User talk:Jack Nebulax

Archived talk: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10

Asajj Ventress
Oh, I see. So by your explanation, you must be going through the entirety of Wookieepedia's articles and removing comic images where talk bubbles have been whited out, since those too, are fan modified. - JMAS 01:13, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
 * That's different. We don't want words in images. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 12:12, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I've gotten confirmation from Administrators that this image is allowed. There are other fan-altered images in articles and there is no policy that states they are not allowed. Please leave it in the article. - JMAS 15:20, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
 * It's still not main-image worthy, though. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 20:08, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
 * That's fine and thinking on it, I agree with you. But you removed it even when I had put it further down in the article. That was my objection. - JMAS 20:38, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I removed it only because I knew it was fan-modified. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 20:39, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Blocked?
My son, who goes by the name Quinlanfan, was blocked earlier today. I have reviewed the transacations in question and the response to his contesting the block. At no time were the words "warning" ever issued prior to his block. The response from wikia said that the wookieepedia administration claimed that he had been warned. The dialogue given as an example instructed him, as a new user, each time he did something wrong - but seemed to be in a friendly, corrective tone. I saw nothing that anyone would have taken as a warning. And each time he heeded their advice. This is a great site for star wars fans to debate and enjoy their favortite subject. Many of his young friends also enjoy it. Please stick to the rules of blocking and issue a formal warning notice if you are not happy with the way someone is conducting themselves. When the tone of voice is removed from the message - the message can be taken many different ways. As administrators it is their job to follow the rules that I assume they established - and a clear official warning is listed in the said rules. Thank you for your time reviewing this situation. I hope in the future your administrators will be more helpfull and less abrupt with new users. It would be appreciated if you would deal with the administrator in question, Darth Culator, on how to deal with and help new users. You can email a response to this to Jlbell@bellsouth.net
 * I would suggest that you take this issue up with Darth Culator on his talk page since he is the administrator that blocked Quinlanfan.– 04:06, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
 * And Jack's not an Admin. -- Yoshi  626 [[Image:Yoshiegg.jpg|20px]] 04:11, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
 * And hopefully never will be. I think that was pretty harsh too.  How about a day for every "offense"?
 * Herbsewell, get off my talk page. That was completely unnecessary and extremely rude. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 12:12, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Herbsewell, leave Jack alone. He is a great contributor and is trying his best (and succeeding) to be a good citizen. I know you have a personal grudge against him for whatever reason, but please, keep it to yourself. And I'd support Jack for admin and I know many others would. Chack Jadson 20:44, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Herbsewell's just to make me look bad... as always. Anyway, I'm about to bring the case up on IRC. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 20:47, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Good idea. He just tries to make things miserable for you, and constantly attacks you. Chack Jadson 20:50, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Exactly. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 20:51, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
 * And thanks for fixing this page, Chack. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 23:25, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Imperial insignia
The VFD page you voted on overlapped with the existing merge discussion thread on Forum:Imperial insignia page: would you mind voting there? Thanks, &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 00:19, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure thing. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 00:19, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Recent edits
I don't know why it every time I make a valid page edit, you feel the need to change it when there is nothing wrong with the edits I made. Is it personal? Do you always have to have your way? - JMAS 14:27, 13 January 2007 (UTC) I'm curious why, in the Palpatine article, in the Preceded by/Succeeded by part at the end, you changed the wording back from "Previously" to "Eventually". This isn't an issue I'm going to argue about, just hoping you can explain your reasons for choosing that word. The word eventually is an adverb meaning something at a later time, and it doesn't seem like that fits when talking about the past. And time in the SW universe is linear and, so far, there is no time travel. That was the reason I chose the word previously instead, because it implies it's from the past. - JMAS 21:08, 13 January 2007 (UTC) I find myself wondering why you reverted my very small edit on the General Grevious article. I'm just saying this because all the information I entered was both relevant and correct. I don't really understand the inner workings of Wookieepedia yet, so mainly I'm asking so that I know what to do in the future. - Darth Geo 09:47, 27 January 2007 (UTC) 14:42, 27 January 2007
 * 1) Why no infoboxes on Stormtroopers and Scout troopers? I don't recall seeing that in the official MOS guidelines of Wookieepedia.
 * 2) Why did you revert the AT-ST main image? Seems to me the prefered setting is to NOT use the NEG images as the infobox image unless there is no other recourse. Hence the BF image would be the better choice.
 * Number one: All stormtroopers and scout troopers are not the same. Therefore, such an infobox is pointless. Number two: In that case, the TNEGtVaV is the better image. Number three: It's not personal. I'm just making the articles look better. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 14:30, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Fine, I can see that point on the infoboxes. I disagree on the AT-ST image. But your opinion seems to be the only one that matters. However, on the Stacking of the images on the bottom of the Scout trooper page, it looks better to have the images stacked on top of each other so that the lower image does not extend below the last of the page text. That is my opinion. And on this one I am not backing down. Do not change it back again. - JMAS 14:36, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but I am. Images stacked on top of one another look horrible. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 14:37, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, "eventually" is also defined as "coming before or after something at an earlier/later time". At least, that's what it says in my dictionary. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 21:12, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Ahh, the one I have handy is just a small size. You must have the collegiate edition. LOL. It still sounds funny to me, but that's fine. Thanks for explaining. - JMAS 21:15, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I find it a bit odd, too, but, hey, I didn't define the word. ;) Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 21:17, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * It wasn't necessary. Just because Grievous doesn't deflect blaster bolts in one game doesn't mean he can't anywhere else. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 14:27, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

The Force is Strong With This One!
Hi, DC blocked me thursday afternoon. Shouldn't The block be done by now? Also I did not mean to be arguemenitive with you about the figures. What i ment was to ONLY have figure info on EU characters. Could you please put back Quinlan and Alpha? I have checked several times and Hasbro announced a couple of months ago that they WILL be making those figures.Last but not Least, I think that you would make a great adminastrator. Let me know what you think about all that on Quinlanfan's talk page.


 * 1) It depends on if Darth Culator had any reason to extend the block. 2) No, I'm not putting the information back. There's a vote going on that will decide it. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 23:38, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

We Meet Again

 * Hello Jack. I haven't seen you in a while. I like what you have done with your user page and subpages. I look forward to seeing their completion. I am also anxious to complete our little saga, although it probably won't ever be finished, it seems that every time I finish it, I always try to add something new. I am also going to complete my Fleet Composition, and hopefully include drawings of the individual vessels. I know I left on such a short notice, and I apologize, is there anything important that I've missed? If you would be so kind as too inform me, that would me nice. Ta,ta.-- IG-Prime (Sentience Core)[[Image:Arakyd Industries.jpg|17px]] 21:57, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Nice to see you again, IG. I don't think anything really important happened while you were gone, though. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 23:47, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I added a new section on my bio, if you could read it, it would be great. It starts after the Battle of the Star Forge. Thanks. Here is a link to use for your convenience.-- IG-Prime (Sentience Core)[[Image:Arakyd Industries.jpg|17px]] 21:56, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'll have to read it later, though; I won't be home for the rest of the night. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 22:05, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I see, well that is fine, but I have an idea, if you have a moment to discuss it, please contact me. Thanks.-- IG-Prime (Sentience Core)[[Image:Arakyd Industries.jpg|17px]] 22:12, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm on a relative's laptop, but please tell me your idea. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 23:15, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi jack, IG-prime asked me to show you this image for his fan fic, its of a younger you and his IG incarnation. Joker1138 ( Mandalore )
 * I wanted to know what you thought about the image. But my idea was a fanfic competition, but Ataru says that we can't due to the WHat Wookieepedia is not, so nevermind. Anyway, Joker1138's image was better than I had dared hoped, I am going to use it on my page somewhere.-- IG-Prime (Sentience Core)[[Image:Arakyd Industries.jpg|17px]] 12:16, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I think it's very good. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 12:18, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Biography
Admiral Jack, I was wondering if i could add you to my in universe fanon biography. My character would be a Junior Officer on your ship around the time of that pirate attack that severed your arm. As soon as i am finished I will have it posted. Cheers, Eggzavier 22:17, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure thing. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 23:47, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay, its up under my user page, if you have any thing you want changed let me know there, here, or on my talk page. Ty again. -Eggzavier 03:33, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Great. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 12:09, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Sourcing Question

 * I asked Culator this, but no reply, and you're faster on the rep than he is most of the time anyway. :-) Anyway, do sources like the NEGTD count for characters like Anakin Skywalker, Revan, etc. who are mentioned in the book but not in great detail? Does it get listed on their sources section? Oh, and btw thanks for the congrats. Atarumaster88  [[Image:Jedi_Order.jpg|20px]] ( Audience Chamber ) 01:55, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure. They might, but if the source in question doesn't reveal much information on them, they don't absolutely need to be listed. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 12:11, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Some userbox help
I need some help for the userbox container. How do you include more than 12 boxes in it? I currently have 12 and am trying to add two more (1 custom, if that matters at all). I see you have many userboxes, you respond fast, and we encountered each other before, so you're a good bet to help me figure this out. Thanks a lot. Chack Jadson 01:05, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * To be honest, I don't know. It might be best for you to just copy mine and then replace mine with yours and delete the remaining ones. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 01:07, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll try that. Thanks Jack. Oh, and by the way, how do you make that arrow everyone uses in the edit summary? Sorry, dumb question. Chack Jadson 01:09, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, instead of clicking "edit" at the top of the page, click the smaller "edit" button to the right of each section header before making an edit. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 01:12, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh. Duh. Sorry, I just never tried that for some reason. I feel like such a noob. Thanks once again. Always a pleausre to talk to you. Chack Jadson 01:14, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 01:15, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I need help! How can I get userboxes at all? Commander Rob 16:32, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Do you mean getting userboxes onto your user page? &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 21:21, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Really.
Can you point me towards this dictate, this little foible of grammar? . .  .  .  01:23, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * It's from an English textbook, Fourdot. I personally think it's wrong; I always thought your way was right. But apparently it isn't. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 01:24, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Really. So we are weighing one English textbook against all the common sense in the world. When we find a little bit more evidence, then I think it might be safe to assume that this brand new, fantastic law of English is correct, but until that time, let's stick with what has been proper grammar for years. .  .  .  .  01:29, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * To insert my opinion on this battle of the grammatically correct ... I do believe a normally italicized word, such as a ship name, when enclosed within an italicized title, just remains italicized with the rest of the title, not de-italicized to make it stand out. - JMAS 01:48, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * To insert *my* opinion, I'll block both of you, Jack and Fourdot, if you can't work this out in talk pages instead of edit histories. Galactic Empire is currently protected because of this disagreement, but if you move this edit war to other pages I'll cut the problem off at the source.  That said, I too am unfamiliar with the rule that Jack is stating, and I suggest we get confirmation of some sort, one way or the other. Jack, if you can indicate the source for this rule, it would be appreciated; currently, I haven't found any online sources that say one way or the other, but I will continue to look. jSarek 01:54, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm looking also. I'll post here if I find anything one way or the other.  Though barring that, I have to say, having one word unitalicized in an italicized title, to me, looks rediculous. - JMAS 01:59, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * How exactly is it correct this way?--Herbsewell 02:01, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * No more so that one word italicized in an unitalicized text, I wouldn't think. I know that de-italicizing italicized words in italicized text is standard grammar in most cases, and the only reason I have any doubt at all about it in this case is because Jack has indicated he's read otherwise in an authoritative source.  jSarek 02:03, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * If Liquidator would be italicized, then this is the proper way. Though it's called the Three-revert rule, not the Eight-revert rule.--Herbsewell 02:09, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * According to every site I've found on proper grammar usage of italics, its saying that italics and underline text mean the same thing. But I can't find anything about what to do with a normally italicized word in an italicized title. But every source says you should never use both italics and underlined words at the same time. Maybe we should make the Ship name in this case bolded text like *Star Wars Missions 4: Destroy the Liquidator. - JMAS 02:23, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * IIRC, i've seen Star Wars novels de-italicize italicized words in italicized text. It's probably best for Wookieepedia to do the same. --Azizlight 02:35, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * That's because it's proper grammar, even if citable websites haven't been particularly forthcoming; however, here is one article on the topic. Note that it explicitly refers to a ship name within italics. For further information, this search string turned up a few other decent citations. jSarek 02:44, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Hooray. I apologise for the shameless edit war though. .  .  .  .  05:29, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia agrees. See Italics.– 06:09, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * How about the book, Iron Fist from the X-wing series?--Herbsewell 11:57, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Fourdot: As do I. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 12:12, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Well there is a Consensus track for this, so we might as well make our conclusions there.--Herbsewell 03:26, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Providence Class Destroyer
Just wandering why the edits at just after 23:00 UK time were reverted? Looking them over they do not seem erroneous? In my copy of Star Wars magazine (UK) 18 months ago ago it was listed with the kills of Several Venator Class ships and several Victory class as being attributed to Invisible Hand, over half a dozen at Coruscant, perhaps it is not typical of its class in this? Although by the sheer bulk of firepower (Many more turbolasers than a Venator) and the redundant Mon-Calamari style systems one would assume one on one is would be Superior to a Venator. Logic no? I would attibute the Venator taking out Invisible Hand as more of a A-Wing to Executor example than visa versa. Although perhaps with the bulk of fighters a Venator is equipped with the balance is redressed slightly? Not really if you think about it. An A-Wing took out Executor, an few fighters took out the deathstar, that does not make it a typical situation.
 * They are, because your edits make it seem like the Providence-class was far better than the Venator-class. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 12:02, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * A Star Wars magazine is not a reliable source. I think. - TopAce 15:09, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, it is. That magazine is the UK equivalent of Insider, and it carries most of Insider's articles, too - \\Captain Kwenn// &mdash; Ahoy! 15:13, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * FYI, a Venator took out Invisible Hand. That disproves your theory. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 19:59, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * That doesn't matter. Taking on a couple of Venators and defeating them doesn't mean Invisible Hand is immune to Venator attacks, and that only Imperial-class Star Destroyers can take it out. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 14:03, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
 * An A-Wing took out Executor, an few fighters took out the deathstar
 * Actually, the Executor got its shields weakened by capital ship fire and the A-wing crashed into the bridge, it didn't blow up the vessel on its own. The Death Star had an opening that served as its Achilles Heel. No fighter could compare to them in an actual straight fight. Saying the Invisible Hand was stronger than a Venator-class Star Destroyer doesn't mean it's automatically equal in power to an ISD. VT-16 07:33, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I was not suggesting that "only Imperial Class Vessels could take it out" I was suggesting that in normal conditions it was more than a match for a Venator, and in most conditions it would probrably be better paired against an Imperial for an equivalence of power, than a Venator. Again an A-Wing took out Executor. It does not make it typical. You are refusing to listen to reason. Wiki:"A lucky shot from the Guarlara started a chain reaction in the Invisible Hand's point-defense cannon bays that almost destroyed", Lucky shots do not signify the overall "whoshouldwiness" of the ship. Or by definition any Executor should be considered worse than an A-Wing? Correct? Weak. Anyway, as we have more evidence of Providence Class ships taking out multple Venators.. I would say that is more the norm than the one damaged providence downed in ROTS.
 * Again, a Venator took out Invisible Hand. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 23:12, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
 * And whose's to say, anon, that Invisible Hand didn't just fire lucky shots to destroy those other Venators? Your case is weak, and I grow tired of it. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 14:36, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Nebulax, I am starting to see his point. The Invisible Hand did take out those Venators after all. There could have been several variables that lead to the Venators' demises, despite the firepower on the Providence-Class Cruiser, but they were defeated. However, the Invisible Hand may have had help in destroying those Venators. As for The Invisible Hand itself, it had seen some action that day, and would have been tired out from the battle when it was attacked. Also take into consideration that the Invisible Hand was not destroyed, and it was able to restabilize itself after the attack. Either way, it's hard to say. We would need a perfect battle situation to conclude that one was more powerful than the other. Of course, we don't live anywhere near perfect, that's why there's Walgreens.-- IG-Prime (IG-2000)[[Image:Arakyd Industries.jpg|17px]] 17:35, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Anon, get off my talk page. It's not being changed. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 19:09, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Who is Anon?-- IG-Prime (IG-2000)[[Image:Arakyd Industries.jpg|17px]] 19:19, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The person who keeps arguing this. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 19:21, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * It would be better to bring this argument to the talk page of the article in question.--Herbsewell 19:34, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't see any reason to anymore. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 19:35, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Why?--Herbsewell 19:57, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Because I've already said Invisible Hand taking out Venators doesn't mean it's better than them. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 22:15, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Why would they be?--Herbsewell 22:18, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Could you clarify that, Herbsewell? Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 22:20, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Why would Invisible Hand be better than Venators?--Herbsewell 23:03, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * That's what I say. We definitely shouldn't say that Providences were far better than Venators just because Invisible Hand took out some Venators. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 01:26, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * But, if we don't have hard and fast canonical proof about which ship is "better"- which is in itself, entirely subjective and largely dependent on a number of variables including commander, range of engagement, better at what exactly, etc., we really shouldn't put it in there, IMHO. Also, is this really going anywhere important, or just another argument? Atarumaster88  [[Image:Jedi_Order.jpg|20px]] ( Audience Chamber ) 04:34, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * It's becoming another arguement. I've already told the anon that his edits on Providences being better than Venators isn't going back in, and if he would happen to re-add them, I would revert it again. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 12:10, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Action figures
Hey Jack, I've started a new consensus track for this issue at Forum:Action figures - Revised. It's currently under construction to be sure we have the right options available. Let me know what you think. 22:49, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the link. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 00:55, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Recusant-class Light Destroyer
Got a source for the claim that it "regularly" crashed into other vessels? I cant find one. We see one crash in the films but as we know, they are hardly a source for "regular activity". Also, I think it should be clarified, its 4 for a Victory, 6 for a Venator right? (has seen these numbers somewhere but doesnt remember the precise details). I know it wasnt just 4-6 for either. Got a source?
 * It was 4 to 6 for the Victory. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 23:12, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
 * RotS:ICS. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 14:36, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * "Four to six can outgun a Republic Venator-class or Victory-class Star Destroyer..."

- ROTS:ICS, page 15 VT-16 07:40, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

FA noms

 * Can you spare a glance at some of the noms Admiral? Some of them are beginning to just sit there- not much input at all! Atarumaster88  [[Image:Jedi_Order.jpg|20px]] ( Audience Chamber ) 00:50, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure thing. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 01:15, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Trivia game?
We probably should update: are you volunteering? 8) &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 00:54, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll see what I can do with it... What positions are available? ;) &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 01:15, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Maybe you can be fleet trivia guy? &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 02:05, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 12:03, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Nomination
I am seriously considering nominating you as an administrator. I don't want to do it without your consent, so may I? I really think you deserve it.-- IG-Prime (IG-2000) 21:53, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * That will be try number 4... Well, it's worth a shot. Might as well see how much support I have. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 22:57, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Very well, I shall commence Operation:Get Nebulax Elected as an Administrator. Catchy isn't it?-- IG-Prime (IG-2000)[[Image:Arakyd Industries.jpg|17px]] 23:15, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Very. Hopefully I'll make it this time. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 23:17, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * There, it's done. Now just sit back and wait. With as much luck as Ataru had, I am sure you'll win this time. I am confident in your abilities. You may answer the questions when it is most opportune for you.-- IG-Prime (IG-2000)[[Image:Arakyd Industries.jpg|17px]] 23:20, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * To be honest, I doubt it will succeed. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 23:20, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * "Now, now your highness, the suffering of your people will soon change yourr point of view!" A little dark and inaccurate, but I think you get the point. Try to be more optimistic.-- IG-Prime (IG-2000)[[Image:Arakyd Industries.jpg|17px]] 23:22, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Hmm...it's not going too well so far.-- IG-Prime (IG-2000)[[Image:Arakyd Industries.jpg|17px]] 23:38, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * People don't want me to be an admin... I'm Anakin Skywalker, and they are the Jedi Council. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 00:33, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry to hear that your nomination failed again. In the past i would have said no flat-out, but you are getting there.  Patience.  You'll be there soon.  HappyTimeHarry 22:10, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I really appreciate that. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 22:12, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry it failed. I should have been more supportive. I could have done more.for you. You are what administrators should be like. Idealistic, aggressive, emotional and Wiki-loving. You love the wiki, and that is what makes you such a logical canidate. Take consolation in the fact that so many rely on your administrator defactoness. This wiki would fall to peices if you left. I know you can be gruff to new users, heck I ignore most of them, especially the ones who can't spell. You were even somewhat rude to me in my first week or so. But you got over it, you apologized, and now you are the user I respect the most. If you have ever seen NCIS, you are definitely Gibbs (that's a good thing). My point is that you would add logic and sense to the pantheon of admininstrators. They will soon realize your potential. I believe that you are the best choice by far. "They need you, more than they know."-- IG-Prime (IG-2000)[[Image:Arakyd Industries.jpg|17px]] 22:28, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, IG. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 23:22, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * You are welcome. I wish for you to observe, if not partake, in the disscussion here.-- IG-Prime (IG-2000)[[Image:Arakyd Industries.jpg|17px]] 23:24, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure thing. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 23:25, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Jack, i would like to give you a friendly warning to stay out of that. just sayin'... HappyTimeHarry 23:26, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I think that's a good idea. No offense, IG, but I just don't want to get involved in something like that so soon after a failed admin nomination. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 23:27, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * You shouldn't be so easily intimidated Jack. Besides, I belive you may be right, your word would hardly be taken into consideration by the other... people. But sometimes I think they are just souless machines, enslaved to their... rules and regulations. Although a little help or consolation would be nice. At the moment, I am all alone.-- IG-Prime (IG-2000)[[Image:Arakyd Industries.jpg|17px]] 23:30, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but I really don't want to make any enemies anymore. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 23:32, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Palpatinian quotes
Actually, Jack, most of those quotes were from Labyrinth of Evil, Shadow Hunter, and Rise of Darth Vader. I didn't source them because they were from a word document I had of Sith quotes I had culled from all sorts of books and I couldn't remember which quote was from which book and didn't want to be inaccurate. --- and do we really need the Darth Bane quote in Palpatine's bio after saying he learned about the rule of two? It doesn't add new info, it's not like Bane told Palpy himself, and it's probably the most reused quote ever. Ewor Nimajneb 01:55, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. And I guess the Bane quote isn't that necessary. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 12:07, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Rockin' my socks continued
Leader 02:31, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 12:08, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Heh...
Heh... whoops. Guess I should click some links and maybe check earlier in the article before editing. Oh well... Thanks for correcting. 21:54, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 21:55, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

The Millennium Falcon vs. Millennium Falcon
If you recall the old discussion at Forum:CT Archive/"the" ship names and Wookieepedia talk:Manual of Style, we currently use the definite article when talking about ships unless the majority of canonical sources omit it. This only seems to be the case with Home One and Slave I: the Falcon is referred to as "the Millennium Falcon from the Han Solo's first scene on through. Hence my reversion of your reversion. &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 22:24, 24 January 2007 (UTC) I personally think it reads oddly to not have "the" before a ship name like Millennium Falcon, but Jack is right. The only time "the" should be used in front of a ship name is when the name is abbreviated, ie: "Get back to the Falcon." StarWars.com supports this as evidenced here in the fourth paragraph from the bottom. - JMAS 14:02, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but we use proper English grammar here. That makes however the books have it irrelevant. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 23:21, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * But, as you'll see if you look at some of the links in the previous discussions, I think it's not necessarily improper to include "the". It's just not preferred by many, but not all, style guides. Whatever style guide Lucasfilm licensees are using doesn't seem to demand its omission, anyway. &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 23:34, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Silly Dan, I'm only doing this because English grammar says that's wrong. I've always thought that "the" was to be used before ship names, but that's not the case. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 23:35, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * You know, it was the Titanic, not just Titanic. Just saying. :(-- IG-Prime (IG-2000)[[Image:Arakyd Industries.jpg|17px]] 23:36, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * "The Titanic" isn't official. Just "Titanic" is. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 23:37, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I suppose. But "the" should be used within the article. Not the article title.-- IG-Prime (IG-2000)[[Image:Arakyd Industries.jpg|17px]] 23:40, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * That's your opinion, and one that goes against proper American English grammar, might I add. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 23:41, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Well the title should be Millenium Falcon, but in the article it should say "...the Milleneum Falcon blasted out of Mos Eisley." instead of "... Millenium Falcon blasted out of Mos Eisley.". As for proper English, the Falcon is a noun, not a pronoun(as it is a ship, not a sentient being). As such it requires the, before its name is stated.-- IG-Prime (IG-2000)[[Image:Arakyd Industries.jpg|17px]] 01:01, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Just as we don't say "the Darth Vader was killed by the Luke Skywalker", we don't say "the Millennium Falcon..." Proper American English grammar, which we use here, says "the" is not to be used in front of ship names. As for "the Falcon", that's okay because "the" takes the place of "Millennium". &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 01:06, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * A ship name is not a pronoun and therefore needs a "the" before its name(i.e. a pronoun is for people names, such as George or Robert, not ships like the Falcon for instance).-- IG-Prime (IG-2000)[[Image:Arakyd Industries.jpg|17px]] 01:12, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, IG, but you're wrong. Now, I have no desire to argue this any further. I didn't make the grammar rules. I only follow them. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 01:15, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Very well, I understand your point. It would be mutually pointless to continue this arguement over a simple grammatical ambiguation. I apologize for continueing this conversation further than it needed to be. I also am becoming different in my opinion of your nutrality. I am now officially begging you to offer some insight or opinion to the discussion. I have such little support, I desperately need the help of someone who likes, or at least favors, my ideas.-- IG-Prime (IG-2000)[[Image:Arakyd Industries.jpg|17px]] 01:51, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm going to have to revert it anyway, though, because it goes against the current version of our Manual of Style. If you want to reopen the discussion, and think that you'll be able to convince the rest of us, feel free to try it out on the CT or on the MoS talk page. In the meantime, I think the "the" should stay. &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 03:14, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) The MoS is wrong. 2) I've already brought the issue up on the MoS talk page. 3) We use proper American English grammar here. 4) I'm reverting it. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 12:04, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * (1) The MoS is not necessarily wrong, I think: in any case, it's the current MoS, which most of the rest of the articles on this site comply with. (2) You brought up the issue on the talk page and didn't manage to get consensus for a change to the style guide.  (3) On the CT thread, we found one American style guide which said "no the", one Canadian guide which said "the", and an international (Wikipedia) style guide which seemed ambiguous: perhaps a renewed discussion will find more contradictory style guides from American and non-American sources.  (Canadian English disagrees with American in vocabulary and spelling, but rarely in grammar.) (4) If you don't make a good-faith attempt to reopen the discussion, you're not following the rules by which we operate.  I'm not reverting today, but I will tomorrow unless the discussion is properly re-activated. &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 12:53, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I too think it's odd, especially because Han himself ofter refers to it as "the Millennium Falcon". 15:07, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, Han isn't exactly a walking English textbook. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 21:11, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Heh, that's true. 21:14, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * True, but I was reading Therefore I Am: The Tale of IG-88 this evening, and several times both Darth Vader and E-3PO(if not several others) refer to the ship as the Millenium Falcon.-- IG-Prime (IG-2000)[[Image:Arakyd Industries.jpg|17px]] 21:16, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Star Wars books are not English textbooks either. In any case, I've started a consensus track on the matter. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 21:20, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Picture question.
Does it take up space if you only put in a code? Or will it take up space just like up- loading? Paleontologist.piczo

Recent vandal attack to this page.
Can someone please find out where that vandal lives? &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) 20:31, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Britain. London to be exact. -- Redemption [[Image:Redemptionusersymbol.png|20px]] Talk 20:38, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * London? I don't know anyone in London. How could someone there know my name? &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 20:40, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * It's an open proxy. So the tracking might be inaccurate. How about San Leandro (or anywhere nearby)? -- Redemption [[Image:Redemptionusersymbol.png|20px]] Talk 20:52, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't know anyone in Britain, unless the vandal was someone who knew me that's on vacation in Britain. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 20:54, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * San Leandro is in California...word travels fast on the Internet with MySpace and Facebook. Probably someone who knows somebody who knows somebody. -- Redemption [[Image:Redemptionusersymbol.png|20px]] Talk 20:56, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't have anything on MySpace or Facebook. And I don't know anyone in California&mdash;hell, the only people I really know live here in Pennsylvania. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 20:58, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * And what the hell is the "vast empire"? &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 21:02, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Judging from what was in the parenthesis, sounds like a slash fanfic site. As for your little know it all vandal, might want to ask an admin for the IP address of the vandal (I can't track users IPs - only anons) and track it yourself. -- Redemption [[Image:Redemptionusersymbol.png|20px]] Talk 21:07, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I know what the website is now... A friend of mine joined this site called the "Vast Empire" a while ago. He didn't have a computer, so he used my e-mail address and, apparently, my screen name. He's not the vandal, but apparently he did something wrong and this vandal thinks that he's me. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 21:09, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * That Vast Empire site is the third result in a Google search for your name. --  I need a name  ( Complain here ) 21:31, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Great... No wonder my friend hasn't talked to me for a while. Whatever he did must have made him afraid of the consequences. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 21:33, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * On a side note, you live in Pennsylvania? Mind if I ask where? And, on another note, what the heck is up with all these vandals yesterday and today? 22:46, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't want to be specific, but I can say that I live in the Harrisburg area. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 22:47, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I didn't expect you to be specific (in fact, if you were, I'd be a lot surprised), so that's fine. It's always weird when you find out people actually live in the same state, even if they appear like they live in California or England or somewhere. 22:50, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I know what you mean. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 22:52, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I think that today's vandal was the same person behind the majority of the vandalism-only accounts we had last year: I believe he was in Italy. He likely only found your real name and old email address by doing a Google search on your username, so it's unlikely to be anyone you've had contact with outside of reverting vandalism here.  (Two of his names were apparently based on nicknames I've given real-life friends on my blog, though he got one of them completely wrong.  He loses at trolling.) &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 23:13, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * After a brief interrogation of my friend, I found out he had done nothing to this "Vast Empire"; he merely went in and out of being active, and this must have ticked someone off. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 01:03, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Reverts
Hey Jack, I noticed you've been reverting some of Whistler's edits. Please do not do this, unless it makes a mistake, like capitalizing humanoid (Btw, I just fixed that problem). We had a quick discussion on IRC, to make sure the first letter of templates was supposed to be capitalized. I know it's not a policy, but it helps, especially with mass edits, to have the same capitalization. Else you need to throw in extra exceptions to catch every instance. Thanks for your time. Let me know if you have a problem with this. 02:02, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. I thought it was a bug or something. Personally, I think the first letter of the templates should not be capitalized; it's distracting. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 12:41, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Some Advice
Hey Jack. In light of your failed admin nomination, I'd like to offer you some advice. Try to just forget about the adminship. Go 3-4 months without running. Just don't worry about it. Continue to a good citizen, and just try your best to not argue with others. Even if they are wrong, keep an even keel. To be honest, several people have grudges and will probably vote no no matter what you do, but don't worry about it. Just forget about adminship for a while. I know it's got to be hard for you, but just continue contributing, and eventually you should get your due. Good luck (you probably know all this anyway). Always nice talking to one of Wookieepedia's greatest editors. Chack Jadson 21:33, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Chack. Anyway, basically everything you said I already knew/was going to do (no offense; just the truth). &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 21:35, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I figured. Just making sure. Chack Jadson 21:36, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Of course. ;) &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 21:39, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Sword
Hi Jack, thankyou for your welcoming message. Could you have a look at the Sword article for me and see what you think needs improving.

User:Zorba Fett 21:35, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. And I took care of the sword article; it was actually pretty good. Didn't need that much fixing. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 21:39, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

That was quick. What I was thinking was that all the information on vibro weapons and swords could be put into one large article like that on lightsabers, and then be categorised into short swords, long swords, vibro swords, daggers, vibroblades, double-bladed swords, vibro double-blades, etc. It would make for a much more interesting read if it is all collected into one place and compared. Statistics from KOTOR and KOTOR II could also be used to show the extent to which swords are used in the Star Wars universe. What do you think?

User:Zorba Fett 21:43, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I think it's a great idea. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 00:10, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Forum:Featured Article Reform Proposal

 * Jack, myself and several other users have an idea to give us better Featured Articles and improve our quality on our FAs. Could we get your opinion it? Atarumaster88  [[Image:Jedi_Order.jpg|20px]] ( Audience Chamber ) 00:14, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Of course, Ataru. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 00:16, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, I disagree with your position on the Inquisitorius thing. I don't want to argue, but this group of users could accomplish nothing on its own. It requires consensus for them to do anything. And most of the admins don't care about FA- Seriously, when was the last time Azizlight or Jaymach were on the FA page? They're both good admins, but that doesn't help our FAs. Atarumaster88  [[Image:Jedi_Order.jpg|20px]] ( Audience Chamber ) 00:37, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * This "Inquisitorius" of yours is basically telling everyone "Too bad. We have the final decision". As said on the vote, it's nothing more than a dictatorship&mdash;and I never thought I would see you in such a thing. Becoming an admin changed you, Ataru. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 01:05, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I would agree with you Jack, except that I suppose I've seen the FA process dwindle until it means little now. It's been something I've worked hard at, but the vast majority of people don't seem to care. I guess I just want to see that we have quality FAs that people can point to and say "Wow, isn't that a good article?" I don't see it as a dictatorship, because the community still has to approve all FAs and has full right to input on them. It can't be a dictatorship, simply because consensus is needed to do anything by this group. As a matter of fact, we already do the same thing informally, and have largely gotten away with it: It's called objecting. All any user has to do is object legitimately to a FA nom, and that one user has power over all the other users who voted for it. Is that dictatorship? We have to accept that user's opinion, right? I'm not seeing much of a difference between this new panel and current FA rules. The people up for this already do this job. And being an administrator hasn't changed me, Jack. First, that's not who I am. Second, I came up with ideas (like this one) for FA reform back in November when Imp mentioned it at a Mofference. Well, I'm sorry to see you disagree with the idea, but I respect your decision, your concerns, and your vote. Cheers. Atarumaster88  [[Image:Jedi_Order.jpg|20px]] ( Audience Chamber ) 02:32, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * A couple of separate questions for you: Would you support the removal of an objection on a FA nom that has A) been addressed and B) the user who made the objection has not been present on Wookieepedia for at least two weeks since the objection has been marked as addressed? If yes, what criterion would you use for who/how the objection would be removed? And what do you think should be done with peer review, which is almost defunct?  Atarumaster88  [[Image:Jedi_Order.jpg|20px]] ( Audience Chamber ) 02:39, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * No, I wouldn't support the removal of an objection. That's going back to this being a dictatorship. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 12:11, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Fair enough Jack, and I'll probably have to clarify the proposal some more- i.e. set up a separate section for objection removal. I just wanted to point out though: We couldn't remove just any objection from the FA noms. Only objections that have A) been marked as answered by someone and B) The person who objected has not contributed to Wookieepedia in two weeks. We couldn't touch any other objections at all. The idea was to keep things like what's happening to Jaina Solo's nom- it's stagnating because Mirlen objected, I answered the objection, but Mirlen has been gone for a month. Just wanted to make that clear. I'm glad we're able to discuss things- it helps give me an idea of how the community feels. Cheers. Oh, and thanks for helping that other user on the sword article. ;-)  Atarumaster88  [[Image:Jedi_Order.jpg|20px]] ( Audience Chamber ) 14:38, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Listen, Ataru, I want to apologize for what I said earlier. I'm just upset. But I still say removing one's objection without their approval is a very bad idea. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 20:35, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Jack, there is nothing to apologize for at all. And I agree with you, and I am very opposed to removing anyone's objection on anything, except in the case described above, only because I'm tired of someone doing an "object-and-run"- it's not on purpose, but I fix the objection, and it stays there. Atarumaster88  [[Image:Jedi_Order.jpg|20px]] ( Audience Chamber ) 22:04, 31 January 2007 (UTC)