User talk:Toprawa and Ralltiir

'''Do not leave messages concerning FAN or GAN objections. I will not respond to them. Use the nominations pages.''' '''For the sake of chaos, there is no telling where I may respond to messages on my talk page. Depending on multiple factors, you may receive an answer on your talk page, under your original message on my talk page, or I may not respond at all. There is no method to my madness. You are required to decipher the inconsistency, not me.'''

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

Need help
Hey Tope. While I was doing some archiving on the CAN page I accidentally archived the Unidentified Sullustan Jedi (battle droids) nom, which had an outstanding objection from Supreme Emperor that I failed to see. I contacted him and he says the objection is dealt with, and I was told to ask a beurecrat to get the objection struck. If you could do that that would be great. See ya.  Commander Code-8  G'day, mate 22:06, April 8, 2013 (UTC)

Lucasfilm Wiki
Question is it redundant to make a Lucasfilm Wiki and how should i promote it. Byzantinefire 17:50, April 12, 2013 (UTC)

Question how was the Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope transfered from Wikipedia to Wookieepedia. Byzantinefire 02:56, April 13, 2013 (UTC)

Why are you not responding to my message. Byzantinefire 14:22, April 13, 2013 (UTC)

Forum post archived
Can I ask why my post on the administrator noticeboard has been archived so quickly? Rokkur Shen (talk) 05:04, April 13, 2013 (UTC)
 * Because it quickly became evident that the forum had turned into nothing but an unproductive pissing match of he said-she said. You posted your complaint against the administrator in question, and the community has taken note. There's really nothing left that needs to be said. You asked "Where do we go from here?" Well, you're welcome to try your hand at a RFRA request, though I wouldn't recommend it. I can pretty much guarantee that would fail miserably. I suggest you both get over it and try to move on from this. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 19:35, April 13, 2013 (UTC)

Inq reviewing tutorial
Hey Tope. As per discussion at Inq Meeting 56, I've started to write a draft for what will eventually become the Inquisitorius' tutorial guide for new reviewers. It can be accessed here. I haven't had as much time as I would like to work on it recently, so there are still some sections that have yet to be written, but I've started off with trying out some basic organization with the current sections. Please feel free to jump in, either by writing new stuff for the guide or commenting on/adjusting what's already there.

Every current member of the Inq will eventually have to approve the guide in its entirety, so getting involved with its development would be great, sooner rather than later. The talk page can be used to discuss ideas about organization, sectioning, content, you name it. Let me know if you have any questions, and your contributions are appreciated!  CC7567  (talk) 21:03, April 16, 2013 (UTC)

I just wanted to say
Hey there, have you heard about how I got blocked? And you know how you blocked Darth Muscare? Well he was the one who got me blocked if you don't already know. I've been telling everyone but no one has really believed me. I just wanted to make my point here. And would you mind telling me why Muscare was blocked on this wiki? Wolf Screech Vibroblade_negwt.jpg( That's a knife! ) 20:46, April 21, 2013 (UTC)

WOTM
Hey Tope, just wanted to say thanks for supporting my nomination for WOTM last month. I really appreciate it. Supreme Emperor (talk) 14:05, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

Hello I am wondering what to do. I used my account on here as Crashfreak99 a wile ago but I have realaized that my edits weren't too good and wanted to start over. I'm using this account from another wiki but I hadn't realized untill now the policy on duplicate accounts. What should I do?--Yoshi dude99 (talk) 20:38, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your help.--Yoshi dude99 (talk) 20:45, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

Fantasy Face-Off
Hello! I just wanted to let you know that Wikia is hosting a fantasy face-off asking users to prove that the fantasy franchise they love is THE best. Each entrant will also get a shot at winning a custom prize pack valued at $500! I was just letting you know in case you would be interested and would want to promote it on this wiki. Submissions will be taken until May 17, so head over to vote for Star Wars if you'd like!

Grace 17:03, May 6, 2013 (UTC)

RE:GAnoms
Sorry I never realised there was a limit :S My bad for clogging up the page, I won't nom anything else till they're finished. Ayrehead02 (talk) 20:55, May 6, 2013 (UTC)

Template Preloads
COuld you link me to where the code is for those? Thanks! TechFilmer • Please reply on my talk page 11:56, May 9, 2013 (UTC)

Template
Hi. I had a question regarding when this template is supposed to be used. What would constitute an appropriate time to use it. How recent does a work have to be to be considered recently released here? -- 14:52, May 20, 2013 (UTC)

Inq 57 sauce
You are hereby invited to Inqmoot 57 and the Inquisitorius Post-Memorial Day cookout, scheduled for 00:00 June 2 UTC, or 20:00 June 1 Eastern time in the only country that matters, AMERICA. Bring your own meat, because I'm not sharing. Sharing is for Communists. -- Darth Culator  (Talk) 18:10, May 23, 2013 (UTC)

Random GA page
Hey Toprawa. Before I forget, were you able to make any progress on updating Good articles/Random with the GAs featured on the Main Page in April? I think you said you were going to do that a short while back (while Cav and I were slaving away with archiving GANs :P). Let me know if you need any help.  CC7567  (talk) 22:06, May 25, 2013 (UTC)

WP:VG milestone
Good day, gamers! WookieeProject Video Games has reached a new milestone. The members of WP:VG have taken 100 articles to Comprehensive status! The 100th article was Inspector-General, from the Star Wars: The Force Unleashed II in-game databank. The full list of articles can be seen here. WP:VG and its members can be proud of the accomplishments we have made. As we near the two year mark of this ambitious project, we look back and see all the great progress and improvements we have made to Wookieepedia as a whole and the video game aspect of the wiki in particular. Most of these 100 articles would have probably been lost in the shuffle had it not been for the hard work, dedication, and patient perceptiveness of the users who comprise WP:VG. Out of all the current WookieeProjects, WookieeProject Video Games has the second highest amount of Comprehensive articles to its name. I would like to say good work and congratulations to all the members of WP:VG. Keep up the excellent job, and May the Force be with the Gamers!&mdash; Cal Jedi (Personal Comm Channel) 20:41, May 28, 2013 (UTC)

Pinball

 * I'm curious of your reasoning for adding the Merchandise template to Star Wars Pinball. Gal-icon.jpg  OLIOSTER  (talk) 22:08, May 28, 2013 (UTC)

Response re: alphabetizing
Hello. If you wouldn't mind reading my response to your posts on my own User Talk page, I'd really appreciate it. I apologize for the length (and possible formatting issues), but I felt I needed to make my case in some detail. Thank you. --k1darkknight (talk) 00:06, June 6, 2013 (UTC)

AC Meeting 59
You have been invited to a last minute pub crawl starting at the Mouthful of Otter on July 6. Grab a pint and a packet of nuts and settle in for a session. If you can't make it, we reserve the right to make fun of you in your absence and laugh at the notes you leave while downing shots and searching for a late night kebab shop. - Sir Cavalier of One ( Squadron channel ) 21:28, June 26, 2013 (UTC)

Naming policy question
Hey what's up, I have a question in need of some clarification in reference to your earlier edit on Coruscant Underworld Police. Both Shadows and the TCW Episode Guide capitalize the name but there is no other difference in reference to the name in the SWE. (The Episode Guide was the first to capitalize by the way so I made the change in the article.) My question is: So based off of your edit, a change in capitalization requires a 1stID tag even with something so simple? I couldn't find any clarification on IDing capitalization, one way or the other, from the naming policy or other policies. I'm looking at the sources section and it looks kind of strange to have two sources next to each both saying 1stID the only difference being capitalization. If you could clarify that would be great, thanks! Coruscantfan (Talk) 22:50, June 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yep that makes sense, thanks for clarifying. I'm not exactly sure how exactly it can be worded but we may want to add that to the policy to avoid future confusion and make the "tradition" standard practice. Coruscantfan (Talk) 01:46, June 27, 2013 (UTC)

Reference lists deletion
Hey Tope. Just wanted to let you know that the pages from Trash compactor/List of references to Star Wars in... have been exported to Fanpedia, so I'm done with it if you want to go ahead and delete them. - Brandon Rhea (talk)  23:30, June 26, 2013 (UTC)

Re: Vandalism
I usually give the benefit of the doubt in most cases, although there have been a few times when I didn't see past my own POV and jumped to conclusions. In this case, I had been contemplating a template I constructed for the FFG Star Wars games, and asked for help on the talk page for ideas on how to get minimizing "Hides" to work for each section. I put a rather good effort into making the template, but realize that if it needs to be split, then so be it. However, I would like to try, at least, to get it to work first. However, Thunderforge has immediately stated his request to have the community consider voting for a split. I agree that a consensus to split it would definitely resolve this matter, however, the only voters on the issue are him and me. Today, he took it upon himself to decide the weight of the vote and unilaterally change the template and all of the articles that use it. I may be wrong, but that seemed a bit presumptuous. However, at your counsel, I will consider that I may have jumped the gun and that, perhaps, he is unaware of the procedures regarding consensus. I will give him the benefit of the doubt from this point going forward in respects to referring to his edits as "vandalism." &mdash; Gethralkin  Hyperwave 00:23, July 3, 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, my mistake. I presumed from his proposing to split the template when I had establish the desire to keep it, that a consensus was being called for. If that is not the case, then I definitely will call for a consensus to be reached concerning this issue. Thanks. &mdash; Gethralkin  Hyperwave 00:52, July 3, 2013 (UTC)

Consensus
Since I have never done this aspect of editing on Wookieepedia (not enough that I consider to raise a voting issue over), I am not anxious to just create a Forum page without doing it correctly. Is there an editing procedure to create a single issue vote that I should follow? &mdash; Gethralkin  Hyperwave 01:04, July 3, 2013 (UTC)
 * Nevermind. I found it. &mdash; Gethralkin  Hyperwave 01:07, July 3, 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much. That helps more than I realized. &mdash; Gethralkin  Hyperwave 01:19, July 3, 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey, are Thunderforge and I, ourselves, allowed to vote on the consensus? &mdash; Gethralkin  Hyperwave 02:09, July 3, 2013 (UTC)

Moving pages
Hey sorry about moving that page about Shak Ti yesterday. It was a total fail on my part. Fe Nite (talk) 17:33, July 14, 2013 (UTC)
 * No worries. No harm done. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 17:55, July 14, 2013 (UTC)

Closing Tc
Hey, Tope. After going over your comments, I agree with your assessment that this was not the correct forum choice, I just chose poorly. Sorry about that. Also, I will try harder to keep a civil tongue (er, uh, keyboard?) for future discussion. After reviewing yours and other comments, I also see that CT is not really the best choice for template change decision, but I really do feel that some consensus with those not in IRC to understand what is at stake should take place. So, at the very least, I am interested in keeping consensus to Talk pages, where if there are no objections to suggestions made, then changes can proceed. I also do not want to hold up progress, but I also feel that changing templates that work and that editors are already comfortable with, should not be done simply because a single editor has a personal preference that he/she feels takes precedent over the interests of other Wookieepedia members. Maybe I am not expressing it correctly, but does this make any sense to you? &mdash; Gethralkin  Hyperwave 04:40, July 15, 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey, check out Trip's comment and my questions for him on the Tc. He is indicating that Thunderforge lied about getting IRC consensus for the move. &mdash; Gethralkin  Hyperwave 09:26, July 15, 2013 (UTC)
 * Let me clarify: He isn't saying Tf is lying, but he is contradicting Tf's statements that consensus was reached on IRC for moving the template, and saying that the IRC was not for the move, but for asking for a bot to fix the redirects. &mdash; Gethralkin  Hyperwave 09:29, July 15, 2013 (UTC)
 * Gethralkin, at this point I don't plan on contributing to the discussion on that forum any further. I will say this: I have no interest in siding either with you or Thunderforge on this matter, though it's clear to me that you still haven't really gotten it that this entire episode you have instigated is and continues to be ridiculous and unnecessary. You appear to believe now that you think you've caught Thunderforge in a "lie," for lack of a better word, that your original point has somehow been re-galvanized or rejustified, when it has not. Whether Thunderforge indeed lied or not, he is nevertheless not required to seek formal or informal approval from the community before making minor changes to the wiki, which I would absolutely classify moving a template from "GG" to "Galaxy Guides" as. If he is guilty of anything, it's misleading us on what transpired over IRC, which I figure was done out of defensiveness after your accusations of his wrongdoing, so I kind of can't blame the guy. This episode should never have become what it is, and that you continue to prosecute it is to your discredit, in my opinion. At this point, this TC vote is nothing more than a subjective community census on whether we think the template should be named "GG" or "Galaxy Guides," a decision that, because of how minor it is, should have no bearing on it based on what Thunderforge did or did not do. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 18:43, July 15, 2013 (UTC)
 * Understood. I actually had requested the closing of the Tc after your bringing it up. The issue I was fundamentally having was the restructuring that was planned and seemingly begun without consensus. However, I didn't properly separate that from the simple issue of the template redirect like I should have. As far as catching Tf in anything, I really don't know who was telling the truth, but I felt IRC was not visible proof enough for using in conjunction with this discussion as the basis for beginning a project of changing templates that don't agree with a single editor's personal preferences. However, I should have kept that off the Tc page and left it for a separate discussion. Sorry about that. I agree it was a mess, and for that I apologize. Not my area of expertise this consensus and voting stuff, but I felt something needed to be done to prevent wide-spread changes from happening suddenly and without easy reversion available. I just should have used the Tc to do it. Culator has suggested I refresh myself on WP:POINT, and I will do that. &mdash; Gethralkin  Hyperwave 19:25, July 15, 2013 (UTC)

Re: Spam
Sorry. I was unaware that I did something that was inappropriate. I had been informed that inviting to a consensus was appropriate if done without attempting "vote farming," or as was explained to me, the garnering of support for my own voting position. I was also told that what was inappropriate was to rally support for one or other side of a decision, not the actual inviting to a consensus. I would like more to be aware of the consensus so that voting can be done without it being slanted by certain voters that may or may not be voting on the issue simply to side opposite of my stance (yeah, I realize I'm not popular right now) or for a friend (who may or may not be on the opposite side of my voting stance). How does that happen appropriately? &mdash; Gethralkin  Hyperwave 04:57, July 16, 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, I didn't know that. Thanks for the information. &mdash; Gethralkin  Hyperwave 05:11, July 16, 2013 (UTC)

CT Discussion
By the way, I revised the issue to specifically omit that each change needed a consensus on each talk page. As long as a consensus on a project is reached prior to that project launching, then that would appropriate, as is currently happening over here. I support that type of template change, but not major sweeping changes that are made without notice or community planning. In any case, the "per each template" is removed. &mdash; Gethralkin  Hyperwave 05:05, July 16, 2013 (UTC)
 * Regarding the maintenance template restructure discussion, Sageleader is doing a fantastic job of making a comprehensive analysis of each template he plans to involve in the project, as well as list in detail the changes he is suggesting. With the completion of the list, he states that he will present it for review to the editing community for consensus for implementation. &mdash; Gethralkin  Hyperwave 05:11, July 16, 2013 (UTC)

SL
He apparently "used to be a big Wikipedia editor." Just have his word for it since he doesn't provide any wiki links, but he doesn't have any contributions earlier than July 4th of this year on WP. I became aware of his project because I was trying to figure out (in the middle of the Tc mess) where I needed to put that issue. His thing was on the SH and "Template" was in the title. Even though he hasn't been here long, he seems to be using the Be Bold policy the way it needs to be used (well barring the verify stuff on his talk page). Otherwise, there doesn't seem to be any connection with Tf if that's what you are referring to. Both of their writing styles are different and while Tf hinted in SH discussion that he was interested in how to name templates (but then took the responses and used that as a reason to begin changing existing ones), SL laid out a proposal for change and seems to be listening to community input regarding the changes. I also like that he is using a spreadsheet table design to show which templates are in question. It looks nifty, so I have an idea he has some skill in wiki layout design. Too bad I didn't know about him when I was having trouble collapsing multiple sections in a navbox. From what I have seen him talk about, he probably knows how to do stuff like that. So, I feel more confident in him proposing a major overhaul of the templates, than in an editor who starts making changes without telling anyone. &mdash; Gethralkin  Hyperwave 06:03, July 16, 2013 (UTC)

Point taken
That CT post was actually the final edit I was making there. I also feel nothing more needs to be said and I see the point that the outlines were too restrictive improve policy and would actually throttle it. Didn't see it before but I do now. Although I have my personal views, I am fine with "No policy" as I should be since this a consensus representing the collective will of the editing community. As for the other matter, I have no intention of saying anything more on it, and would not have even posted what I did had not the issue kept coming up. &mdash; Gethralkin  Hyperwave 20:33, July 16, 2013 (UTC)

RE: The Worms
Hey Tope I saw you comment but annoyingly I only have Paradise Snare as a Txt file on my laptop which doesn't include any chapter or page numbers. I assume in print there probably are chapter numbers but I'm not sure how I'm going to check. I'll make sure it's added as soon as possible. Ayrehead02 (talk) 12:35, July 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * If you could find the chapter for me I'd consider it a huge favour! There just called white worms and appear about half way through the book while Han's having a mud bath. Ayrehead02 (talk) 17:53, July 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reference now added to the page. Ayrehead02 (talk) 21:04, July 23, 2013 (UTC)

Help! Need to be allowed to edit my page!
Hello Toprawa and Ralltiir, it has been a while. I was wondering if you would be able to unlock my page for editing? I still would like the protection from editing by others but I would like to be able to edit it myself? haha thanks.  Anju Vena  ( Nihilus Speak ) 22:19, July 17, 2013 (UTC)

Phineas and Ferb: Star Wars
Now are you sure i can't make the article? Byzantinefire 22:01, July 19, 2013 (UTC)

Inqmoot 58
Hey Tope. Inqmoot 58 has been scheduled for July 27/28. As always, leave notes if you can't make it. Cheers,  grunny &#64; wookieepedia :&#126;$ 18:36, July 20, 2013 (UTC)

I'd like your input
I didn't want to make the change without consulting you first, so I'd like your input on this idea Forum:SH:Redirecting "R2" to "R2-D2"--Richterbelmont10 (talk) 17:33, July 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I have done so. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 19:33, July 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your help with this! Much appreciated.--Richterbelmont10 (talk) 21:15, July 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem. :) Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 21:18, July 25, 2013 (UTC)

Talk page policy and off-topic posts
Hey Tope. Following the failure of the talk page policy CT earlier this month, I have modified the proposed policy based on the feedback received therein. The most notable change was the redefining of off-topic posts as posts that can be removed without archiving. As a compromise between the majority opinion that we should not be forced to keep the posts and the minority that says removing them can be harmful, I have included a footnote suggesting, but in no way requiring, that users consider leaving the post in place if circumstances allow. All changes made between the closure of the previous CT can be seen in [ this diff].

As you were one of the most vocal opponents of the previous proposal, I would like your opinion on the revised proposal, located at User:Master Jonathan/Talk page policy, before starting a new CT. I am also asking Menk, who was the one of the most vocal supporters of not removing off-topic posts, for his feedback as well to get opinions from both sides. Thanks in advance. &mdash;MJ&mdash; Training Room 01:52, July 26, 2013 (UTC)

Battle of Tralus
I would like to have your opinion about another thing. The Battle of Tralus. I don't find any mention of the 6 ABY placement in all the sources mentioned in the page. However both involved Grand Admirals' featured articles places their death in 6 ABY. And the Essential Guide to Warfare places this battle in 5 ABY... Hk 47 (talk) 00:30, July 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * Sounds to me like those Grand Admiral pages need to be changed. May I ask which ones they are? Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 00:32, July 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * Josef Grunger & Danetta Pitta. In my opinion, the problem came from the Essential Chronology that just indicates that Thrawn was the sole remaining Grand Admiral in 6 ABY. Hk 47 (talk) 00:38, July 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok, I'm going to bring both articles up for review at the Inqmoot tomorrow. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 00:45, July 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok thanks Hk 47 (talk) 00:53, July 27, 2013 (UTC)

Nintendo Power Issue 173 deletion
Hi.

I'm not sure how Nintendo Power Issue 173 was warranted a deletion. It featured Rebel Strike on the cover, and it even gave coverage on it. Last I checked, that was notability enough for it to be on this wiki. I honestly don't understand how that's not notable enough to belong on there. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 00:40, August 2, 2013 (UTC)
 * So what? Are we going to create articles for TIME and Rolling Stone magazine now too because they feature Star Wars characters on the cover and have Star Wars feature stories inside? There's a big difference between LFL-licensed material and third-party things like Nintendo game magazines. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 00:45, August 2, 2013 (UTC)
 * There's little difference, actually, because they both cover Star Wars, which is notable enough, and which this Wiki is supposed to do (cover everything that directly relates to Star Wars). The only differences I can perceive is whether they cover them at all (especially directly) or not. For example, I would not in my right mind make an article on the Bible or William Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet on this wiki precisely BECAUSE they do not cover (directly) Star Wars. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 00:51, August 2, 2013 (UTC)
 * There's so much wrong with what you just said there, I'm just going to pick on one line. "this Wiki is supposed to do (cover everything that directly relates to Star Wars)." No. In fact, that is not what this wiki does. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 01:08, August 2, 2013 (UTC)

Update
Hi I want to know why you haven't updated this wiki. Like no chat or badges and updated talk page? 02:42, August 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * Wookieepedia categorically rejects these things by near-unanimous community consensus. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 04:01, August 6, 2013 (UTC)

Eron objections
Just a reminder that it's been over two weeks since your objections here have been taken care of. DarthRevan1173 (Long live Lord Revan) 05:28, August 12, 2013 (UTC)