Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Star Wars/Archive 10

Archive 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

AFD of Death Troopers

Death Troopers has been nominated for deletion, please go to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Death Troopers (novel) and give some input. Cerebellum (talk) 16:18, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Complete rewrite of Battle droid necessary

I started cutting the OR, but I realized in between all of the OR and guide content, lies descriptions that may be of some use. So I think there needs to be a rewrite of the article to salvage what I think could be a quality article.

But speaking of which, I'm finding, including in featured articles (Palpatine, Padmé Amidala) that they're not quite up to current standards. I think some work needs to be done to "save" them. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 17:50, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Chronology of Star Wars up for deletion again.

Chronology of Star Wars is up for deletion again. Why doesn't a series with this many articles have its own AFD listing to alert people when something is up for deletion? Dream Focus 17:47, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

There's no reason you can't create one. I'd ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Deletion sorting if they think it'd be appropriate. Powers ^T 19:54, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and Wikipedia:Article alerts might help this project keep track of things that happen to articles under its remit. Powers ^T 19:55, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Padmé Amidala featured article review

I have nominated Padmé Amidala for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 05:10, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Okay, seriously, this is a lark.

I've grown pretty tired of the non-response from this project. Every time I leave a notice of the quality of an article, that notice seems to be relevant months from now. So just so you know, I'm going to merge all low-importance Star Wars articles that do not assert notability. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 21:33, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

A better way to do this might be to make one central listing here, where people are more likely to see it. FYI, I approve of your merger of [[Chiss]. The Wordsmith^Communicate 21:40, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Sorry if it sounded a bit rude, but it was just a bit of a bother how little is done. Even Luke Skywalker has nothing in the way of out-of-universe info; if I had no idea who he was, I honestly would say he qualifies for deletion, or a merge if he's lucky. I hope to get some time to improve some articles, but my plate is full already. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 21:44, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Welcome to the realities of a volunteer project. On subject areas that have their own wikis, such as Star Wars, a lot of normally dedicated contributors direct their efforts there instead of here. That doesn't make the subject area less worthy of coverage, but it does mean that some tasks go undone. I advise patience; there is no deadline. Powers ^T 14:33, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

And, beyond that, the nuisance is that the cruftier an article is, the easier it is to table it and deal with something more quickly and easily salvageable. Still, there's been some good progress on those larger articles, e.g. Boba Fett and Han Solo, and the vehicle articles -- imperfect, maybe even glacial, but progress nevertheless. Ditto the bit about the deadline. --EEMIV (talk) 14:42, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, but I just don't see a powerful effort to fix these things. I mean, it should be expected that leaving notices of an article's quality, especially in the way of Padmé Amidala, Jabba the Hutt, and Palpatine, should get a proper response, when in fact all they get is, well, people discussing the most trivial details of an article versus whether it could be considered an example of Wikipedia's finest. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 04:10, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Kudos on Fett and Solo, though. But on the subject of Fett, it definitely needs more reception; it relies far too heavily on one man's opinion. Perhaps we could use what he says less frequently? But I digress, I'ma make Watto a GA. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 04:14, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

As I said, most of the really dedicated Star Wars fans are over on Wookieepedia. This is not a very active project from the looks of things. Powers ^T 14:09, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, that does seem to be the case, that it does. However, the "there's no time limit" argument doesn't ALWAYS fly - I mean, if it did, one could protect an article for an extended period of time to avoid it being deleted. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 18:38, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Also, I totally propose dropping the Star Wars template. It doesn't seem very good to use them, as they are strongly in-universe. It should do what video game characters do, and have a universal template for characters in film/books/etc. as opposed to using its own series template. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 19:20, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

If you mean the Talk page template, that's not going anywhere. All WikiProjects have templates that go on talk pages to note that an article falls within the scope of their wikiproject. Its how we organize things here. The Wordsmith^Communicate 03:31, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

No, I meant the character infobox. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 03:39, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Also, the list needs strong cleanup. I'm working on it at User:New Age Retro Hippie/List of Star Wars characters, but a big problem is not knowing who's notable ENOUGH for inclusion. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 08:51, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

In general, anyone linked from more than one article. Have to be careful not to orphan valid redirects and such. =) Powers ^T 20:12, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

True enough, but I mean, doesn't it seem excessive to have Gonk Droid and 4-LOM on the lists even though they're not even vaguely important?

Anyway, I'm proposing we do lists of characters like so: One list for characters established in the films, one list for characters established in various books and comics, and one for video games. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 22:13, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

They may not be important, but they might still be notable for reasons other than importance to the plot. Powers ^T 01:44, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, but we can't include them because they could in theory be notable. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 02:34, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm not saying we should. I'm just saying that it may not be excessive to have them on the lists even though they're not particularly important. Powers ^T 01:29, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

I don't think breaking it up into the medium in which they first appear is an especially great idea. A simple alphabetical break-up would be more reasonable. Before any of that, though, the list needs ongoing clean-up. There's a long-standing but nary-responded-to thread on that list's talk page asking for suggestions about inclusion criteria. --EEMIV (talk) 02:51, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Book-class

Since several Wikipedia-Books are SW-related, could this project adopt the book-class? This would really help WikiProject Wikipedia-Books, as the WP SW people can oversee books like Star Wars episodes and Star Wars: Jedi Knight much better than we could as far as merging, deletion, content, and such are concerned. Eventually there probably will be a "Books for discussion" process, so that would be incorporated in the Article Alerts.

There's an article in last week's Signpost if you aren't familiar with Wikipedia-Books and classes in general. If you have any questions just ask. Thanks. Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 03:36, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

For those who don't know much about what books are about, essentially Wikipedia-Books are collections of articles, which you can arrange in a certain order, separated by chapter an so on. This compilation, meant to be read like a book, can then be downloaded electronically, or ordered in print. See this example PDF (Although this one doesn't have any chapters yet). Here's one with chapters, although it's not SW-related.)

You can also check WP:Books and Help:Books for more info. Or contact me. (I'll watch this page for a while though). Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 03:36, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

cast members

I think its a good idea to have an article like List_of_Harry_Potter_cast_members for the star wars films. Its done quite well on some pages, such as that Harry Potter FA-List. I think it would work rather nicely. Yeah? IAmTheCoinMan (talk) 20:15, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

This exists already - List of Star Wars films cast members. Its not in great shape though. --Torsodog^Talk 19:52, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Galen Marek his own article?

Is it possible for an article about Galen Marek? I mean being the main character in Force Unleashed and the upcomming Force Unleashed II, having been featured in Soul Calibur IV and revolving alot around Darth Vader's life? --Victory93 (talk) 23:17, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Are there any secondary sources that discuss the character? If they exist and you can provide them, I think we might be able to have one. The Wordsmith^Communicate 23:19, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

The character currently is sufficiently covered at Star Wars: The Force Unleashed and Star Wars: The Force Unleashed (project). Like so many EU characters, he has no notability outside the significant works (and, really, only one significant work: the game) in which he appears. Unlike e.g. Master Chief (Halo), he's the protagonist of a merely mediocre game; popularity among the Star Wars fanboy community isn't going to move into culture beyond the games themselves, i.e. lead to significant third-party coverage separate from the works, warranting a separate article. I suspect he'll continue to be covered as part of the overall coverage of works in which he appears. --EEMIV (talk) 23:58, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Mehhh, I think we should focus on figuring out what articles DON'T warrant articles before we move onto new ones. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 00:48, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Image Problem

There has been a recent problem with regards to a specific image, Image:Spirits.jpg, which has Fair use rationale, being replaced by exactly the same image, Image:Spirits 1.jpg, which does not have FUR. The FUR image has been replaced in the articles Force (Star Wars), Anakin Skywalker, and Star Wars Episode VI: Return of the Jedi by Xnacional (talk · contribs). As I understand it, the image with the FUR should be used. --The Taerkasten (talk) 22:51, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

They're not exactly the same, one has Hayden as Anakin and the other has Sebastian. IMO the Hayden one belongs in Star Wars Ep VI: ROTJ because the text surrounding it is talking about the changes that were made to the original cut, particularly, the replacement of Sebastian with Hayden. –xeno^talk 22:53, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

My mistake, they aren't exactly the same. I guess I oversaw that fact. The problem remains that Spirits 1.jpg doesn't have a fair-use rationale. --The Taerkasten (talk) 22:58, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Boba Fett

I've done some significant rewrites and expansions to that article (the latest was the second of two waves; did a big overhaul in the fall-ish). I'm thinking about putting it up for GA status, but would appreciate some eyeballs from this group first. --EEMIV (talk) 21:42, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm no fan of the lead image. I don't think using a fan-made costume is good to demonstrate the character. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 22:08, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

I second that opinion. The infobox image on Fett's Wookieepedia article is a much better substitute.--Eh! Steve (talk) 01:33, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot announcement

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:58, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Tools to help your project with unreferenced Biographies of living people

List of cleanup articles for your project

If you don't already have this and are interested in creating a list of articles which need cleanup for your wikiproject see: Cleanup listings A list of examples is here

Moving unreferenced blp articles to a special "incubation pages"

If you are interested in moving unreferenced blp articles to a special "incubation page", contact me, User talk:Ikip

Watchlisting all unreferenced articles

If you are interested in watchlisting all of the unreferenced articles once you install Cleanup_listings, contact me, User talk:Ikip

Ikip 02:17, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Request for comment on Biographies of living people

Hello Wikiproject! Currently there is a discussion which will decide whether wikipedia will delete 49,000 articles about a living person without references, here:

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

Since biographies of living people covers so many topics, nearly all wikiproject topics will be effected.

The two opposing positions which have the most support is:

1. supports the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, User:Jehochman
2. opposes the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, except in limited circumstances, User:Collect

Comments are welcome. Keep in mind that by default, editor's comments are hidden. Simply press edit next to the section to add your comment.

Please keep in mind that at this point, it seems that editors support deleting unreferenced BLP articles if they are not sourced, so your project may want to source these articles as soon as possible. See the next, message, which may help.

Tools to help your project with unreferenced Biographies of living people

List of cleanup articles for your project

If you don't already have this and are interested in creating a list of articles which need cleanup for your wikiproject see: Cleanup listings A list of examples is here

Moving unreferenced blp articles to a special "incubation pages"

If you are interested in moving unreferenced blp articles to a special "incubation page", contact me, User talk:Ikip

Watchlisting all unreferenced articles

If you are interested in watchlisting all of the unreferenced articles once you install Cleanup_listings, contact me, User talk:Ikip

Ikip 02:23, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Star Wars sequel trilogy

I've noticed that there has been continuing addition and removal of the link to the Star Wars sequel trilogy on the {{Star Wars}} template, and others. Since there has been quite a few deletion discussions on this article, including whether this article should exist or not, I am wondering where the article stands with this project. Should there be something done about it, and if so what? --The Taerkasten (talk) 20:38, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I think that if it is to be included in the template, it needs some kind of note with the name. Saying "Sequel trilogy" makes it sound like a reality. Needs to say "Rumored sequel trilogy" or "Sequel trilogy (rumored)" or something similar. Nothing wrong with saying "rumors" if such rumors are verifiable in reliable sources. Erik (talk) 19:48, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

I would say "Possible", "Proposed", etc. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 09:06, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

It used to say "Proposed" but EEMIV didn't like it. Powers ^T 18:47, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, to call it "Sequel trilogy" is too suggestive; we need some kind of name that tells readers that it's merely proposed. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 18:48, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Pop culture sections

What is the projects feeling on pop culture sections? I know, SW is pop culture, but I'm referring to things like the pop culture section recently added to Tatoonie, which is mainly a bunch of mentions from cartoons etc. Niteshift36 (talk) 20:49, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Bulleted lists of "In popular culture" are generally useless crap, and should be supplanted by a broad but not indiscriminate explanation of the topic's reception/impact. Big lists of popculture trivia are perhaps better cut-and-pasted to the talk page to put in editors' view to prompt them to construct something more useful. --EEMIV (talk) 21:13, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Specie Classification of characters

I notice that characters appearing in the movies without obvious 'alien-like' body/face features, tend to get classified as Species Human (e.g. Luke Skywalker etc). As the Star Wars Universe is famously set 'A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away', how can this classification be justified? The Human wiki page refers to us, ie. Homo-sapiens, native to planet Earth and is discordant with the series' extra galactic frameworkl? If this is the wrong place to discuss this (or if it has already been discussed) please advise. Trinkella (talk) 09:26, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Requested move warning

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Based on offsite collusion, a comment I left on his talk page, as well as a reasoning I used to oppose a similar extensive and controversial move, Heavydata (talk · contribs) will probably soon be requesting that every Star Wars article that uses the naming format "Star Wars Episode #: Subtitle" to "Star Wars: Episode # Subtitle" because the official Star Wars website uses the latter name formatting and Wikipedia uses the former in order to make a point.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 10:52, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

I NEVER said I was going to move ALL of the pages, or even one of them. I said I was THINKING of it, but then I read this [1] and realized that you all reached a consensus already. And how is that Power Rangers move controversial? You're the only one here making a big deal out of it. Stop being a tattle tale. Heavydata (talk) 11:06, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

It's a controversial move because you are requesting that every single page that has "Power Rangers:" in the title have the ":" removed from it. That's over 50 pages. Also, it's considered bad etiquette to go to other pages to continue an argument.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 11:22, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Then why did you post that stupid "warning" here, when I said I decided that I wasn't even going to do anything? Heavydata (talk) 11:28, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Jesus. Both of you, please: "Move along, move along." --EEMIV (talk) 11:32, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

• I could care less what happens to Power Rangers articles, but I think that the suggested change in the Star Wars one would serve no purpose. Niteshift36 (talk) 14:04, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

It doesn't seem like anything is going to come of this except more accusations, so i'm archiving it now. These aren't the droids you're looking for, move along, etc. The Wordsmith^Communicate 16:11, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Category for people

Category:Star Wars has several sub categories; but none for ...people (which could include writers and crew) or ...actors. I think it should. Anyone disagree? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 15:11, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure the cat. guidelines advise against creating "people associated with movie/show X" cats -- except for super-head-honchos -- because actors, writers, etc. would have a billion cats. --EEMIV (talk) 15:12, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Notification regarding Wikipedia-Books

Hadronic Matter An overview

An example of a book cover, taken from Book:Hadronic Matter

As detailed in last week's Signpost, WikiProject Wikipedia books is undertaking a cleanup all Wikipedia books. Particularly, the {{saved book}} template has been updated to allow editors to specify the default covers of the books. Title, subtitle, cover-image, and cover-color can all be specified, and an HTML preview of the cover will be generated and shown on the book's page (an example of such a cover is found on the right). Ideally, all books in Category:Book-Class Star Wars articles should have covers.

If you need help with the {{saved book}} template, or have any questions about books in general, see Help:Books, Wikipedia:Books, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia-Books, or ask me on my talk page. Also feel free to join WikiProject Wikipedia-Books, as we need all the help we can get.

This message was delivered by User:EarwigBot, at 22:33, 7 April 2010 (UTC), on behalf of Headbomb. Headbomb probably isn't watching this page, so if you want him to reply here, just leave him a message on his talk page. EarwigBot ^{(owner • talk)} 22:33, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Celebration V

Anyone else going to Celebration V? Niteshift36 (talk) 01:36, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

• Nobody? Niteshift36 (talk) 23:28, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Star Wars: The Clone Wars episodes

FYI, I've redirected all the Clone Wars (2008 TV series) articles to the List of episodes. They were overwhelmingly laden with "trivia and details" sections, OR, giant swaths of plot summary ... and nothing about critical reaction, development, etc. etc. --EEMIV (talk) 03:15, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Moons and planets notable I think for an article

There are some moons and planets that in recent years might be notable enough for an article based on their appearances through out Star Wars media and their notability amongst fans. They are:

• Dantooine
• Kessel —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.59.22.91 (talk) 08:30, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
• Korriban
• Nar Shadda
• Ord Mantell
• Sullust

--Victory93 (talk) 08:28, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Wampa

Could someone please take a look at this article? It has no citations aside from primary sources, though there should be more to say about it given the Special Edition scene and the claims in the article regarding deleted/unfilmed scenes. See this edit in particular for some of what needs to be addressed. I think it's all verifiable, so it would be a waste to just wipe the slate clean. Cheers, postdlf (talk) 23:13, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

The Empire Strikes Back

I have nominated Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.--The Taerkasten (talk) 18:02, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

This article has now been delisted from FA status. Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 04:56, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

A New Hope - FAR

I have nominated Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.--The Taerkasten (talk) 18:14, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

This article is now delisted. JJ98 (Talk) 02:45, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

And due to all the delistings. I think it's about time to discuss how these articles can get better so they can at least renominate it to Good article status. Any thoughts ? − Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 20:40, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes. I would suggest addressing the FAR concerns for this article and also try to replace unreliable sources with more reliable sources (i.e. news websites, film coverage books). If those are dead links, they can be archived as well. Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 01:49, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

September 2010 Roll Call

Please sign your name and date below with four tildes if you are still with us.

1. Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 01:55, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
2. --The Taerkasten (talk) 20:32, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
3. Niteshift36 (talk) 19:31, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
4. Canon Law Junkie §§§ Talk 20:19, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
5. --EEMIV (talk) 21:15, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
6. SCΛRECROW 07:23, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
7. − Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 00:01, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Star Wars articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Star Wars articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of November, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 23:40, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Stormtrooper

FYI, Imperial Stormtrooper has been requested to be renamed, see Talk:Imperial stormtrooper. 76.66.200.95 (talk) 02:35, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Updating project pages

The things to do list has not been updated in a while, as well as the index page. I suggest we update it to its current status, given the fact that some of the articles have been deleted and merged as well as delisted from GA and FA status. Any comments or objections? Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 01:54, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

I wholeheartedly agree. I also think this project could use a bit of a revival and revamp. Easier said than done, of course. At least it appears to be more active than us over at WP:HORROR--The Taerkasten (talk) 20:49, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Star Wars Music articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Star Wars Music articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Sunday, November 14th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of November, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

If you have already provided feedback, we deeply appreciate it. For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 16:37, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Invitation to participation!

Hello!

As you may be aware, the Wikimedia Foundation is gearing up for our annual fundraiser. We want to hit our goal and hit it as soon as possible, so that we can focus on Wikipedia's tenth anniversary on January 15 and our new project: Contributions. I'm posting across these Wikiprojects to engage you, the community, to work to build Wikipedia by finance but also by content. We seek donations not only financially, but by collaboration in building content. You can find more information in Philippe Beaudette's memo to the communities here.

Visit the Contribution project page and the Fundraising page to find out how you can help us support and spread free knowledge. Keegan, Wikimedia Fundraiser 2010 (talk) 05:47, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Starkiller - His Own Article

I've recently been toying with the idea of given Galen Marek, better known as Starkiller, his own article. After a very quick google search for 'top characters starkiller' I found these sources on the first page: http://www.ugo.com/games/star-wars-expanded-universe-characters-top-50 http://uk.ign.com/star-wars-characters/34.html http://www.xbox360achievements.org/news-1036-Top-5-Characters-of-2008.html

While the current sources may not really be enough to establish notability, I think the possibility of him having an article is something we should consider. Harry Blue5 (talk) 21:39, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

There's also this. Might be worth seeing if any of these are worth anything. Harry Blue5 (talk) 22:20, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

For convienece, so people don't have to search few the IGN articles in order to find Starkiller pages: [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]

Sam Wither also commented on the role here.

Note that hardly any of these will be usable. I'll try to find some other non-IGN sources soon. Harry Blue5 (talk) 23:03, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

The Xbox Achievements article is not a reliable source. But nonetheless, I can imagine that it would work as an article. Google Books, Google News, and the Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Sources' Google search are all great ways to find reception. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 07:37, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm going to start work on an aritcle here soon but right now I can't. I know that Starkiller is currently a disamibuation, but would Galen be the primary topic? I'd prefer to call the article Starkiller rather than Galen Marek, mostly because most sources refer to him as Starkiller. Harry Blue5 (talk) 13:25, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Starkiller would be the appropriate heading, since the TFU [game] developers made the deliberate choice not to give him a name. --EEMIV (talk) 15:50, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

I've started the article in my namespace, and its going well so far. I'm going to work on "Reception" and "Concept and creation" before I move onto all that plot/appearances/biography stuff, because the Reception and C&C bits are by far more important in a Wikipedia article, IMO. I remember something about there being action figures released at the time of Star Wars: The Force Unleashed's release, but my memory is a bit hazy. So hopefully I'll be able to make a "Merchandising" section if I'm lucky. Or at least a short sentence somewhere in the article that helps notability. Harry Blue5 (talk) 15:37, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

My overall hesitation about a standalone article on the character is whether the subject has received significant coverage independent of his game appearances. Strikes me that most of the commentary on him is within the context of the immediate game in which he appears, with no response/discussion of Starkiller as a "standalone" idea. Finding significant commentary on the character itself, and not a blurb within a broader review of e.g. a novel or game, strikes me as the hardest part and biggest barrier to justifying a standalone piece. But, if the material is there, then it's a swell idea. --EEMIV (talk) 15:50, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

I was a bit hesistant myself, but I thought there'd be enough coverage for the character. What do you think about the article so far? Harry Blue5 (talk) 18:47, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Looks good; I think it'd be appropriate to migrated it to Starkiller. --EEMIV (talk) 01:02, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

I'll just add some last minute touches (grammar, etc.) and then I'll replace the disambig page with my own. Harry Blue5 (talk) 10:56, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

All done. It ain't perfect, but it'll do. The "Character history" section could be done a bit better, since I really just got Star Wars: The Force Unleashed#Cast and characters and rewrote it so I could include the sources it has. There's no mention of Star Wars: The Force Unleashed II yet, so that probably needs fixing. Harry Blue5 (talk) 17:11, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Star Wars galaxy

The article Star Wars galaxy is nominated for deletion. You may nominate on whether it should be kept or not here. − Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 18:22, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Solo family

Because of no non-primary sources, and because there was an article on the Solo family already there, I decided to quickly merged Jaina Solo and Anakin Solo into the article. I'm planning on doing the same to Jacen Solo after I've cleaned up Anakin. What's everyone's thoughts on this? Harry Blue5 (talk) 21:18, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

I like that approach but if stuff like that is going to happen in that article it might probably should be done on Skywalker family too. − Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 17:33, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm planning on doing a similar thing to Skywalker family, but I started with Solo family since I thought there'd be less opposition to such a thing. Plus, I was worried the characters might get only a sentence if merged into anywhere else, which is a bit extreme. They probably don't warrant an article, but probably more than a sentence. I also didn't want Solo family to remain the way it was, since it was just a non-notable family list. Harry Blue5 (talk) 20:20, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

One reason why I mentioned it is because the Shmi Skywalker character used to have her own article until AFD'd. Probably more better information of a character like that could be done being merged there than the low informative List of Star Wars characters. − Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 20:25, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm going to put Shmi in Skywalker family now, actually. I don't think they'll be too many objections for or problem caused by that. Harry Blue5 (talk) 10:56, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

All done, for now. I'm going to put the merge notice on the talk page, but I've got to go right now. The article probably needs a bit of a clean up now, though. Harry Blue5 (talk) 11:07, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

January 2011 Roll Call

Please sign below with four tildes if you are still with us.

1. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 04:53, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
2. With greatly reduced time recently to devote to Wikipedia :-/ --EEMIV (talk) 13:22, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
3. Harry Blue5 (talk) 11:06, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
4. SCΛRECROW 11:39, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
5. TÆRkast (Communicate) 17:20, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
6. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 15:19, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Ulic Qel-Droma and Exar Kun

I redirected Ulic Qel-Droma and Exar Kun to List of Star Wars characters, because they didn't show any assertion of real-world notability. I feel I should tell the project about it, in case anyone disagrees with my act and wants to restore the articles, preferably with reliable third-party sources that demonstrate notability. Harry Blue5 (talk) 10:14, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Darth Malak and/or KotOR characters

I've started a discussion about making a Darth Malak or Characters of the Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic series. The discussion's here. Feel free to comment. Harry Blue5 (talk) 20:19, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

List of changes in Star Wars re-releases

The above article has been tagged as containing original research, since 2009. Although some cites have been added, these appear to relate mostly to a single section of the article. Is there any way these can be cited? As it stands the bulk of the article could be deleted as long tagged OR. WikiuserNI (talk) 23:26, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

I could see it being salvaged for a general criticism of Star Wars, which I could imagine being an interesting article to write. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 03:59, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

IIRC, there's been much critism about the whole re-releases thing George Lucas did, so it'd be good to include that somehow, but I'm not sure if any of that has been from reliable sources like IGN or just general fan complaining that happens whenever something happens to anything. Harry Blue5 (talk) 13:08, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Jediism

Hey, all. I just put in a request for input on Jediism (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch about how to approach a religion-related article, and figured I'd post a similar flag here. Regardless of experience with articles associated with belief systems, there are some sticky points at the article and its talk page on general implementation of policy & guidelines, e.g WP:RS and WP:EL. Any input and ideas about how to move this article forward would be appreciated. --EEMIV (talk) 22:06, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

List of Star Wars characters

A discussion's been started about trimming or splitting the list of Star Wars characters. The dicussion's here, for those interested. Harry Blue5 (talk) 23:13, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi?!

We are Korean. We made a Korean project of Star Wars. - Berebere2011 (talk) 01:14, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

List of Star Wars books

So i was thinking that the List of Star Wars books needs a complete overhaul so it is sorted by release date and not in universe era's. So what i was thinking was table like this:

Novel	Author	Release	Era	Timeline?
The Clone Wars	Karen Traviss	2008	The Clone Wars	21 BBY
Clone Wars Gambit: Stealth	Karen Miller	2010	The Clone Wars	21 BBY

There would be a seperate section at the top to explain the era's and the timeline (not sure if this is the best name for it). Thoughts on what could be added or changed? Salavat (talk) 11:47, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

As this encyclopedia is supposed to describe things from a real-world perspective, using either release dates or alphabetical order is indeed preferable. Of course, with sortable tables, the fan-centric internal chronology can be mostly maintained if some sort of numbering of eras is given, i.e., instead of writing out "Clone Wars", giving it the number 3 (or which ever number it is in the official order) with a corresponding key. oknazevad (talk) 03:48, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Id like to keep the in universe year (eg 21 BBY). Is 'Timeline' the correct header to use or there a more appropriate header that anyone can think of? Salavat (talk) 06:44, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

"Setting" might be a better header, but I think that'd work in principle. The hard part would be ensuring that the ABY and BBY years don't get mixed together. In a straight alphonetical sort, as the tables do, "21 BBY" and "21 ABY" would be next to each other, which wouldn't work. Putting the BBY or ABY first would take car of that, but that's not the way Star Wars dates are usually written. I wonder if there's a a way to alter the sorting that would work. We may need to find some technical help on this. oknazevad (talk) 15:48, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Well it's definitely the better idea than what's already done. Be bold and go for it I say. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 19:27, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok well ill start as soon as i can, probably work on it in user space. To fix the sorting issue you would just use the <nowiki[[]]</nowiki> template shouldnt be to hard as long as BBY dates go before ABY right. Salavat (talk) 14:42, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

So I started the list over at User:Salavat/Sandbox2 but I have a couple of questions. Does anyone know how to sort the dates correctly. Currently im using the sort template, {{sort|–1003|1,003 BBY}}, but the problem with that is that it sorts 1003 BBY as the lowest value were as 3653 BBY is a high value? Salavat (talk) 07:11, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok so ive come up with a system that makes sorting work. Ive started as low as a value of 10,000 BBY which is equal to zero. So for any BBY date you take 10,000 and take away the date, eg for 44 BBY you use: 10,000 - 44 = 09956 as its sortable value. For ABY dates you add 10,000, eg 44 ABY: 10,000 + 44 = 10044. I understand that the earliest date on that list is 5000 BBY but I wanted to make room just in case. If someone can come up with a more simplified system please share. Salavat (talk) 12:52, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Template:Star Wars major characters

There's a discussion on Template talk:Star Wars major characters about repurposing it to be just about characters with articles rather than "major characters" with articles, and whether Ahsoka Tano should be under "Expanded Universe", among other things. Harry Blue5 (talk) 00:10, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Darth Bane

I've gone ahead and redirected Darth Bane to the list, since no notability was established (and I could fine none apart from one source). If anyone can find some sources for him, I welcome them to go ahead and restore the article. Otherwise, Wookieepedia is the sanctuary for characters like this. Harry Blue5 (talk) 18:08, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

'Twas reverted. Fair enough, he's a pretty major character in the EU and I post these things here to see if anyone has objetions. Right then, me and Jhenderson are doing source searching, anyone's free to help. Harry Blue5 (talk) 19:18, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Yeah sorry about that. Even though I feel strongly about the merge, I do feel the article is in poor shape and imperfect. Just all that information in the article is better than the information the list article would have. And if we find reliable sources perhaps that can help a little bit. :) Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 20:46, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

GA nomination of Starkiller

I've nominated Starkiller for GA status. Here's hoping. (If any of you would review it, that'd be just great...) Harry Blue5 (talk) 20:56, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Yay, it passed. Harry Blue5 (talk) 07:05, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Freedon Nadd

I've redirected Freedon Nadd to the list. While he may be notable in the Star Wars universe and franchise (which, honestly, I'm not even sure of), he showed no real-world notability. Harry Blue5 (talk) 20:22, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Where is he on the list though? I haven't noticed him. He definitely deserves inclusion on there. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 21:23, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I think he should definitely be on the list. I don't know much about the character, so I can't really summarise him, though. Harry Blue5 (talk) 22:25, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

I included him. :) Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 23:23, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Harry Blue5 (talk) 23:26, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

No problem. And I appreciate your work on Cad Bane, an article I help start. I was thinking about a critical reception for it but you beat me. :) Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 23:40, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:StarWarsDroids

Template:StarWarsDroids has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Harry Blue5 (talk • contribs) 14:14, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

The New Essential Guide to Droids

Don't suppose anyone here has The New Essential Guide to Droids? I'm trying to find development info for HK-47 and was wondering if the book had anything about him. All the article really needs in development info. and then it could probably become a GA only with some fluffing of the Appearances section. Harry Blue5 (talk • contribs) 21:01, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Planets

I question the existence of notability for individual articles on planets. While, naturally, planets like Coruscant repeatedly appear in Star Wars stuff and are incredibly important to the universe of Star Wars, I do not believe from a real-world non-Star Wars point-of-view that any individual planet comply to Wikipedia's notability rules. Thus, I believe that all planets that currently have their own articles should be merged into the List of Star Wars planets. While I'm sure this is not going to be a popular decision, I don't think there have been any stuff like "Kamino was voted the 2nd top planet of all time..." to justify inclusion. Harry Blue5 (talk • contribs) 17:46, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

I might want to see other people's opinion's on this. I am not against merging some of them but I am not sure about all of them. I do believe fictional planets can be notable if the article hasn't proven notability that may be a sign of imperfection of how it's been treated and if so Wikipedia is a work of progress and it just needs to treated more like a Wikipedia article. So let's focus on the less important and the ones that will look better in the list article first. Which ones are you aiming at at the time being? Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 18:01, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Mon Calamari is one of the worser ones. Harry Blue5 (talk • contribs) 19:08, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Remember that to be notable, subjects just need coverage in third party sources. It doesn't have to be in a "Top x list" to display notability, although it helps, and is usually easier to find and present. Simply finding sources that cover them is fine. With that, Coruscant has quite a few references, which are print material. However, I am not sure how much of that is first party.

I say redirect all planets which don't display any sources to their respective list spot.(I am supprised those lists have plenty of sources as well.) I think remaking Star Wars galaxy with prose of short descriptions of some of the notable planets and in-universe material would be good. A list of all planets is not needed. Every in-universe setting is not notable, but a few described in prose might be ok. This would be a huge project, and I am not sure it would get taken. _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 19:38, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Mon Calamari looks doable to be merged. It doesn't look like it needed to be split off. So you can go ahead and merge that one, I know you want to. :) Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 20:12, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

There was really no content to be merged. _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 20:28, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Coruscant seems to have a few sources, though most that I can see tend to be about it's reveal in The Old Republic. Harry Blue5 (talk • contribs) 20:29, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Doesn't surprise me the article doesn't have too much. You know what do whatever you feel like doing unless there somebody that opposes the idea. I don't see anybody reverting you if not. ;) Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 20:37, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Would anyone be opposed to merging Mustafar? Its only real claim for notability is because it's "that place where Obi-Wan and Anakin fight in Episode III", which isn't really enough. Harry Blue5 (talk • contribs) 21:54, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Looking about just all of them (which I admit that I haven't even noticed them for a long while) I would say they would be better off merged for the time being. Keep only the good information (if there is any) and leave out any unneeded information. So HarryBlue5 give it a shot. The only thing we might lose is the images. ;) Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 22:26, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

I think all that are left have a good chance of having sources cover them. They are all vastly popular places, and I doubt nothing would exist for them. Could we IAR on this one assuming that sources do exist, but we are too lazy to find them? _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 23:02, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't mind the ignoring all rules philosophy. And I wouldn't say we are lazy it's just that (for me anyways) that we are busy with other stuff for now. I am just about an everywhere guy on Wikipedia sometimes when it comes to fictional topics or movies. And I can't wrap myself on one thing when it comes to editing an actual article. And finding sources is the most time consuming thing to do for me sometimes. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 15:04, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

I've redirected Geonosis and Corellia. I think the others might be able to pass notability guidelines. Harry Blue5 (talk • contribs) 22:41, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

I asked for Star Wars galaxy to be undeleted so we could take a look at the history, and they instead moved all the history to my userspace. I have asked for it to be moved back to where it belongs. Do you think we could do anything with it? _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 14:54, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

I moved it to Universe of Star Wars with a redirect to Star Wars#Setting. So at least the history is intact. _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 18:13, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Infobox SW books

Template:Infobox SW books has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Wow, really going on a deletion storm today, aren't I? Harry Blue5 (talk • contribs) 22:04, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Starkiller up for peer review (again)

I've requested that Starkiller gets a peer review. Please comment here if you have any suggestions or other remarks. Harry Blue5 (talk • contribs) 20:10, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Luminara Unduli

As the article did not establish any notability outside of being a character in the Star Wars universe, I have redirected Luminara Unduli to the list. Don't worry, I saved the merchandise section and development info and added it to the list, so nothing important seems to have been lost. I know some of you may be opposed to such a merge, but remember we have these lists for a reason and all articles need to be properly notable. Harry Blue5 (talk • contribs) 21:44, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Nah I am not hesitant about it. It was on my to do list to maybe merge it. The only thing that cold maybe have prevented it is that it survived AFD. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 22:31, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Max Rebo Band

Eh, I'm not sure whether the Max Rebo Band are notable enough for their own article. However, I've noticed enough sources that I think it's worth not just doing it instantly. I've found 5 sources so far (3 from IGN, 2 from UGO; only 2 referring to the band as a group), but I'm still not sure it's enough for their own article. [8][9][10][11][12] Harry Blue5 (talk • contribs) 23:04, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Jedi Knight topic up for removal

The Star Wars: Jedi Knight titles featured topic is up for removal. – Harry Blue5 (talk • contribs) 11:08, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Template:Sww is up for deletion

Please comment here at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 June 27#Template:Sww. I have listed Template:Sww for deletion at WP:TFD. Thank for you time. JJ98 (Talk / Contributions) 17:48, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Merge Ki-Adi-Mundi

See Talk:Ki-Adi-Mundi#Merge?. – Harry Blue5 (talk • contribs) 18:45, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Galactic Alliance

Why isn't there an article about the Galactic Alliance? There's only a redirect to the Galactic Republic, which isn't the same thing. I would like to request that this article be created. – Confession0791 ^talk 15:41, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Most of the in-universe government/organization articles barely pass (or just flatout don't pass) WP:GNG as-is. Let's improve (and, as necessary, consolidate/excise) the content we have before jumping into creating more. --EEMIV (talk) 17:18, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

A lot of unnotable articles

Well im sure you are all aware of this, but maybe some action might help us clean up (and by action, i mean weed out unnotable articles as clearly theres already enough effort making good and featured articles). The articles i find to be the most troubling in the main star wars template are:

• All the documentary articles:
  • The Making of Star Wars
  • SP FX: The Empire Strikes Back
  • From Star Wars to Jedi: The Making of a Saga
  • Classic Creatures: Return of the Jedi
  • Empire of Dreams
  • Star Wars: The Legacy Revealed
• These articles:
  • List of changes in Star Wars re-releases
  • Star Wars opening crawl
  • Canon

Im sure at least one of these have been discussed before, but im starting to see a pattern where these articles are made based on whatever relates to what george lucas has said. I hope we can clean these up. It might be a good idea to set a goal in this wikiproject to motivate finding stub or start class articles and attempting to promote a certain percentage to +-class if not B-class and removing the articles that have no hope of being notable.Lucia Black (talk) 07:16, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

This isn't notable either... Star Wars Imperial Commando: 501st but I notice a lack of responses to this. That isn't good, folks. You need to respond whenever inquiries are made, or else the project gets labeled as inactive. WhisperToMe (talk) 19:23, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

I've reverted the wholesale removal of the documentaries from the Star Wars template, and removed the redirects on the individual documentary articles. They should never have been redirected. MikeWazowski (talk) 23:24, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

You're not providing a reason at all. You claim we have no good reason, but then again you don't provide one yourself.Lucia Black (talk) 21:00, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

If you believe there is no notability, you can open an AFD on them. If you believe that they need to be kept, go hunting for sources ASAP. WhisperToMe (talk) 21:57, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

WP Star Wars in the Signpost

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Star Wars for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 04:51, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

File:WpStarWars.png

Penyulap ☏ 12:56, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Comment requested

Please see WT:VG#Thoughts on Template:Star Wars games. --Izno (talk) 13:30, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Star Wars droids

Template:Star Wars droids has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. DH85868993 (talk) 23:57, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Wookiepedia

Star Wars Wiki shouldn't be linked, because it is Wikia, can someone take it off please?Jfficclbsugobbjc (talk) 20:45, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

List of changes in Star Wars re-releases is a joke

Sorry for the punchy discussion title, but that article, which addresses a quite relevant topic, is practically empty; and without looking so at first view, which is very misleading.

Looking into the revision history, it seems the core content of the article was removed because it was too much of an original research. Fair enough, but now, apart from the introductory paragraph, it's like there were only pre-Special Edition changes and deleted scenes. No mention, for instance, of the Jabba scene addition or the "Han shot first" issue.

So I don't know, but I believe that is a not-so-minor issue within the scope of the WikiProject Star Wars. I came on Wikipedia to find a clean list of such changes, and I was fairly disappointed to reach the bottom of the article whithout finding them (...wait, is that all?), and without even having for instance a notice about the fact they were missing; currently the article looks like there is no real problem, whereas the biggest part is missing.

Cos-fr (talk) 15:44, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

I added section stubs to acknowledge that issue in the article. - Cos-fr (talk) 16:02, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Merge Star Wars live-action TV series → Star Wars

Since Lucas is selling the Star Wars franchise and so forth, we have yet another reason to realize that George's Star Wars live-action TV series is not going to happen. In fact if it ever were to happen, it will have nothing to do with whatever plans Lucas made back in 2005. Can we just merge any notible content here back into the main article as something that "might have been" but never was?

Please comment either way at Talk:Star Wars live-action TV series#Merge into Star Wars. tahc ^chat 08:13, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

New sister project proposal

Hi, you may want to see this proposal for new project based on fiction. --213.155.255.148 (talk) 19:51, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

RfC: Should Darth Vader be mentioned in the lead of James Earl Jones?

There's an ongoing Request for Comments at: RfC: Should Darth Vader be mentioned in the lead of James Earl Jones?. You're welcome to state your position. Diego (talk) 06:49, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Request for comment on Biographies of living people

Hello Wikiproject! Currently there is a discussion which will decide whether wikipedia will delete 49,000 articles about a living person without references, here:

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

Since biographies of living people covers so many topics, nearly all wikiproject topics will be effected.

The two opposing positions which have the most support is:

1. supports the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, User:Jehochman
2. opposes the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, except in limited circumstances, User:Collect

Comments are welcome. Keep in mind that by default, editor's comments are hidden. Simply press edit next to the section to add your comment.

Please keep in mind that at this point, it seems that editors support deleting unreferenced article if they are not sourced, so your project may want to pursue the projects below.

Star Wars Episode VII up for deletion (2nd nomination)

Here is the link Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Star Wars Episode VII (2nd nomination)

2013 Roll Call

Please sign below if you are still with us:

1. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:47, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
2. MisterShiney ✉ 07:04, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
3. --EEMIV (talk) 12:07, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
4. Still here-ish SCΛRECROW 12:47, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
5. JJ98 (Talk) 21:58, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
6. Fortdj33 (talk) 14:13, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Merging Jacen Solo

See Talk:Jacen Solo#Merging. – Bellum (talk) 02:39, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Important question, need experts

Talk:Joel Edgerton#Is this him?.--GrapedApe (talk) 05:54, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of List of Star Wars superweapons for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Star Wars superweapons is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Star Wars superweapons until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ansh666 01:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Happy Star Wars Day

Well, it wouldn't be May 4th anymore in some areas by now, but it's still May 4th here in the US, so "May the 4th be with you" guys here at WikiProject Star Wars. ZappaOMati 03:50, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Project revival

Hello everyone. I am thinking about getting this project revamped with all the latest hubbub going on about Episode VII and the sale of Lucasfilm and Disney. First off, I would like to say that I am going to bring LucasArts and Lucasfilm to GA status. Thoughts? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 18:44, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

As I wrote on your talk page, I'm keen. I think, though, before jumping headlong into beefing up Lucasfilm or LucasArts, I'm going to take a whack at updating -- even finishing -- the style guide. Just FYI. --EEMIV (talk) 01:10, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Character infoboxes

Crashsnake (talk · contribs) has recently made some good-faith expansions of acting & voice talent in several characters' infoboxes. However, some of these have expanded the infobox into what I see as an impenetrable wall of text -- Darth Vader, for example. Any thoughts of appropriate general cut-off for infobox inclusion? I would suggest films, TV shows, and maybe NPR radio drama. Other performances -- mostly video games -- is perhaps better relegated to a sidebar table in an "other media" section. What're y'all's thoughts? --EEMIV (talk) 01:05, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Portal:Star Wars

Portal:Star Wars (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 07:17, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Costumes in prequels included Indian home-spun khadi? Reference needed

Since October 2005 the page for khadi (Indian homespun cloth) has claimed (DIFF) that some characters in Star Wars prequel movies, such as Samuel L. Jackson's Mace Windu, were costumed in khadi. However, as noted in recent comments on the talk page, a reference has never been supplied. To be reliable, a source should either pre-date the insertion of the claim on the Wikipedia page, or else be issued from a source that is clearly highly knowledgable about Star Wars. Is there anyone from this project who could supply such a source? Or, alternatively, does anyone have a source on Star Wars prequel costuming that clearly contradicts this claim, indicating that it should be removed (e.g., an alternative account of Mace Windu's costume as not involving khadi)? Thank you -- Presearch (talk) 22:07, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Category question

Hi WikiProject Star Wars. I was wondering: what's the distinction between Category:Star Wars parodies and Category:Parody films based on Star Wars - it isn't clear to me. Thanks. DH85868993 (talk) 03:49, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Category:Star Wars parodies is for parodies in general, including parodies done by comedy TV shows. Category:Parody films based on Star Wars is specifically for Star Wars film parodies, and therefore is a subcategory of the general category. Fortdj33 (talk) 04:57, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. DH85868993 (talk) 14:57, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Greetings and... request for help

Greetings WikiProject Star Wars. I've been reverting the edits of an editor who's been vandalising several pages, but am having to AGF on some of the edits he's made to Star Wars-related templates. Please check. Thanks. --Technopat (talk) 22:09, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Also disruptive. Reverted. --EEMIV (talk) 01:49, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for having a look. --Technopat (talk) 08:37, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Star Wars FA?

Hello, everyone. It is I, Lord Sjones23, returning from my two-month semi-retirement. I am thinking about getting all six Star Wars films to FA status. Thoughts? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 04:03, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Create Han Solo and Princess Leia?

We have Sam and Diane proven to be independent from Sam Malone and Diane Chambers. But I am here discussing the relationship, explained in Han Solo and Princess Leia. Because of the existence of File:HanKissesLeia.jpg, I wonder if the relationship is adequately explained. Is the relationship independently notable from separate individual characters and the Star Wars original trilogy? --George Ho (talk) 20:04, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

From an out-of-universe perspective? I don't think so. There might be some fodder for a broader "gender in Star Wars"-oriented article -- or "Star Wars as modern myth" -- to touch base on that. But, most of the third-party commentary re. Star Wars is rooted in the films, where the relationship is a nice touchstone but not anything I've seen that's gotten a lot of academic focus. Developments in the EU might expand the characters and play a big role in the fiction, but I doubt have gotten serious commentary. I think for the time being the individual character articles suffice for covering the relationship, even if there is some duplication across the two. --EEMIV (talk) 20:13, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

I also concur with EEMIV. Specifically, even if the relationship between Han and Leia is relevant, I think the articles should remain separate as we don't want to go to an in-universe perspective. We use out-of-universe sources like those pertaining to production and reception. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 21:33, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Princess Leia's metal bikini

Is this topic independently notable per WP:GNG? --George Ho (talk) 04:14, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes and no. It looks like it has enough citations that it can be a notable topic on it's own somewhere on Wikipedia but at the same time it probably be better off still staying at the Princess Leia page than being it's own page. More discussion can definitely be welcome to that. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 22:06, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

The current article isn't that great, but I think it could stand out on its own. It's a bit of an odd area, so it's harder to judge (as opposed to regular fictional characters, which we have plenty of articles on and a generally accepted layout and standard). The metal bikini is something of a cultural icon, independent of the character of Leia.

The article establishes the whole "icon" stuff well enough, but right now it only lists some pop culture references. And the whole "Other metal bikinis" seems a bit unrelated. It might be worth merging in for now, but I think it might be worth looking for some more sources and seeing if it can be split out again later. – Bellum (talk) (contribs) 23:49, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

The author from EverydayHealth calls the gold bikini a sexy "Halloween costume". And Brandon Sun mentioned the bikini as a compliment. News and Sentinel calls it a popular Halloween costume. Shall I include these sources somewhere in that page? George Ho (talk) 03:51, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Greedo notable?

Any thoughts if this characters is notable enough for a article? I think this would be the main thing he would be notable for. So maybe this can be a good place to maybe merge or redirect him to. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 22:12, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

I think so too. Greedo makes very few appearances in the films, and the Clone Wars doesn't really count unless it is someone big like Ahsoka Tano. 20-13-rila (talk) 14:03, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Darth Vader

Does anyone else think that Darth Vader ought to be titled Anakin Skywalker, since that's actually his name? Darth Vader ought to redirect to him. I think so. Feel free to sit on this idea, and my other one as well. 20-13-rila (talk) 09:53, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

This is a sporadic discussion hashed out on the article talk page. I suggest looking over there, including talk page archives, and feel free to rekindle the talk if interested. --EEMIV (talk) 13:48, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Star Wars Bot

I think that a bot to monitor Star Wars articles, possibly prevent extreme cases of vandalism, and keep the article index up to date would benefit the project. I would need someone to own it and program it, because I'm not exactly sure myself, but I think this might help. Feel free to sit on this idea, and my other one as well. 20-13-rila (talk) 09:57, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

There are already plenty of bots that keep an eye out for vandalism Wikipedia-wide. One more bot for just one corner of articles really isn't worthwhile. Reverting vandalism is an easy mouse-click away, anyhow. --EEMIV (talk) 13:49, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2013_November_19#Category:Star_Wars_creatures

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2013_November_19#Category:Star_Wars_creatures. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 18:29, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

TheForce.net edits | Assisted by Citation bot r454

Hey, all. I'm on the road and editing is a pain, but could someone take a gander at recent TFN article edits? I suspect a COI with the editor, who appears, based on his handle and talk page messages, to be a Forecast podcast co-host. The article was weak before, but it certainly now reads more like an advertisement. --EEMIV (talk) 05:00, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Move request for the film articles

Please see Talk:Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope#Requested move, a request to rename the original trilogy's articles. Powers ^T 16:31, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Seeking help for new article about author Simon Beecroft

I've created the beginning of an article about Simon Beecroft in my userspace. He wrote Lego Star Wars: The Visual Dictionary, which has sold more than 2,000,000 copies. Could anyone help me improve the article enough so it can be moved into the main article space? TedErnst (talk) 04:52, 9 March 2014 (UTC)