Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Star Wars/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

→

Archive 12

COTW

I would like to suggest that the Star Wars Collaboration of the week be renamed to the Star Wars Collaboration of the Month. This is what is being done in other WikiProjects (to give more time working on articles, and/or because membership may be less than active).

Name changes:

• Wikipedia:WikiProject Star Wars/Collaboration of the week to Wikipedia:WikiProject Star Wars/Collaboration of the month

• Category:Star Wars Collaboration of the week to Wikipedia:WikiProject Star Wars/Collaboration of the month/Templates

• Template:Current-SWCOTW to Wikipedia:WikiProject Star Wars/Collaboration of the month/Templates/Current
• Template:SWCOTWvoter to Wikipedia:WikiProject Star Wars/Collaboration of the month/Templates/Contributor
• Template:SWcandidate to Wikipedia:WikiProject Star Wars/Collaboration of the month/Templates/Candidate
• Template:StarWarsCOTW to Wikipedia:WikiProject Star Wars/Collaboration of the month/Templates/Notice
• Template:User SWCOTW to Wikipedia:WikiProject Star Wars/Collaboration of the month/Userbox

(If I missed any, feel free to add them.)

Once we have consensus here, we can list the category for cfr (possibly speedy), and someone can ask to have a bot to do the page moves, and redirect fixes. - jc37 14:12, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

This has been here for almost a year. I'll give a little more time before I just do it. - jc37 07:26, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Not that anyone cares by this time, but I've performed the moves. (The links above are updated to the targets.) The Star Wars COTM is also marked historical until such time as someone wishes to reactivate the process, though, since it appears that WP:COTM, and its successor WP:AID, are both inactive/historical, I doubt we'll see this process reactivated. - jc37 23:10, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Articles facing severe editing

The articles, The Force (Star Wars) and Dark side (Star Wars) are going to be edited after a week af having placed requests for citations be added to statements in the article. These articles have very little in the way of citation. WP requires secondary sources of information, considering a requirement for inclusion. The week of waiting expires on 9/16. I would direct the attention of anyone wishing that these article remain without any removed ext venture forth and provide solid citation in keeping with WP policies. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 04:37, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Actually, not only secondary, but tertiary sources are preferable. Evidence of others' original research which is verifiable. But I know what you mean, and yeah, those articles (I'm sorry to say) do suck right now. They need lots of improvement. --linca^linca 12:50, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Don't misunderstand me. Linca - the writing there is particularly well-written (from a writer's pov) and well-thought out (kind of a refreshing thing to see, actually); it just suffers from no real connective citation that could quickly launch it to GA status, I kinda felt bad kicking out all the uncited stuff and speculation. If some folk wnet back through some of those articles and properly cited them, they could earn the right to be GA. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 04:17, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Lightsaber

I know I am not part of this WikiProject, but I thought it wouldn't hurt anyone if I simply pointed out that the lightsaber article could be greatly improved. Zouavman Le Zouave 20:46, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Removed PROD from Cularian System

Greetings! I wanted to let your project know I found a PROD for the article on the Cularian System on the grounds of real-world notability. I removed it because under that justification, the entire Category:Star_Wars_regions_of_space is not notable. There are several star systems in that category, along with a rather large article on Star Wars galaxy (which is listed as part of your project). I suggested in the PROD removal justification that the separate galaxy articles be reviewed, and possibly merged into the overview galaxy article, but I'm definitely not the person to take that on, as I don't even own episodes 1-3 :-) Thanks guys. DLPanther 13:53, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Article proposal

It strikes me as odd that there's no chronology of tutorship in the jedi arts. This seems like something that would be quite a task to construct, but very applicable to the project nonetheless. The toughest part wouldn't be the actual construction of the chronology but referencing it. Tough, but not impossible.

I'd propose laying it out (to begin) something like this:

Emperor Palpatine/Darth Sidious

Yoda

Darth Tyranus

Count Dooku

Qui Gonn Jinn

Obi-Wan Kenobi

Darth Vader

Anakin Skywalker

Luke Skywalker

Except of course, you know, accurate? The colours could indicate a person's allegiance (Jedi, Sith, Dark Jedi, NJO or mixed). It can also be drawn up to indicate whether or not a person is EU or standard, all based on the colors. I've pretty muchy just chucked in dark red for Siths, blue for contentious and green for Jedi. What do you guys think? This is obviously a bit hogde-podge and could be heaps better, but it's a start. --linca^linca 12:40, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Cool idea! The flow chart looks good, although wouldn't Palpatine also be Vader's tutor? Anyway, it has my support!  :) Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 15:32, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

October - December 2007 Roll call

We haven't had one in a long while. Time to find out who's actually active. (And to purge the active members list once again.) - jc37 07:32, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

1. I'm here, though doing more "behind the scenes" work, than article editing these days. - jc37 07:32, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
2. I am still here, watching the articles for vandalism and a possible renomination of ROTJ. Greg Jones II 17:32, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
3. Yeah, I'm here, just, you know... wandering about. Occasionally updating stuff. It's a pretty daunting tast, to be honest. There's so much stuff missing and most of what's here is written so terribly in-universe, it's hard to undo that. But yeah. Present. --lincalinca 04:10, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

   Hey, just so you know, Lincalinca, can you fix the number in your comment? You accidentally forgot to put a # (number sign) in your comment. That would be much appreciated Greg Jones II 09:23, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

   What? Yes I did? It's right there? I'm numerised as #3...? I'm sure I did that. Did somebody else do that? I'm sure it was me. --lincalinca 12:14, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

4. Present. Returning to work on the vehicles articles, with the occasional odd AfD to get people riled up. --EEMeltonIV 10:02, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
   
5. Here, sorta - editing out all the cruft and uncited, unsourced info - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 19:40, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
6. I'm here, I'm just not all that active because of school. Grey Maiden ^talk 18:17, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Battle of Yavin

Battle of Yavin could use some serious work. In its current state, it doesn't really abide by WP:WAF. A few vocal editors who claim the article doesn't meet WP:FICT have persisted in turning it into a redirect for Star Wars: A New Hope. I don't think that's the course we should take; but we might consider merging Battle of Yavin, Battle of Hoth, and Battle of Endor into Galactic Civil War. Ichormosquito 11:10, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, the galactic civil war started way BBY, it's just that at BY, it became a "serious" threat to the empire (hence Seth Mcfarland's parody in robot chicken saying it was "blown up by a bunch of F#$*&^*&% teenagers"). I'd recommend calling it "Battles in the Star Wars film saga" and encompassing the Naboo vs Trade Federation battle, Geonosis clone siege/insurrection and the taking over of the Invisible Hand as notable battles within the film saga, so as to cover all seiges within the six films, new and old. --lincalinca 12:19, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh and all of the articles need a serious re-write anyway because they're very heavily in universe anyway. --lincalinca 12:30, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea. Ichormosquito 13:00, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Wow, Inca - stop reading my thoughts, you debbil (grn). I was going to say many of the things alrready stated here. 'Galactic Civil War' is a pretty broad term, which could apply to any number of galactic civil wars in scifi, and not just Star Wars. This doesn't appear to be a problem right now, but I can foresee it becoming so; perhaps adjusting the article title to reflect the nature of the civil war might sidestep these potential issues. I would propose Galactic Civil War (Star Wars) be the new name.

As well, I don't think merging these articles right now is the best course of action for any of them. Maybe later, but at this time, all three articles are a bit on the bvloated side and suffer from terribly in-universe pov - so much so that in some of them, I feel as if I have misnavigated and ended up Wookipedia instead. The Sith, Dark Side and Force articles suffered fromt hat as well, and I had to trim away all that which was uncited or too in-universe to remain. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 21:31, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

What if we renamed it "Death Star trench run"? As a notable movie scene, I think it passes muster. We could include production notes; its impact on the special effects industry; and excerpts from scholarly criticism, while still retaining a small section devoted to plot summary. Ichormosquito 02:48, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Now we're talking productively and out of the box! --lincalinca 08:19, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Help with Star Wars Galaxies

Hi. is anyone watching the Star Wars Galaxies article? there have been some major edits recently, and then reverts of those edits, but i can't tell which are vandalism, and which are legitimate. Appreciate any help. Thanks. --Steve, Sm8900 14:59, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Star Wars video game task force proposal

This is an idea I've been mulling over for some time, but only decided to propose now. Though it is more of a WikiProject Video Games task force, I thought it made sense to mention it here. I noticed it says on the main page of this WikiProject that it's effectively a collaboration of numerous projects, but I thought one task force specifically focusing on one aspect of Star Wars (and one which doesn't actually have so many high-quality articles) would be pretty useful. It's fairly self-explanatory, so check out the proposal. I'd be interested to hear what you think. Una Laguna^Talk 18:52, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Book, possibly of interest to project members

An Edifice of Intent: The Metaphysics of Star Wars, seems well written, author states it's still in process. Benjiboi 00:56, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Wookieepedia

For WikiProject Star Wars members, there is also another wiki thats made for star wars.Click here —Preceding unsigned comment added by Olsonman (talk • contribs) 02:34, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, his right. It's way better; it is well worth looking at.Amassacre 12:27, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

And it is crufty and uncited and of little practical use to us here, at the actual encyclopedia. :) - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 05:27, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Have you even bothered to read its FAs? Blue Mirage (talk) 11:30, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I use to been a member, I think I should be a member of the WikiProject of Star Wars Olsonman 23:38, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Cliff Wampa

Hi fellow Star Wars fans, Cliff Wampa is being prodded, just thought I'd let you know. --Montchav (talk) 23:34, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Star Wars.com

Recently, I've noted some references being added to a few articles from here. An example of these references would be something like this. There is no provenance to this info, and I am concerned about how reliable it is. Thoughts? - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 05:27, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, it's official information on the official site for the series... I'd say it's reliable enough to be cited, though it sort of depends on how it's being cited. EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:35, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

First Battle of Yavin Base

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article First Battle of Yavin Base, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of First Battle of Yavin Base. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 22:38, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Also note that the Great Hyperspace War has been turned into a redirect. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 22:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Darth Ryba

A tag has been placed on Darth Ryba, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

No assertion of notability

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 23:11, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Star Wars: Dark Horizons

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Star Wars: Dark Horizons, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Star Wars: Dark Horizons. Fayenatic (talk) 20:19, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Star Wars comics problems

Star Wars: Republic: there seems to be an article for just about EVERY issue and/or storyline of the series. Category:Star Wars comics also seems to hold a bit of this issue clutter. Wikipedia shouldn't be a guide to every issue of a series. I brought this up a while ago here (and mentioned it to the creator of the articles), however not much seems to have been done. RobJ1981 (talk) 21:04, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm resurrecting this question -- I've flipped through most of the Republic comics and their mostly just a plot blurb and list of characters. Can anyone articulate a reason not to have them redirect to the main Star Wars: Republic entry? Perhaps transplant the plot summary blurbs into a list on that page? --EEMIV (talk) 19:07, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Lack of referencing

After browsing through half a dozen articles in the wikipedia Star Wars project, I have to say that, whilst fairly readable and well written, every single one of them was crying out for a

start -->

tag!

Proper referencing needs doing on these things, otherwise they come across like a big wodge of fan fiction.--feline1 (talk) 17:26, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Over the past month, I've taken steps towards adding citations and footnotes to Princess Leia's article. However, almost all of these have been only for the two sections of the article I created . The whole article (along with many other Star Wars characters like Luke Skywalker and Han Solo) is unsourced, I notice. But I can only do so much, especially considering I don't know where a lot of the statements in Leia's article specifically come from. I'm currently researching the never-ending "Han shot first" debate, and will probably be of more help to Han Solo's Wikipedia page as soon as I can get info sorted out. Anyone else mind taking a crack at it? — Cinemaniac (talk) 20:51, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion on article organization

I have a strong suggestion about the organization of the primary articles about Star Wars - it can be found at Talk:Star Wars#Mass pruning, but basically I'm suggesting that since

1. Star Wars original trilogy and Star Wars prequel trilogy are essentially empty and very weak articles with little more than synopses and lists
2. Star Wars purports to be an article about the franchise itself

that the trilogy articles should be merged into something like Star Wars films, and the mass of information about the films that can be salvaged from Star Wars (ie: is sourced and written properly) be moved there, so that the Star Wars article can truely be written as being about the franchise, and not all about the movies with an "oh yeah, there were also books and tv movies" tacked on at the end. TheHYPO (talk) 13:36, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Project page problems

1. In actually displaying the templates in the template section, the Collab of the week templates all mis-appear at the bottom of the project page instead of where they should be.
2. What is the point of the lightsaber image on the right column? Just seems to serve to waste a lot of space on the page

Cheers TheHYPO (talk) 07:23, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Princess Leia Organa peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because it right now seems oddly cluttered and, despite my adding of a lot of references, it lacks reliable source citations. Although I've already requested another peer review for another article, as long as it helps the articles get better, I've got the time. Any helpful comments are appreciated, as this should help me in expanding other Star Wars-centric articles (particularly bios like that of Luke Skywalker and Han Solo, also in dire need of certain expansion). Thanks. — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 03:23, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

The peer review was archived earlier this month. Thanks to everyone for their comments. — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 01:38, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Star Wars film FTC up for removal

The Star Wars films are up for removal from Featured Topic status. Please take part in the debate. Wrad (talk) 04:50, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Character template

Hiya. Where can the template source for the Star Wars' characters be found? - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 21:57, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Update Much Needed

Odd. . . It looks like the front page hasn't been updated in over a year! — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 22:45, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Army of the Republic

I through a bunch of tags on it, so I thought I'd bring it up. The article has no sources to verify it's claims what-so-ever, it has no third party sources to defend it's notability, it rambles, and looks like it's pretty much all original research. I'd recommend a complete rewrite, or maybe just transwiki to wookieepedia and redirect it to some other article here? Well, I'll let the experts sort it out, just throught I should bring it up. --Falcorian ^(talk) 08:12, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Immaculate Conception (Star Wars)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Immaculate Conception (Star Wars), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Immaculate Conception (Star Wars). Thank you. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 22:40, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Jaina Solo

An article that you have been involved in editing, Jaina Solo, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jaina Solo. Thank you. Grey Maiden ^talk 05:39, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Star Wars sequel trilogy

I've noticed that the Star Wars sequel trilogy just barely survived an AfD and looking at it, it needs a lot of cleanup, so there is quite a lot of work to be done on that, if we don't want it to go through AfD again.--EclipseSSD (talk) 17:23, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Star Wars comics images

Hello all. I just wanted to give you a heads-up. Several Star Wars comics images are up for deletion because they don't have fair use rationales. (I would imagine some screenshots have been tagged as well.) In case the Comics project can't get to them all in time, you may want to take a look through User:Hiding/no-rationale#S and add rationales if you think it appropriate. (The Star Wars images mostly begin with "sw".) Thanks! --GentlemanGhost (talk) 01:29, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Hiding also prepared this handy-dandy worksheet you can use if you so desire.

{{Non-free fair use rationale
|Article           = <!-- THE NAME OF THE ARTICLE WHERE THIS IMAGE IS USED -->
|Description       = <!-- FOR EXAMPLE: Cover to '''New X-Men #114''',<br /> July, 2001. -->
|Source            = <!-- EITHER IT'S A SCAN OR IT'S FROM A LINK -->
|Portion           = <!-- EITHER A COVER OR A PANEL OR ARTWORK -->
|Purpose           = Image is used for purposes of illustration in the above-named article,
 a subject of public interest.
|Resolution        = Small size unsuitable to use for high quality reproduction
|Replaceability    = Image is protected by copyright, therefore a free use alternative won't exist.
|other_information = Although the picture is originally copyright, it is covered by fair use because: 
# It is a low resolution copy of a comic book cover, hence, only a small portion of the commercial 
product; 
# The use of the image will not affect the value of the original work or limit the copyright holder's 
rights or ability to sell or distribute the original comic book;
# Copies of this image could not be used to make illegal copies of the comic book; 
# The image is used as the primary means of visual identification of topics in the article. For a 
visual medium such as comic books, words alone cannot adequately describe the subject;
}}

Thanks again! --GentlemanGhost (talk) 01:33, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

It looks like a number of these images were added by User:Skope. So, if you take a look at his talk page, you can find a more succinct list. --GentlemanGhost (talk) 01:32, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Star Wars ship-mounted weapons

In this discussion we have mentioned a History Channel special that could be used as a reference. By any chance has any members of the project seen or own this documentary and if so any he/she/they help us to use it as a secondary source with the article under question? Thanks! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 05:41, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Sith edits

I would like to get some eyes on the Sith article. I am encountering a lot of info being added with very little in the way of proper or even reliable sourcing. The article needs some re-writing, but by folk who know not to add a lot of cruft. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 05:22, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Star Wars: Empire

I have added Star Wars: Empire issue pages to be merged into the main pages because the Star Wars: Empire page has nothing but the list of issues, and the issue pages themselves are stubs, and I think it would be better if they are merged. Also the issue pages on Star Wars: Republic are up for deletion because they are not independently notable, violates WP:NOT#PLOT as an extended plot description with no real-world content or context. Just thought to let you know. Gman124 (talk) 17:42, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

To discuss the merger see Talk:Star_Wars:_Empire#Merger_proposal. Gman124 (talk) 17:44, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Mandalorians

Just pointing this out, but the mandalorian article needs serious help. RC-0722 ^communicator/_kills 15:22, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Many of the articles concerning the Star Wars universe (and possibly Star Trek and other stuff) seem to be copied from another wiki or are just not very useful. — Raffaello9 | Talk | 00:09, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps all stubs, that should not be articles should be proposed for deletion.Blackngold29 (talk) 20:49, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

There should be a general article on Star Wars weapons

Instead of having "lists of weapons", there should be a general article on Star Wars weapons, citing examples in a typical sentence/paragraph format. Perhaps sections on each type of weapon would be a good idea, but this would definitely beat having multiple borderline-notable lists. — Deckiller 05:05, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

What about the Jawas?

Jawas redirects to List of Star Wars races (F-J), but they're not on there. Have they fallen through the cracks? Been forgotten? Hopefully this will bring the Jawas some justice. --MPD ^{T / C} 21:05, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Kessel/Kassel/Castle

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Star_Wars_planets_(K-L)#Kessel claims that "Kassel" is also the German word for "guarded area". Being a German native speaker, I have to point out that this is simply not true. I'm not sure how to edit the article because the etymological proximity to English "castle" is there, and I know that Dutch "Kasteel" is also close by, but I can't think of a German word that sounds anything like Kassel and has this meaning. --Daniel Klein (talk) 12:14, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

StarWarsProject: Articles of unclear notability

Hello,

there are currently 23 articles in the scope of this project which are tagged with notability concerns. I have listed them here. (Note: this listing is based on a database snapshot of 12 March 2008 and may be slightly outdated.)

I would encourage members of this project to have a look at these articles, and see whether independent sources can be added, whether the articles can be merged into an article of larger scope, or possibly be deleted. Any help in cleaning up this backlog is appreciated. For further information, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Notability.

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the Notability project page or on my personal talk page. (I'm not watching this page however.) Thanks! --B. Wolterding (talk) 16:07, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

What's up with the infobox colors?

Yep, that's my question. We don't do this elsewhere (or aren't supposed to), so we should purge this crazyness (making Sith the code word for red and whatnot). I suspect its a template issue. Where is that? - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 16:42, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Found it, but my relative unfamiliarity with html caused me to bollix up the code whilst attempting to remove the color assignments (I immediately self-reverted). Someone else needs to purge it. Might I ask for some assistance in doing so? - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 16:53, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Could I help?

I am not yet involved in this "Officially" however I have been making edits to things in the star wars portal, so I was wondering if it would be possible for me to help. Thank you... Stealth (talk) 12:18, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones

Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

Lightsaber combat - a grand crufty mess

I would like to get some eyes on the Lightsaber combat article. I am encountering a lot of info being added with very little in the way of proper or even reliable sourcing. The article needs some re-writing, but by folk who know not to add a lot of cruft. Most of the referencing seems to be in the form of speculative end-notes. I posted a note in discussion asking for better citation three weeks ago, and have received no input on the post. I am about to do some wide-spread removals, so some clean-up sooner would be better than later. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 18:09, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Star Wars Comics

Why is it that all the Star Wars comic pages are all stubs like, Rebellion. Why is it that this and many other Star Wars comic pages link to story arcs that only contain plot or are just stubs? would it not be better if all the arcs were merged together then at least there would be one good page. and most of the Star Wars comic articles violate WP:FICT and WP:N. So i suggest that all the story arcs of pages like Star Wars: Rebellion be merged into them. Anyone have any comments? Gman124 ^talk 22:43, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello

I have just joined the Wikiproject Star Wars, and I hope to be of help. I enjoy star wars and know quite a bit about it. I hope I can be of service! (I posted here since the main page said I should, I hope that that is ok....). Stealth (talk) 23:36, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Me too :D cncplyr (talk) 19:24, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith

Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

New Star Wars Encyclopedia On The Way?

Hey, a new source will be coming out that you may want to check out. See here. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 15:31, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

The following articles should be (re)created

• Confederacy of Independent Systems - Should be recreated because they were the "main" villains in Episode II and III as well as numerous novels and comics.
• Darth Krayt - The main villain in the Legacy comics

--SGCommand (talk • contribs) 16:06, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

AFD nomination of Anakin Skywalker

As the article Anakin Skywalker falls within the boundaries of this Wikiproject, I feel that it is best to inform you that the article has been listed at Articles for Deletion. -- saberwyn 08:11, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Star Wars sequel trilogy

I've done a bit of cleanup and improvement to the Star Wars sequel trilogy article, and wanted to know what everybody else, thinks, what I could do to improve it and anything like that. I've cleaned it up in a way to reflect current status of those films. Thanks, --EclipseSSD (talk) 15:01, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Iphoneorange

I would appreciate it if someone familiar with the dos and don'ts of Project Star Wars to take a peek at Iphoneorange (talk · contribs), as I'm concerned that many of the articles s/he is creating are too minor of importance for inclusion in Wikipedia. Thanks. --ZimZalaBim ^talk 13:28, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I'll take a gander. Thanks! --EEMIV (talk) 16:23, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

RFC on WP:FICT

A request for comment has been made to determine if the Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) proposal has consensus. Since this project deals with many fictional topics, I am commenting here. Input on the proposal is welcome here. --Pixelface (talk) 01:30, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Opportunities for merging articles

Check out the following - here, I think many of those can be merged - either into some form of new article or to existing articles. --Allemandtando (talk) 16:38, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Made-up dating

One thing I've noticed is that a lot of the star wars articles make a lot of reference to the made-up dating system of ABY with no explanation to the causal reader of what this actually means. suggestions? --Allemandtando (talk) 18:32, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Jedi Council Article

I wish to bring to your attention that the Jedi Council article has been at the receiving end of a series of edits that have essentially massacred it. Much of the in-depth content and detail has been lost, and the article is now merely a shell. In order to prevent an inevitable edit war, I have refrained from reverting these edits - but the article is in dire need of defence. As far as I know, the user making the edits isn't a member of the project. Would somebody have a look and take appropriate action? Thanks, TheMoridian 08:43, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

No I'm not a member of this project and don't plan to be - I think those special interest groups tend to work against the core interests of the project. If people in this project aren't going to take care of clean-up work to bring those articles in line with our guidelines and policies then don't be surprised if others take care of the job. Articles about fictional items, places and people are not immune to normal policy and guidelines. this is an example of a fictional character written about the correct way. Notice how the description of fictional characters, places and devices are done as objects of the narrative not like they are real. Most of the Star Wars articles fail to hit the right tone, have the right level of depth or present anything resembling an encyclopedia article. I don't say that to be harsh, I say that because it is true.

Let's not beat around the bush about this - writing in an in-universe fashion is simply wrong and should be replaced with prose describe the item, character or place from a real world viewpoint. Some of the articles I cleaned up (and I'm not alone in performing this clean-up lightsabre combat has been virtually re-written to get rid of it's in-universe perceptive.) were absolutely amazing in their level of detail to in-universe concerns. One had lengthy passages about the fictional contractual arrangements for the manufacture of arms. --Allemandtando (talk) 10:47, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I second Allemandtando's removal of uncited in-universe plot summary and trivia. --EEMIV (talk) 19:13, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

And I rather 'third' it. While I disagree a bit that wikiprojects tend to work against the core interests of the Project (having people who know about a subject in a specific place has its definite advantages), there is a tendency for some of the projects to slip into a 'us-versus-everyone-else' mentality. I am not saying it occurs here - or at least, not nearly as much as some of the rabid zealot/fans in other projects - but I think its prudent to remain on guard about forgetting the point of the Project. We are here to share info with the rest of the world, not just fans. That means we have to write from a real-world point of view, so that the material is accessible to even the most casual of users. It allows them to test the waters of their interest; if they like the subject, they will plunge headlong in.

To carry the swimming metaphor a bit further, adding a lot of pointless detail, or to assume/speculate about facts not cited overwhelms the reader, and they end up drowning in detail. I cannot speak for everyone else, but when I almost drown, I tend to avoid the area that nearly did for me.

A way to help test your (speaking to the various members of this project, fan and non-fan alike) edits is to have someone who has precisely no interest in the subject matter read an article, and get their detailed feedback on what they get, and what they don't. If there are parts they don't understand, you need to improve that bit, using the parts they do as a guidebook on how to improve it. Additionally, folk from outside the project should not be condemned but praised for adding a breath of fresh air to the discussions. Granted, there are folk who come in like stormtroopers and put entire articles to the torch as well as anti-zealots (I think I am part of the latter, as fancruft and "canonicity" has zero eight with me). It is something of a natural response to the point of view presented in a lot of these wikiprojects - 'well, if you don't know why Lando was in Cloud City, why the frak are you here?' - I know I tend to see a bit o' red when some chucklehead deals me a response like that. Of course, that just perpetuates the lack of AGF that is required to lubricate the gears of friendly editing, and leads to the zany adventures we call edits wars.

Maybe we can all ease out of our corners and edit as equals. Us versus Them isn't going to work. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 19:58, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Let me clarify my remarks about projects - the first is that a lot of projects slip into the mindset that they have some special authority over articles and that any major changes must be proposed and pass by them first. Also with a couple of projects (*not* this one), I've seen the very dangerous mindset that the decisions they make somehow bypass or are more important than core policies and procedures. The second issue I have is one of culture - wikiprojects are self-selecting by their nature and I think that the problem with discussion between interested fans is that they tend to consider what is more interesting to them as fans rather than our duty to the core drive of the project - to create a general readers encyclopaedia. This tends to cause conflict between members of the project and generalists like myself. I'm not saying that all wikiprojects follow into this trap but it's very hard to avoid under a long period of time. --Allemandtando (talk) 20:06, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh and check out Jabba the hutt --Allemandtando (talk) 13:50, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't wish to turn this into an argument, but I feel we have 2 different extremes here. While some of the articles may have far too much detail to be plausible (or informative to non-Star Wars fans), your act of 'cleanup' has gone for the other extreme; much of the in-depth content in the articles has been massacred. In summary, while I can see that your removal of the heavy in-universe content makes the articles more approachable for, using your words, 'someone who has precisely no interest in the subject... it takes away that extra content that fans don't know, leaving the articles nothing but empty shells for the fans who already know the basic content. So, why your edits are all very nice for most users, they really don't do anything for the fans (who make up a majority of the wikiproject members). If the articles need cleanup... fine - but consider the impact of your edits on all users, not just non-fans such as yourselves. TheMoridian 08:44, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

We are not writing for fans, we should never write for fans. That's why I'm wary about wikiprojects because a group of fans offer lacks the proper perspective. --Allemandtando (talk) 09:32, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Whoa! These articles are about Star Wars - do you not think that the major readers/ editors will be fans or users of knowledge of Star Wars?! So, you're just going to write for non-fans and ignore the fans? Surely you can see the dire faults with that idea? TheMoridian 09:36, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes we - because we are a general readers encyclopaedia, it's NOT a encyclopaedia for fans of X, Y or Z. Why do you think we have clean-up tags that say things like "this article reads like a fan page"? Read the MOS - Many fan wikis and fan websites (see below) take this approach, but it should not be used for Wikipedia articles. An in-universe perspective is inaccurate and misleading, gives undue weight to unimportant information and invites unverifiable original research. Most importantly, in-universe perspective defies community consensus as to what we do not want Wikipedia to be or become. Writing in-universe is explicitly wrong. --Allemandtando (talk) 12:48, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

No, sorry, we aren't a "general readers encyclopaedia". Wikipedia is (from the beginning) a place where we can provide summaries of all subjects of interest and also provide exhaustive detail on those subjects, conveniently linked, categorized, and searchable for readers who want more detail because we are an encyclopedia incorporating elements of general encyclopedias, specialized encyclopedias, and almanacs.. Readers who want more detail aren't general readers and specialized encyclopedias, and almanacs aren't for general readers, but for "fan" of these topics (from Arts, to Medicine, to Fiction).--213.140.15.164 (talk) 03:02, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Revenge of the Sith

Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith has been delisted from FA status. I just want to bring this attention to here. Greg Jones II 18:59, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I guess my meds must be off, 'coz I am not sure where to find the specific discussion about this article's FAR (please free to provide a link). As well, it might be worth to suggest improving the steps in the delisting discussion that the attendant Wikiproject be notified that something wicked this way comes. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 20:15, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

The link to the FAR can be found here. Greg Jones II 20:20, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

If this article isn't promoted to at least GA by 2008-09-24, then Star Wars episodes will be removed as a featured topic for no longer meeting the criteria - rst20xx (talk) 00:09, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Time for some nuclear strikes

Is it worth cleaning up articles like List of minor Star Wars characters? Are we better served just nuking the articles? --Allemandtando (talk) 15:09, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I haven't looked at WP:LIST in a while, but my observation has been that lists tend to have a lower bar for establishing the topics' notability. My inclination for lists like this is to substantially trim, similar to (shameless plug) List of Star Wars starfighters, List of Star Wars air, aquatic, and ground vehicles, List of Star Wars spacecraft. They could probably stand to have some expansion -- especially in terms of marketing/merchandise, since many of these have been turned into toys, Lego sets, etc. --EEMIV (talk) 15:45, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

hah - WP:LIST links to that article. Even if we agree it should be kept, we also agree it has to represent a real world perspective right? --Allemandtando (talk) 16:00, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

• The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
• The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
• A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 20:53, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Default importance of template

Why does it default to Top importance? See here: Template_talk:StarWarsProject#Default_importance --DanielPharos (talk) 10:52, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Articles flagged for cleanup

Currently, 1035 articles are assigned to this project, of which 327, or 31.6%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 14 July 2008.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. Subscribing is easy - just add a template to your project page. If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page. --B. Wolterding (talk) 18:42, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Star Wars video games

There is discussion happening currently at Talk:List of Star Wars video games#new categories about the organization of the list. There haven't been many editors involved - if anyone would like to comment, please do so there. – jaksmata 13:26, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I have assessed all the Star Wars articles

Resolved

I have looked at, in the last 24 hours, every star wars article (1,017 of them) and rated it on the assessment scale (stub,start, etc), so they are all rated, and have an importance measure. Therefore can I please have a Star Wars barnstar? Judgesurreal777 (talk) 21:04, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Yay, Thanks so much!!! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 03:45, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Feel free to keep churning in this project; I no longer edit fiction articles (except FACs), and this project could use the activity. — Deckiller 04:42, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Nomi Sunrider

Would appreciate comment, critique, (help) etc.

¤ Nomi Sunrider ↔ (start-to-finish)

Vengeance is mine, saith the Prime ♥ 07:12, 1 Aug 2008 (UTC)

The article needs to assert some notability, read up on WP:N. If you have specific questions, ask me or others here. The article needs things like creator interviews describing how they came up with the character, or fan reaction to the character. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 04:13, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

HK-47

What makes him more notable, or more worthy of having a page which is separated from the main list? Texcarson (talk) 21:14, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Probably nothing particularly "big" -- although I'm pretty sure he and Kreia both received some Best of... awards (villains, sidekick, humor...something like that) the years of KOTOR's and KOTOR2's releases. In general, the KOTOR/KOTOR2 character articles and lists of are a mess. Just take a look at Revan... --EEMIV (talk) 21:16, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

It isn't needed

As you probably all know, there is a wookieepedia (And no that isn't a mispelling, they just had to change the domain name) Wikipedia does not need to make a starwars project when there is already a wiki that specializes in it, which is also probably more accurate. I do not believe that these will be deleted, but it should be. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.157.19.186 (talk) 04:48, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Media franchises

Dear WikiProject Star Wars participants...WikiProject Media franchises needs some help from other projects which are similar. Media franchises' scope deals primarily with the coordination of articles within the hundreds if not thousands of media franchises which exist. Sometimes a franchise might just need color coordination of the various templates used; it could mean creating an article for the franchise as a jump off point for the children of it; or the creation of a new templating system for media franchise articles. The project primarily focuses on multimedia franchises. It would be great if some of this project's participants would come over and help the project get back on solid footing. Also, if you know of similar projects which have not received this, let Lady Aleena (talk · contribs) know. Please come and take a look at the project and see if you wish to lend a hand. You can sign up here if you wish. Thank you. LA @ 05:13, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

AFDs

Several Star Wars articles are currently up for deletion:

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kamino
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle droid
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Protocol droid
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gamorrean
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Twi'lek
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ssi-Ruuk

96T (talk) 12:31, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dates in Star Wars. The above debates are now closed as keep (most of them with no consensus), with the exceptions of Gamorrean (still ongoing) and Twi'lek (redirected). 96T (talk) 19:35, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Franchise naming convention discussion at WikiProject Media franchises

Dear WikiProject Star Wars participants...WikiProject Media franchises is currently discussing a naming convention for franchise articles. Since this may affect one or more articles in your project, we would like to get the opinions of all related projects before implimenting any sweeping changes. Please come and help us decide. Thanks! LA (T) @ 23:02, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Great article

Anyone with an interest in working on Star Wars Expanded Universe or any other article that delves into the EU and its maintenance should check out the Sept. 08 issue of Wired, which has several pages with Leland Chee, Lucasfilm's internal-consistency guru. There are several references to conflicts, the nature and degrees of "canon," etc. --EEMIV (talk) 02:38, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

The code to cite it, if it saves you some time, is

<ref name="wiredsept08">{{cite journal|last=Baker|first=Chris|year=2008|month=09|title=Master of the Universe|journal=[[Wired Magazine]]|pages=134-141|publisher=[[Condé Nast Publications]]}}</ref>

MTFBWY. --EEMIV (talk) 03:23, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Just so long as no one starts applying canon to Wikipedia. Canon and four quarters will get you $1 on Wikipedia, meaning canon has precisely no value here. If it is reliably and verifiably sourced, it has the same value as something considered canon, for the most part. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 03:33, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh, completely agreed. My general notion is that a "canon criterion" for inclusion here is non-npov. The idea that the meaning of canon varies between people -- i.e. is non-npov -- comes across in the Wired article. I wasn't suggesting this article/canon be a litmus for inclusion; rather, that it might be useful for improving the ORish/speculative content at, for example, Star Wars Expanded Universe and Star Wars canon. --EEMIV (talk) 03:41, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Discussion of {{FreeContentMeta}}

{{FreeContentMeta}}, which is used in the {{Wookieepedia box}} template, is under discussion. Please see template talk:FreeContentMeta#Inline or floating to participate in this discussion. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:14, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

SWG Userbox

Just thought I'd let you know I created a userbox for those who play Star Wars Galaxies. Just go to: User:VitasV/Userboxes/Star Wars Galaxies.--VitasV (talk) 08:42, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

0pinion about "fancruft"

I see that many pages related to Starwars have been tagged with a template which reads "out of universe", "needs more citations", etc. Most of this material doesn't have any sources which can be found using the Internet, for example all the stuff that it is written on List of Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic characters (which, by the way, gets randomly vandalized by IP addresses which add false information quite frequently) is probably legitimate and true, but it comes from internal game files and dialogs. Most of the information on those kind of pages (also Revan and Jedi Exile) are also more or less mirrors of pages found on another wiki, which is not a reliable source. Talking about "encyclopedic value", those are minor characters from a single game, and some of them remain split from the page, such as HK-47. I think there's some overlapping of information on those pages "List of Ancient Jedi" and such, where some characters are on both lists. In short, this all looks like a pile of crud. I tried to keep those pages in order for some time but my efforts were meet by strong resistance from some users and found myself fighting against an absurd set of rules.

What is the Star Wars project going to do about these problems? Texcarson (talk) 20:09, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Merging and such

As a Star Wars fan, I like to see a lot of articles on Star Wars, and I think a lot of the articles are more notable than they would be without the Star Wars name behind them. However, I think that some should be merged. For example, the Galactic Empire and Galactic Republic are technically the same entity, and are fairly relevant to each other that a merge could be possible. Anyone interested in discussing possible merged? Note that I'm not going to do any "list of characters" moves, as, while they are legitimate, I don't care much for improving lists of characters, but rather, making articles more notable by expanding their coverage. - A Link to the Past (talk) 05:06, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

And here are some articles that need sourcing - User:A Link to the Past/Sourcing problem in Star Wars articles - A Link to the Past (talk) 06:52, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

And just to add, this is not a list of "to be merged", or "to be deleted", or "bad sourcing". Several of these articles feature very good sourcing, but are lacking in certain aspects. I encourage you to find sources for creation, reception, merchandise, controversy, etc. You may add to the list if you think an article exists that needs sourcing, but don't remove any without discussion. If you need clarification of why a certain article is on the list, please feel free to ask on the talk page for the list. - A Link to the Past (talk) 06:56, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Star Wars

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 22:26, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Revamping character lists

Hi. I copy-and-pasted all the lists in Category:Star_Wars_characters to User:EEMIV/StarWarsCharacters and have been working on trimming excessive plot summary and providing external links to Wookieepedia and the Lucasfilm Databank -- it went from 600+K to ~25K. It continues to be a slow-going process, although I made a lot of headway today -- to the point where I think the "A"s are ready to go. I'd appreciate your comments, if any, on the talk page.

My criteria for inclusion, informally/initially, was, "Does this character matter?" For EU characters, I asked whether the character appears multiple times and/or has an impact when they're "not there" -- essentially, are they forgettable? More concretely, I think the scope of this list is/will be a) significant movie characters b) major characters' immediate family/offspring c) the player's characters or antagonists in video games d) antagonists in the novels (and any protagonists, like Corran Horn, who don't fit the first group). I think this offers some hefty material while avoiding problems with WP:NOT#INFO and WP:NOT#DIR. There is some room for debate on all these, particularly NJO characters like Elegos A'kla, whom I deleted from the list but now am kind of inclined to restore. And I broke some of my own "rules", i.e. axed Corran Horn's family. So, it's imperfect.

So, again, please share your thoughts. If you'd like to take a section and add links -- blurb citations, Wookieepedia links, Databank links -- please feel free to jump in. And, again, send feedback -- and perhaps give a heads up re. anyone obvious oversights, like Jar Jar Binks until a few minutes ago -- on the talk page. Again, please: on on the talk page (not here), so that when it gets moved to mainspace, the discussion goes with it.

I'll post again here when I get (close to) done; if there isn't any dissent from the more-or-less final product within ~a week then, I'll put in a move request to move this to List of Star Wars characters, set the current lists to redirect there, and begin the fun process of fixing double redirects. --EEMIV (talk) 21:16, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I plan to replace the content at List of Star Wars characters with the material currently (more or less; I might add a few more) at User:EEMIV/StarWarsCharacters on Monday-ish. As before: please let me know on the talk page if there are any substantive reasons not to nuke the project's current haphazard and duplicative lists with this amalgamation. --EEMIV (talk) 20:56, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

• comment perhaps wider notice would have helped get some comments. But even so, silence here as well as common sense does I think indicate consensus for merging the various character lists into one. My own view is that every named character in every notable fiction should have a redirect, and I have seen that frequently defended by others also, so I do not consider there is consensus about eliminating any of them. I remain unsure about consensus for dealing with the articles on the characters. DGG (talk) 23:40, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Given that this is the talk page for the appropriate project, I can't see that there's anywhere more prominent to post it. Furthermore, isn't it vastly preferrable that this work is done before the redirect actions as opposed to having yet another mass AfD of fan-fiction where the stock argument "these should be merged rather than deleted" is wheeled out? Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 12:57, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Comics

I am slowly going through comcis starting with star wars: republic, i may need help with formatting at some point.--Ravenshadow666 (talk) 10:33, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Article classification

Can someone here please add the C class to our article classification list? Thanks, Greg Jones II 22:54, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

AfD Discussion

There's an ongoing AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Languages in Star Wars about Languages in Star Wars. RayAYang (talk) 04:42, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Final comments on Wikipedia:Notability (fiction)

The current proposal for a notability guideline for fiction is nearing completion, and we'd like to get a final round of comments on it to make sure it fully reflects community consensus inasmuch as it exists on this issue. Any comments you can provide at Wikipedia talk:Notability (fiction) are much appreciated. Thanks. Phil Sandifer (talk) 15:28, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Category:Fictional swordsmen

Any thoughts about this category being added to Jedi character articles? It's mostly been added by anon. IP editors; I and a couple of others generally remove them along the lines of "lightsaber != sword", and being a "swordsman" is not a defining characteristic for these characters. But I think I've stopped removing them of late, mostly out of annoyance, and thought I'd check in here to see if the WikiProject* can reach a consensus. (*I think the registered editors who add this cat. tend not to otherwise edit a lot of SW character articles.) --EEMIV (talk) 00:53, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Gavyn Sykes

A user (that seems to be unusually invested in the actor that portrays this character...) has created this article on a VERY minor Episode I character. Not only is this article non-notable (no sources are cited except primary or the actors blog), but it is also completely written in-universe and is a blanent rip-off of the wookiepedia article. Request to merge it with List of Star Wars characters. --Torsodog^Talk 00:59, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Odd, I know Gavyn's habits, and he always makes sure that minor articles are deleted or never written. It could be someone else using his account. I'm not making judgements though.--Degenerate-Y (talk) 00:05, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Wait a minute, are you talking about the article Gavyn Sykes, or the user: User:Gavyn Sykes?--Degenerate-Y (talk) 00:11, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Milestone Announcements

All WikiProjects are invited to have their "milestone-reached" announcements automatically placed onto Wikipedia's announcements page. Milestones could include the number of FAs, GAs or articles covered by the project. No work need be done by the project themselves; they just need to provide some details when they sign up. A bot will do all of the hard work. Click here for more information or to sign your project up.

I thought this WikiProject might be interested. Ping me with any specific queries or leave them on the page linked to above. Thanks! - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 22:21, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Coordinators' working group

Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.

All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 06:39, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

FYI...

Not yet tagged for your project, but see for yourself: Star Wars: The Power of the Force - currently at AfD. --Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord² 06:38, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Races/Creatures Overlap

I just wanted to point out that the list articles for Star Wars races and Star Wars creatures overlap considerably, just in case you didn't know. I don't think this is the appropriate place for a merge template, as both lists have reason to exist. But just a friendly poke that if anyone's interested in taking the time, the two lists should be made to be consistent, and to link to one another. (To take one example, do a Wiki search for "Ugnaught". You'll find different information on the "races" list and on the "creatures" list, with no link to the other one.)

Thank you. LordAmeth (talk) 16:06, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Imperial Academy (Star Wars) (2nd nomination)

Please respond and rescue this one. Bearian (talk) 17:45, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Star Wars/Participants

was there a reason for deleting Wikipedia:WikiProject Star Wars/Participants. The Category:WikiProject Star Wars members has 143 members but the participants list at the bottom only lists like 10. So why were the rest removed? --Gman124 ^talk 19:34, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

User:Nihonjoe axed it; ask him. Could be because no wikiproject pages link(ed) to that subpage. --EEMIV (talk) 19:43, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

That was me. I redesigned the frontpage to use an ordinary table containing the people who signed the last roll call, instead of the template, which was poorly designed, maintained, ugly, and filled with many people that hadn't edited a Star Wars article in months and quite a lot who have since retired from editing completely. I have sent out a lot of invites to join the project again (though I have not yet invited everyone who was in that category; I plan on getting to it someday soon), and anyone who signs the roll call gets put into the table. The template had been deprecated and was unused, so I nominated it for Speedy Deletion under G6. Firestorm ^Talk 23:20, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

February 2009 Roll Call

Please add your name below.

1. Firestorm (talk) 02:23, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
2. --EEMIV (talk) 03:38, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
3. Chaz (talk) 15:40, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
4. DP76764 (Talk) 23:09, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
5. Fairly inactive; most of the work I do on SW articles these days is just anti-vandalism. Still interested in it, though. EVula // talk // ☯ // 23:12, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
6. --EclipseSSD (talk) 16:00, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
7. I am not super active, but I will do what I can.--Adam in MO Talk 03:15, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
8. Same as what the last guy said. Emperor001 (talk) 16:48, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
9. User:Degenerate-Y--Degenerate-Y (talk) 23:58, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
10. Quite busy nowadays, but I'll be happy to help out cncplyr (talk) 17:01, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
11. I'll see what I can do to help -- WORMMЯOW  15:34, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
12. User:Triplehman24--talk 8:37,24 May 2009 (UTC)
13. Ill do every thing i can to help

2 articles from the project are up for deletion

Dates in Star Wars and Timeline of Star Wars Books have both been nominated for deletion. Please join in the debate at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dates in Star Wars (2nd nomination). Thanks, Dalejenkins | 23:15, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

This Deletion discussion has now been Speedy Closed with no prejudice against reopening, due to this being a group AFD with articles that were too different. Also, Timeline of Star Wars Books has been redirected to List of Star Wars Books.

In addition, I have moved Dates in Star Wars to Chronology of Star Wars. I am also nominating it to be the first Collaboration of the Month of the revived WikiProject. Please vote on it there. Firestorm ^Talk 00:33, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Collaboration of the Month

Just to let you know, I have revived the Collaboration of the Month. Please start nominating and !voting on candidates for next month (May). The next collaboration will be selected by rough consensus and announced on 1 May 2009. Firestorm ^Talk 00:48, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

New colour scheme?

I think that we might want to update our colour scheme, as the current one was made when Wikipedia's Main Page used colours closer to that. I've picked out a blue and a green, and put one up on the Left Panel and one on the Right Panel. What do you guys think of wither of the two? If you guys like one of them, we can deploy it across the Project and its templates. If not, then you can come up with an alternative or revert my changes back to the old one. Firestorm ^Talk 06:44, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Character cats

Hiya. I'm going through and migrating character entries to Category:Star Wars characters rather than the unnecessarily granular and in-universe era subcats. Thought I'd give a heads up. --EEMIV (talk) 14:11, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

IMO that's a controversial boldness... What might be the project's view on this? -- Jokes Free4Me (talk) 20:03, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with it. We do have a lot of cruft that we need to get rid of. Firestorm ^Talk 20:41, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

The current categories are overcategorized across entirely in-universe cats, done half by affiliation (e.g. Imperial, Mandolorians) and half by era (e.g. Old Republic, Rebellion). Most cats had just three or four entries, with negligible likelihood for expansion. For comparison, take a look at the simple Category:Harry_Potter_characters. --EEMIV (talk) 20:48, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Anakin and Vader

Seeing as a WikiProject is a better place to ask: why do we have two articles for Anakin/Vader? I would've expected the two to be in the same article, but maybe the Doctor Who precedent (a new article for a significantly new and permanent personality) could apply here... Sceptre ^(talk) 14:14, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

This question has come up before... I think I !voted to keep them separate, but now am inclined to go in the other direction. I dunno. Glad I could offer something definitive. --EEMIV (talk) 14:16, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Spring 2009 Roll Call

Please sign your name below if you consider yourself an active member of the WikiProject:

1. Firestorm ^Talk 00:49, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
2. --EEMIV (talk) 02:01, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
3. -- WORMMЯOW  08:09, 14 April 2009 (UTC) (but I'm a touch busy with work... will do what I can!)
4. Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:46, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
5. User:Triplehman24 I want to help any way i can

Collaboration of the Month

Mara Jade has been selected as the Collaboration of the Month for May 2009! Please contribute as we try and raise its class this month. Firestorm ^Talk 00:37, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Help

For the life of me, I cannot figure out why the caption field at {{Star Wars character}} isn't, ya know, causing captions to appear. I pretty much copied the template verbatim from {{Star Trek character}}, which displays captions fine here and here -- but the caption at e.g. Mara Jade doesn't display. Can someone please take a look? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EEMIV (talk • contribs)

That's really weird. I tool a look at it, and I can't for the life of me figure out why that is happening. If I figure it out, i'll let you know. Until then, maybe try the Helpdesk? Firestorm ^Talk 20:24, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Coordinator

I've just created our new outline of the Coordinator duties at Wikipedia:WikiProject Star Wars/Coordinator. Please have a look. I used the LGBT Project Coordinator page as an outline. Since i've been working to reactivate this project, i'm more or less the de facto coordinator anyway, so the next elections will be held six months from now.

Anybody interested in becoming Deputy Coordinator (one or two people should do it), please drop a note here or on my talk page. Thanks! Firestorm ^Talk 05:40, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Animated Star Tours?

Does anyone know anything about an animated version of Star Tours? There's a user continually making edits referencing such a production, but without sources. I've detailed the situation at Wikipedia:Editor assistance/Requests#Star Tours: Animated?. Would appreciate help from WikiProject Star Wars. =) Powers ^T 14:42, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

• I've seen it too and it sounds dubious to me. I'm leaning towards removing it and keeping it out until a wp:RS is provided. Niteshift36 (talk) 14:57, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

• All I've seen recently about Star Tours is that they're re-filming it, but it's live-action. --EEMIV (talk) 15:29, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
  • Yes, that's at Star Tours II and is not what the IP user is linking. Powers ^T 17:27, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Yuuzhan Vong invasion

Yuuzhan Vong invasion was PRODed for deletion. I removed the prod because it's been around forever, but it'll probably be sent to AfD soon. 70.29.208.129 (talk) 06:38, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

• I added it to my watchlist. If you see it AfD'd before I do, please drop a note here and I'll do the same. Niteshift36 (talk) 14:17, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Numerous Star Wars articles in AfD

The Great Jedi Purge, Yuuzhan Vong invasion and Jedi Council are among the 12 articles nominated for deletion in this WP:Articles for deletion/Great Jedi Purge (2 nomination). Niteshift36 (talk) 09:19, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Are there enough articles on this subject to justify an Outline of Star Wars?

By the way, here's a relevant discussion about subject development you might find interesting.

Now back to the question...

The Transhumanist 01:21, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Clean up needed: Fallout from List of Star Wars characters

In October 2008, many entries were deleted from List of Star Wars characters. Unfortunately, nobody went through Wikipedia to check for (now) broken links to the article. For example, the entry for Ghent was deleted. But the link on the disambig page Ghent (disambiguation) was not removed, and the #REDIRECT page Ghent (Star Wars) was not proposed for deletion.

I have cleaned up the fallout from Ghent. As your Project created this mess, I must suggest that the responsibility is on you to clean up the rest of it. (A good place to start would be Special:WhatLinksHere/List_of_Star_Wars_characters.) HairyWombat (talk) 04:54, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

I have added some comments to the talk pages of Darth Plagueis and List of Star Wars characters that may be relevant to your project. Mainly, i think, as mentioned on the list of things to do, that the big list should be split into some smaller more inclusive lists.Quickmythril (talk) 05:13, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

GA Reassessment of Clone Wars (Star Wars)

I have done a GA Reassessment of the Clone Wars (Star Wars) article as part of the GA Sweeps project. I do not believe that the article meets the current GA Criteria. As such I have put the article on hold for a week and I am notifying all interested projects and editors of the possibility that the article could lose its GA status if work is not done. I am open to discussion so please contact me on my talk page if you have questions. H1nkles (talk) 18:03, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Articles that need help

On reaserch I found that List of Star Wars Characters needs help. It just needs more description. Maybe we should make smaller lists with more description. I did a little edit to make it better. But the page needs improvement. I will put more articles that need improvement if I find any. Tennispro45 00:06, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

GAR for Sarlacc

I have done a GA Reassessment of the Sarlacc article as part of the GA Sweeps project. I do not believe that the article meets the current GA Criteria. As such I have put the article on hold for a week and I am notifying all interested projects and editors of the possibility that the article could lose its GA status if work is not done. I am open to discussion so please contact me on my talk page if you have questions. --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 02:03, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Article alerts

This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 09:43, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

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)