power but it made the Gungans happy since they could point at their guy Jar Jar and feel proud. It also came from an anon user from what I recall and therefore I thought it was a joke (see reason A above.) Dismas 05:41, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Since none could answer the question, I tried to find the answer. The short answer is we do not know. The long answer is probably not:

Lucas is not clear about how many inhabited starsystems exist in his galaxy. The general impression is someteen million. Discourse in a senate with millions of senators is impossible; so, the galaxy has thousands of sectors with thousands of systems in each sector; thus; the senate has thousands of senators The worlds in a system, let us say Jovian Moons, Earth, Mercury, the asteroidal colonies, the Saturnian Moons, and Mars, have to decide on someone to represent The system Sol. Sol might be part of the sector Sirius. The thousands of representatives choose a senator, let us say from Alpha Centauri, to represent our sector in the galactic senate.

The Gungans got Jar Jar Binks as deputy-senator out of gratitude for fighting off the Trade Federation]]. Gratitude only goes so far. The other systems in the sector certainly are not happy about the Nabooian System monopolizing both the senatorial seat and the being the home of the deputy as well. It is likely that the other members of the sector replaced Jar Jar Binks with a deputy from another system in the sector. Thus is politics.

--

— Ŭalabio 23:44, 2005 Jun 11 (UTC)

Photographic evidence showing that Jar Jar Binks is still the Vice Senator of Naboo in Star Wars Episode Ⅲ: Revenge of the Sith

A picture about Jar Jar Binks with other Senators and Vice Senators

—

— Ŭalabio‽ 03:31:29, 2005-07-28 (UTC)

Lucas apologetics

It is amazing that one of the most blundering film flubs has taken on such a mumbo jumbo explaination. People turn evil very easily, and Lucas had no need to break his own story's continuity so heart-wrenchingly. -Acjelen 22:01, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

What, may I ask, is the purpose of posting this here? Nufy8 22:06, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Generally one offers a reason for deleting a large amount of text from an article. Lucas either made a mistake or jerked his audience around (and needlessly too) by killing Padmé at the end of Episode III. That Leia's memory of her mother comes from the womb is spread on WP and elsewhere by Lucas apologists. Padmé did not need to die (or have her life threatened in dreams) for Anakin to turn to the darkside. It was weak and created a sad sad film flub. -Acjelen 22:26, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

It seemed at first like you merely posted this to discuss your opinions on the subject. If what you're trying to say is that you're concerned the information about the womb is presented as fact instead of speculation, I went ahead and fixed that. Nufy8 22:41, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

The womb theory should not appear in this article at all. At best it is made-up and at worst it is baseless. I could add other theories such as Padmé visited a young Leia as a specter and that is why she has those memories (these scenes could appear in the TV series). Or, perhaps Padmé realized she was dying and made holographic recordings for her children, but Luke's uncle destoryed his. Instead of jumping through hoops, Star Wars fans need to acknowledge the mistake, grieve, and move on. -Acjelen 02:41, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Of course anyone could make any number of theories, but the womb explanation is by far one of the most popular. I don't see why the article can't explain that there is a large amount of fan speculation concerning the womb theory - whether it is completely false or not, it is still notable to at least mention that discussion about the topic of Leia's memories is prevalent within the community. Nufy8 02:49, 4 September 2005 (UTC

Guys your making it too complicated! What if the mother leia describes is her adopted mother, Organa. You should rule out the obvious (not to mention easiest) answer first. 70.105.106.147 06:10, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Luke asks his sister about her "real mother". When Return of the Jedi came out, everyone understood who they were talking about: the mother Luke and Leia shared. Apparently, Leia remembers her but Luke does not. -Acjelen 15:06, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

He does NOT specify "real mother" and leia didnt know at the time that they were brother and sister, so she would have described the woman she knew best. 70.105.106.147 00:01, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure Luke does say "Do you remember your mother? Your real mother?" and I've always regarded Padme's death during childbirth as a plot hole, but since Leia only really remembers "feelings" and seems to be surprisingly attuned to the Force (e.g. sensing Luke without having received any Jedi training) it didn't seem too silly at the time. Or maybe Bail had another wife or mistress that Leia THOUGHT was her real mother... ;P Willo kenobi (talk) 16:37, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Padme visited Leia as a specter? Where'd you get that? Bibliomaniac15 22:15, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

What's in a Name

Amidala is Padme's real name. Naberrie is the fake name she uses when posing as a handmaid. 70.105.106.147 22:34, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Her personal name is Padmé. Her family name is Naberrie. She traded places with Sabé who was her decoy. Her title is Amidala She was the youngest daughter of Ruwee Naberrie and Jobal Naberrie. Her niece Pooja Naberrie, became the last Senator for Naboo befor the disbandment of the Galactic Senate. This is the familytree:

        Winama Naberrie--+----Unknown Male  Unknown Male--+--Ryoo ?
                         |                                |
                 Ruwee Naberrie-------+------Jobal Naberrie
                                      |
                                      |
                                      |
    Skywalker family         +--------+------+
           |                 |               |         
    Anakin Skywalker--+--Padmé Amidala   Sola Naberrie--+--Darred Janren               
                      |     
                      |                                 |
             (See Skywalker family)             +-------+-------+
                                                |               |
                                          Ryoo Naberrie    Pooja Naberrie

—

— Ŭalabio‽ 03:46, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Then why is she referred to as Senator AMIDALA!?! 70.105.106.147 21:20, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Because that's her reign name. Nufy8 21:28, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

But she's senator not queen.The reign name wouldn't apply. 70.105.106.147 21:32, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Then she adopted that name after her tenure as Queen was through. Either way, she was born Padmé Naberrie, so it is not a "fake" name. Nufy8 21:35, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Since you obviously have a family tree i guess i must concede the point. Nice arguing with you, maybe we can do it again sometime.(the title of the article needs changed. LOL) 70.105.106.147 21:45, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Well, her SW Databank entry is called Padmé Amidala, but Wikipedia naming conventions says to use the most common form of someone's name. "Padme Amidala" gets 369,000 Google hits, while "Padme" gets over 2 million. I'm not sure if it should be changed or not - anyone have any comments? Nufy8 22:00, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Not a fair comparison: Padme will include all hits for Padme AND all hits for "Padme Amidala". A search of "Padme -Amidala" in Google still reveals more hits than one for "Padme Amidala", however, leading me to conclude that is the proper choice. With regards to 'Amidala', I would take it as a title and sign of respect. Rather like former Presidents are still given the honour of being greeted "Mr. President", Padme is given the honour of being greeted with her regal name/title/thingy. Demosthenes X 06:02, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I say, if her name is in fact Padme Naberrie (snicker) the title should either be that or QUEEN Amidala. (or simply padme) 70.105.106.147 22:20, 22 September 2005 (UTC). Maybe her name should say Padme Skywalker (nee Naberrie/Amidala)

I am wondering about the etymology of the name. Is it a Sanskrit name? Padme means lotus in Sanskrit. Her niece name "Pooja" also has a meaning in Sanskrit. Piyatad (talk) 16:11, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

I would have thought that the title should either be 'Padmé Naberrie' or 'Amidala, Queen of Naboo'. Personally, I'd go for the first one seeing how she's only a character, not an actual crowned head of state, and that she fulfils roles other than Queen during her tenure in the Star Wars films/books/games/whatever? MC 13th April 2008 23:33. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.23.48.122 (talk) 23:34, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Her name is unknown to Luke and Leia

This is the case both in the films, and in the expanded universe. Why so? And is it going to be tackled? If this is the case, in what manner? Fergananim 22:21, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

• I think Tatooine Ghost covers this. -LtNOWIS 17:58, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Memories of Leia

Bad (misplaced) quote in the text page: "She was... very beautiful. Kind, but sad." —Leia Organa Leia told it not about her real mother (i mean not about Padme)! The next sentence in a dialogue is Luke's, do you remember it?

Yeah, Luke's next dialogue goes something like this: Luke: (shakes head sadly) "I have no memory of my mother. I never knew her." Leia: "Luke, what's troubling you......." etc. etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.215.211.215 (talk) 22:03, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

It is correct, that Leia says "very beautiful", and one might THINK that she speaks of her adoptive mother because of her age when Padme died. BUT, if you check Leia's page, it states that the official StarWars.com Q&A confirm, that those memories are indeed of Padme! Harry2o (talk)

Protected

I've protected the page until the silliness over which picture to use has ended. Now shoo, start discussing. --Maru (talk) Contribs 02:18, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

I've explained why I want the current picture. Simply because it best represents her character. The other one may "look better" to some, but that's how I feel about it. The Wookieepedian 02:47, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

The picture I proposed in no way makes her look weak. It represents her character just as well as the current publicity head shot does. Also, my picture is clearer, brighter, and better represents Naboo by placing her home in the background. -Tjss 05:01, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

I'd prefer an image that shows more than just her face, imo (that applies to both images).

What's your opinion on this? [2]--DrBat 21:59, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

That works for me. It's doesn't show her as weak but it gives a larger, clearer view of her. Unless, there is a strong objection, we should switch the picture soon. -Tjss 04:39, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

I concur. The Wookieepedian 10:10, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Unprotected

Since there doesn't seem to be much of a discussion going, and hence little chance of consensus, I have little choice but to unprotect the page. --Maru (talk) Contribs 17:47, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

RfC/poll – Darth Vader/Anakin Skywalker: one article or two?

Me Jane you ... who? What do you think? E Pluribus Anthony 19:35, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

The official Star Wars webpage Character Databank has separate entries for "Anakin Skywalker" (appearing in Episodes I, II, III, and VI), and "Darth Vader" (appearing in Episodes III, IV, V and VI). Why not stay consistent with them and have two wiki pages?Sdsures (talk) 18:08, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

pregnant images

Could anyone get a screenshot showing Padme pregnant to replace the current one? --DrBat 19:34, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Padme a Force Sensitive?

"Yoda told Padmé that she had the Force Episode II, and it was suggested by Anakin that the kicking infant in her womb was indeed a girl, not a boy, and it has been said that Leia and Padmé had both a pre-connection and a brief connection at the birth of Leia."

There is never any about Padme being a Force Sensitive in the EU - FloydNbunch, February 2006

In a Star Wars edition of Top Trumps, a card game, it implies that Padme has some connection to the Force. Bibliomaniac15 22:19, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

It is unclear whether Padme is a Force Sensitive. In the junior novelization of Revenge of the Sith, it is mentioned that Anakin is often disappointed because Padme does not understand his troubles because she is not a Jedi. However, that may just be implying that Padme has not been through the harsh training regime of the Jedi, and it does not neccisarily mean she is entirely Force Insensitive —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.100.204.205 (talk) 13:12, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Failed GA nomination

too much fancrufty focus on her as a "real" character, albeit in a fictional universe. instead focus should be on george lucas, natalie portman, why the character was created, why she is as she is, why was she portrayed like that etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zzzzz (talk • contribs)

Character flaw

I find it not correct to say that Padme's easy consenting to a silent marriage with Anakin is a character flaw. After all, she truly loves him and keeping it silent is the way to avoid trouble. Apart from that, according to Wikipedia standarts, one should refrain from writing too subjectively. If only for that reason I think this line should be removed from the article.

Misconversion

1.65 m is 5 ft 5 in (more precisely, 5 ft 4.96 in), not 5 ft 4 in. --Anshelm '77 14:07, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Update of article

This is my first major edit to a Star Wars article. First off, I changed very little of what was already written, I just reorganized. Second, using the guidelines at Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) I tried to treat Padmé as a fictional character within a fictional universe and show the develop of the character within that fictional work (in this case the films primarily and the EU secondarily). I thought it might be a good idea to de-Wookieepedia her article. The structure and contents were too similar. Wookieepedia treats her biographically as if she were a real person. As a model for this article, I used the Palpatine article, listed as a "good article" on our Wikiproject website and the Hermione Granger article, which was a recommended article on the Wikipedia:Notability section. Feel free to change it back or edit it or whatever, I just thought this looked better and different from Wookieepedia. Dmoon1 00:25, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

I say excellent job! Although I made a few changes, as the Clone Wars series is EU, and Padme never had the last name "Skywalker," etc. The Wookieepedian 08:19, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! Dmoon1 08:35, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't mean to be intrusive here, but I have put a new image at the top of the article. I believe that the new one shows her in a more favourable light, the other image wasa bit dark/bleak. The new one exhibits the beautifully crafted hair designs, as well as showing a tiny bit of the scenic landscape in the background. Again, I do not mean to be rude or anything, but I honestly think the new image is a lot better. Thoughts? Cvene64 07:56, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

No problem, except there has already been several problems about the picture and Image:Amidala.png is the one that was decided upon. Scroll down to the section on "Protected" on the talk page for the discussion. Dmoon1 13:36, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Okay. I do feel it is important to have that picture in the article, so I replaced the first one in the AotC section, as it is quite similar to the lead image. The image shows the more loving side to her, whereas the majority of the images, except the wedding one, portray mainly political/battle personalities. Hope this move suits better. Cvene64 15:16, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Update of article, part 2

Several months ago I performed a major rewrite of this article. I was sort of new here and didn't know what I was doing. I have taken the liberty of editing this article to conform to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction), a guideline that did not exist when this article was rewritten in March. Notable changes:

• Out-of-universe perspective: no (birth date - death date), no biography.
• Appearances in Star Wars fiction replaces a biography with an account of the Star Wars works the character has appeared in, mainly the three films, Clone Wars series, and EU literature.
• Characteristics section describes how this character is portrayed in the fiction.
• Concept and creation details process that created the character, including the actress's portrayal and costume design.
• Trivia section is gone; incorporated into article.
• The number of images have been reduced.
• Original research has been removed. This is good information, but I could not find any independent sources to support the claims:
  • Some believe her character in the first film and accompanying sub-plot is based on Liliuokalani, the last queen of Hawaii before its annexation by the United States. Prior to the annexation, Liliuokalani traveled to Washington, D.C., to appeal to the native Hawaiians' case to Congress to no avail. There is a parallel occurrence in The Phantom Menace as described above.
  • The name Padmé is derived from the Sanskrit word for lotus flower (पद्म, padma). In Hindu mythology, the lotus is associated with creation while according to Buddhists the lotus represents purity of body, speech, and mind floating above the muddy waters of attachment and desire. Padmé's regnant name, Amidala, comes from the Sanskrit word Mandala, a Hindu and Buddhist concept that generally acts as an archetype for the sacred union of opposite energies. The latter is an obvious reference to the love between Padmé and the future Sith Lord Darth Vader.
• Copyright violations removed, mostly the list of costumes printed word-for-word from Reynolds, Star Wars Episode I: The Visual Dictionary.
• The article might need a Popular culture section, but the article is already long and I don't think this character is very influential outside of Star Wars aside from a few action figures and Halloween costumes. I may work on something soon, however.

I used a similar approach to this article as I did when I rewrote Jabba the Hutt (which passed through the FAC process very smoothly). Dmoon1 09:32, 1 August 2006 (UTC) i am going to do the

• The article may need a reference to fandom section as many people write stuff about Padme as a force ghost and reunites with Anakin at the end of episode VI(through this is wrong-only jedi can become one with the force) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.12.99.63 (talk • contribs)
  • The Star Wars WikiProject discourages fanfiction of this sort. Dmoon1 03:02, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I am going start the pop culture article now

I personally think what you did SUCKS because it doesn't make any sense. At all. I love Wookieepedia because it treats every character as though they are real, which is how I like it because I am 100% Star Wars obsessed. If you aren't obsessed with Star Wars you shouldn't change the articles, because you will wind up with a whole lot of Star-Wars obsessed enemies. I have said this for your own good. De-Wookieepediaizing this article does not make any sense at all because she is a key character (and there are LOADS of articles about non-key characters) and of course she doesn't have much impact on the outside world, because all people know about Star Wars is Darth Vader, like I did before I became obsessed.

Video games

The article lacks of a "appearance in video games" section. Is this because Amidala did not appear in one of the star wars video games? CG 08:17, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

That is correct. Dmoon1 09:35, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Not even a cameo? hard to believe :) CG 17:13, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Again, what would be the point? Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an indiscriminate collection of information. — BrianSmithson 22:32, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Once again, she does not play a significant role in any video games thus far. Dmoon1 03:02, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Queen Amidala is definitely a playable character in the final 2 levels of the Phantom Menace video game (PC/PS1) Slice13

She is also a featured character in Lego Star Wars. EVula 20:57, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Missing reference

Reference #20 has no text! Rmhermen 20:31, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Just fixed it! Dmoon1 20:47, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

The fans of Star Wars are at it again!

I heard fans are trying to put her as a force ghost in or outside fanfiction stories.But she can't become one. Why do they want her as a sprit? I don't even know! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.12.111.128 (talk • contribs)

Don't think we need a section about this. If they try to go "at it" in this article it can simply be deleted as fan-fiction nonsense. Dmoon1 00:25, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I know but why do they put it onto message boards? Why don't they keep it in fanfiction. Why do they even put her as a force ghost. She's not a force trained jedi!

I've seen a picture of Padme as a Force Ghost and it is beautiful. It is implied that she may be Force Sensitive, even if she's not a Jedi, so leave the poor Star Wars fans alone, their job is to make Star Wars better, if that's even possible!

Please discuss this tread.

Who tampered this page?

I just did a search on "padme" and found that someone has tampered the document.

You need to search Padmé, not Padme, for the search to be valid. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.206.233.143 (talk) 13:38, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I did a wiki search for "Padme" without the accent, and it redirected me to this correct page. What is the difficulty?Sdsures (talk) 17:42, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Played by more than one actor?

Someone has just added this page to Category: fictional characters played by more than one actor (or some such). Does it really belong there? Padmé herself is solely played by Natalie Portman. The Decoy Queen is (iirc) Keira Knightley playing Sabé who is pretending to be the Queen... not a different actress playing the same character. Rawling 20:37, 29 September 2006 (UTC) [EDIT: I have reverted this change for now]

Well, saying as the "portrayer" section of the article's infobox has more than one person in it, I'm not sure why this would be a surprise... EVula 20:52, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I wouldn't want to disagree with you, but I'm a very rebellious person. She IS portrayed by different people because Keira Knightley portrayed Sabe and Sabe portrayed Amidala. Also, she has other handmaidens who impersonate her, like Rose Byrne who plays Dorme for example. She also has a Stuntwoman who did some stunts, plus a stand-in to do photoshoots. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.100.204.205 (talk) 13:23, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree that Padme herself is only played by Natalie Portman. The "Queen Amidala" we first meet in The Phantom Menace is not given a first name, so until the appropriate moment in the film, there's no reason to confuse the two as being played by the same actor.Sdsures (talk) 17:47, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Padme in Last Command 5 comic

Where is it written that that is supposed to be her? And who said that that was based on Portman? --DarthBinky 19:01, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Although I'm quite convinced what the article says is true, to maintain the FA status of this article I'm moving that paragraph and accompanying image here until proper citations can be found. If anyone knows of a reference to this in a reliable source, please help out with this. Dmoon1 19:44, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

The first appearance of Padmé Amidala in Star Wars Expanded Universe literature is Mike Baron's 1998 comic book adaptation of Timothy Zahn's novel The Last Command (1993). Set five years after the events of Return of the Jedi, the comic features a portrait of Padmé hanging in the Imperial Palace on Coruscant‹The template Talkfact is being considered for merging.› . The portrait has nothing to do with the plot, but is an Easter egg in the background scenery. The comic adaptation was released a year before the premier of The Phantom Menace. The image is based on Natalie Portman's likeness‹The template Talkfact is being considered for merging.› .

Padmé Amidala first appeared in Star Wars fiction in a portrait from Mike Baron's 1998 comic book adaptation of The Last Command.

The decoy

What I don't get about Padme, which it'd be nice if someone could explain, is why on earth she took her own name as a disguise, or why anyone else fell for it. I mean, when she was crowned Queen Amidala, did the entire galaxy forget that she had been born Padme Naberrie, enabling her successfully to disguise herself as a handmaiden under that name? Or was Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan's research into their mission to the system so lax that it didn't even involve figuring out the name of the Queen they were supposed to help mediate a dispute with? It all seems a bit odd to me. Lordrosemount 00:13, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Padme used her real name so that her own people and friends would know who she is when she is disguise. Also, most people did forget, and the Jedi Order and the Trade Federation didn't know because it was none of their buisiness at that time. Also, Tatooine is not part of the Galactic Republic, so they don't know about all of the rulers and politicians in it, and she used it mainly as a disguise in Tatooine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.100.204.205 (talk) 13:25, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

When I first saw The Phantom Menace, I got the impression that "Amidala" was just the given and/or surname of the Queen, and that was the only name used for her - before the decoy thing was revealed. Anyone else get that impression? After all, the suffix "A" in many languages denotes a feminine aspect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sdsures (talk • contribs) 17:49, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Padmé

Why Padmé? They already have Sabé, Yané, Rabé, Radé, Lané, Katé, Shaté, Malré, and Tremé. Names in Star Wars tend to be unique. Why can't they have applied that to Padmé? Anakin Skywalker is a great name. Padmé isn`t. Padmé`s sister has a great, unique name as well. Were they making up names out of the blue to save time? Also, Padmé`s daughter has a great name too. And let`s not forget Luke. All good names! Why, Padmé is a great character and my favourite so far. Why her? Gnmng Jreck

It's because George Lucas has no imagination and stole everything he used from the history books, other cultures and other religions. There is not a single thing in any Star Wars film that can be said to be completely otiginal.Sdsures (talk) 17:51, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

I think it's a great name and you'll soon find out why. You watch your manners! Sincerly, the real Queen Padmé Amidala (talk) 14:24, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Manners? I was simply stating the facts, and the facts are, Padmé does not have an original name. Would you like to visit an alien? Talk to her too! >>> (talk)

I take it back. Padmé is somewhat of a cool name. Talk to Gnmng Jreck here >>> (talk) 15:07, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Possible candidate for removal?

I'm not trying to be "that guy", but I thought it'd be better if I came and said something before someone just ups and nominates it. It's well-made, but incomplete, lacking any section discussing the character in popular culture, or the character's critical reception. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 16:48, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

So somebody should go and do that. But it won't be me, as I do not have the required expertise.Sdsures (talk) 17:53, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

The Gallery

I have removed the gallery and replaced it with two instances of {{double image}}. Galleries are not for fair-use images and the double image template can perform what is asked for here. Furthermore, the gallery does not "place the images together next to the text" as claimed. It was several paragraphs below the text (albeit in the same sub-section).

Regardless, are the the fair use images used appropriately? Evidently, they are very similar to the displayed Mongolian fashion and the Grand Duchess photos, and as such by looking at these photos, one would not need photos of Amidala's costumes to imagine the style or similarity. Jappalang (talk) 22:56, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

No, but "imagining" the similarity is hardly a substitute for illustrating it. Powers ^T 18:23, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Fair use images are not for pure "illustration", see WP:NFCC. If "free replacements", either by text or "free" images can be found (or a combination of both), the copyrighted images have no ground to be used. Jappalang (talk) 01:00, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

On the contrary, images are exactly how we illustrate topics. I believe the guideline you're referring to prohibits "decoration", not "illustration". A prohibition against illustration would eliminate 99% of the non-logo non-free media on Wikipedia. To address your more solid point, an image of the Mongolian dress plus the text "Amidala's outfit looks kinda like this" is not even remotely a legitimate replacement for an actual image of the outfit. Powers ^T 15:41, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Decoration also means pure illustrative purposes that can be explained in terms of words or free pictures (see WP:NFCC, FACs, FFDs, etc). There are "free" photos of her costumes (Mike Godwin ruled that costumes do not qualify for infringe on the fashion designer's copyright, hence only the copyrights of the photographers are considered). Jappalang (talk) 02:13, 18 October 2009 (UTC) (corrected Godwin's opinion) Jappalang (talk) 03:16, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

As long as you're abandoning your original claim that pictures of the costumes are unnecessary, I will happily concede that the costumes could be photographed and the photographs released under a free license. Powers ^T 00:11, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

You have misunderstood my intent. My stance is that the fair use images fail the rationales laid down in WP:NFCC. They might be helpful as illustrations but the images used have "free" replacements, thereby failing criterion 1. "Failing to comply with NFCC" is quite different from "unnecessary". Jappalang (talk) 03:16, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

You said "by looking at these photos, one would not need photos of Amidala's costumes to imagine the style or similarity." I contend that statement is not correct. Have I misunderstood somewhere? Powers ^T 14:28, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, although having pictures of Amidala's costumes would help, they fail the WP:NFCC criterion 1—words and a free photo of the base costume are capable replacements; that is my point and different from calling photos to illustrate Amidala's style of fashion "unnecessary". Jappalang (talk) 05:28, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

I apologize, but I don't see the difference, and at any rate, I disagree that "words and a free photo of the base costume" sufficient, if by "base costume" you mean a picture depicting the foreign fashion style that inspired Amidala's costumes. Powers ^T 16:58, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Etymology

What does this mean:

"Padma" is Sanskrit for "lotus flower", and "Amidala" is the spiritual manifestation.

Okay, so "padma" is Sanskrit for "lotus flower", but what is this bit about "Amidala" being "the spiritual manifestation"? Of what?
— User:Cymydog Naakka 20:40, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Apparently the spiritual manifestation of the Buddha called Amitābha. I doubt that the following observation (speculation?), which might have inspired the remark, can be used for the purposes of this article, but I'd like to point it out nevertheless (emphasis in the original):

Star Wars: Episode I, The Phantom Menace, 20th Century Fox/LucasFilm, 1999, A Response to Critics

Further religious overtones of Phantom include Queen Amidala's name, which looks suspiciously like the Japanese name of the Buddha Amida (Sanskrit Amitabha), and this suspicion is reinforced when we realize that the name of her alter ego, Padme, is Sanskrit for "Lotus" (in the locative case), taken out of the famous mantra Om mane padme hum, "the Jewel is in the Lotus."

Kelley L. Ross, Ph.D.

--Florian Blaschke (talk) 10:08, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Ben Solo edits

Users have disagreed on the meaning of Wikipedia: Spoiler, but it's clearly stated although we do not go out of our way to warn people of spoilers, the information must be warranted. The information posted about Kylo Ren has no purpose in the header of this page, and I consider it's addition vandalism. It's not deemed worthy to be included in the body of the article, so why is it in the header? The header exists to give an overview of the article, not as a place of inclusion for information which is otherwise deemed too impertinent to be included in the body of the article. --IronMaidenRocks (talk) 13:16, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Distinction between Legends and Canon content should be made clear.

This article seems to be a mess, especially under the "Television Series" section (which should be named otherwise, as it includes details from novels and comics as well). There is no distinction between current canon and legends, which may cause significant confusion to the general reader. This needs to be cleaned up. Perhaps it would be better to have a section for The Clone Wars, and then another for Legends. There is also the question of how much of Legends should even be touched, as FANCRUFT should be a concern. ETRossier (talk) 19:20, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Padmé Amidala. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050630014030/http://www.starwars.com/episode-ii/bts/profile/f20020827/indexp2.html to http://www.starwars.com/episode-ii/bts/profile/f20020827/indexp2.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041023023458/http://www.starwars.com/episode-i/bts/production/f19990501/indexp4.html to http://www.starwars.com/episode-i/bts/production/f19990501/indexp4.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051202224046/http://starwars.com/episode-ii/bts/profile/f20020827/index.html to http://www.starwars.com/episode-ii/bts/profile/f20020827/index.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060718161716/http://movie-reviews.colossus.net/movies/s/sw99.html to http://movie-reviews.colossus.net/movies/s/sw99.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060613211511/http://www.boxoffice.com/scripts/fiw.dll?GetReview&where=Name&terms=STAR+WARS%3A+EPISODE+I--THE+PHANTOM+MENAC to http://www.boxoffice.com/scripts/fiw.dll?GetReview&where=Name&terms=STAR+WARS%3A+EPISODE+I--THE+PHANTOM+MENAC
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060628203757/http://www1.villagevoice.com/film/0520%2Chalter1%2C63970%2C20.html to http://www.villagevoice.com/film/0520%2Chalter1%2C63970%2C20.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060807033557/http://www.starwars.com/bio/iainmccaig.html to http://www.starwars.com/bio/iainmccaig.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060910005601/http://www.starwars.com/bio/dermotpower.html to http://www.starwars.com/bio/dermotpower.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060807033520/http://www.starwars.com/bio/trishabiggar.html to http://www.starwars.com/bio/trishabiggar.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060626183148/http://www.starwars.com/community/event/museum/news20050915.html to http://www.starwars.com/community/event/museum/news20050915.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:55, 30 April 2017 (UTC)