Talk:Palpatine/ArchiveDarth Sidious

Combination
Now combining article "Palpatine" with "Darth Sidious". Name of article: "Darth Sidious". Point of view: "Evil". Definition: Calling Palpatine Sidious. By: "KFan II. KFan II 21:54, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
 * I oppose this procedure being carried out. This would be like combining Darth Vader and Anakin Skywalker. Bad idea. – Aidje talk 21:58, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Agreed with Aidje; they should be seperate. JSarek 22:04, 7 May 2005 (UTC) Vote changed; see below. JSarek 22:27, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
 * It would probably be a good idea to ask for opinions before you merge them. Personally, I'm against the idea. If anything, I would say that Darth Sidious should be a section in Palpatine's entry. --Fade 22:18, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep these separate per Aidje's reasons. -- Riffsyphon1024 01:20, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Since there seems to be a consensus to keep these articles separate, could you revert them please, Riffsyphon (especially the Palpatine article, which is now just a redirect)? It's quite a bit of work without the rollback button. – Aidje talk 01:40, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

Well I guess I better be the one with the minority view. I think Sidious and Palpatine should be fused (though not until ep 3 spoilers are gone). I actually think keeping Anakin Skywalker and Darth Vader separate is dumb. They're the same person. One person, one article. Darth Tyranus doesn't get an separate article. We should be consistant. FUSE THEM --Death Regis 22:14, 10 May 2005 (UTC) Congratulations whoever managed to de-wookiee this article. --Fade 08:49, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Darth Tyranus does not act as an individual character. We only see Count Dooku. This is an important difference. --SparqMan 22:24, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Actually, upon reflection, I'm inclined to agree with Death Regis and change my earlier vote. Sidious and Palpy are the same person, as are Anakin and Vader.  However, the resulting article A) should wait until after RotS releases to be made (we still *technically* don't know for certain that they're the same person), and B) should go under Palpatine's name, not his Darth Sidious title. JSarek 22:27, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Sure, Vader and Anakin are the same person, but they're different personas, both of whom play large roles. As SparqMan said, we never see different personas for Dooku and Tyranus, that's why it's a non-issue for him. – Aidje talk 22:31, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
 * I take the same view as Aidje. The vast majority of work that Dooku does is under his own persona, rather than that of Tyranus. Whereas both Anakin and Palpy do a lot of work under their Sith titles. --Beeurd 22:42, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Tyranus hired Jango Fett for the clone army. That's more than Orn Free Taa ever did. --Death Regis 18:32, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
 * But we are led to believe (at least before anything that may be revealed in ROTS) that Dooku simply used Tyrannus as a pseudonym when hiring Jango. Palpatine and Sidious are two (until ROTS) separate personas.Murphy 09:17, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Orn Free Taa actually has a decent amount of backstory in the EU. No one's gotten around to filling it in. --SparqMan 18:35, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't have anything against Tyranus and Dooku being split, I just see why they're not. Right now, I don't care either way in his case. Also, the Orn Free Taa argument is completely irrelevant in this case, because it's a totally different scenario. Orn Free Taa doesn't have multiple personas, and that's the issue being discussed. – Aidje talk 18:42, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Don't the rules dictate that everyone should be under their real name (unless their real name is obscure, as in Thrawn's case)? In which case this guy would be under Palpatine if it's all one article. I think it might be a good idea to present other personas in a 'timeline' format- for example, Anakin would be under his name, with a section in his bio entitled 'Darth Vader', which would comprise the second half of the article, then have a redirect from Vader to Anakin. Whether or not they're different people "from a certain point of view", their whole story should probably be included in one biography under their real name. Just my thoughts. --Fade 19:14, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, one might make the argument that Sidious is his real name. I mean, Amidala is the state name of Padmé Naberrie, but the academic debate aside, Palpatine was never publicly known as Darth Sidious, and as such the article should be under Palpatine. We need a vote.--Eion 12:32, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
 * But Sidious isn't his real name either. Just as Vader's isn't "Vader", but Anakin, Sidious is, as with the rest, more a regnal name than anything else, with the extra charge of being a short descriptor of the personality of the holder in many cases. -Murphy 13:40, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

What in the blazes is going on with this article??? It looks like crap now. -- Riffsyphon1024 06:47, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm working on it right now. It's mostly stylistic, but I believe I'll probably have to hack at the explanation of the original trilogy quite a bit, as precious little of it is actually relevant to Darth Sidious, in my opinion.  While it is important to note his control over Vader, it's too much to go into detail about Hoth and Vader being Luke's Father (though the latter may be relevant with regard to the DVD special edition, during which (evidently) Palpatine and Vader have a nice little chat about Luke's father.  Also just noticed that there's an enormous amount of redundancy in this article, as everything that's directly below the EpIII spoiler graphic is exactly the same as in the Rise to Power section.-Murphy 16:15, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

And, for the reasons I outlined above, this should still be under Palpatine, regardless of Kfan II's preferances. Currently, Palpatine redirects here, which doesn't seem right at all. --Fade 09:22, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Palpatine, though the same person, is an entirely separate entity than Darth Sidious, and is quite important in his own right as the public persona of the Sith Lord. "Palpatine" should not redirect to Sidious, regardless of their status as the same person for the same reason "Anakin Skywalker" shouldn't redirect to "Darth Vader".  They're separate personas.  Furthermore, shouldn't this article have the header "Darth Sidious" rather than "Sidious"? --Murphy 13:40, 17 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes, Murphy. His Darth Title should not be compromised in the article, and Palpatine should not redirect to Darth Sidious because for the longest time they are kept as separate entities, and only at the end (Ep III) does Palpatine reveal himself to be Sidious. If KFan continues this, I will have to block him temporarily. -- Riffsyphon1024 16:19, 17 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Perhaps the two could be merged in the future, when the fact that they are one and the same are public knowledge? Imperialles 16:22, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
 * But even if its obvious that the two are one and the same, I still think that they both have traits so different, that each deserves its own perspective. -- Riffsyphon1024 17:21, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

I'm fed up with this- why is it that everytime I fix the perspective, someone makes it oou again?! --Fade 20:24, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Anakin Skywalker ceases to exist when he literally undergoes a physical transformation into the complete Darth Vader. These two characters are separate in Lucas' treatment of them. The entire saga is dedicated to Skywalker's dual personas. Thus, two articles are necessary for him. This is not the case with the other Sith Lords with two identities, Sidious/Palpatine and Tyranus/Dooku. An aside: Palpatine is the real name, as he was born on Naboo and given this name. Hence, if the article was to be merged, it should be under Palpatine. Tyranus is not a significant character on his own, so, of course, Dooku should be a merged article. For Palpatine, it is known that in his role as Emperor he is a Sith Lord with the name Palpatine, hence, the characters are already merged in many respects. However, either way serves well for this wiki, as the Databank has Sidious and Palpatine as separate characters at this time. When www.starwars.com updates the Episode III section it will be fully known whether they combine the articles or not, and, thus, a suggestion for the merging of these articles. -24.253.120.206 12:35, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks
Hello. This is KFan II. Thanks for keeping my article. You guys treat me better than Wikipedia. Thanks again. KFan II 23:44, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

Images
What's wrong with my images? Some of them are "missing". Could someone tell me what that means, and how to actually put images on Wookieepedia? KFan II 23:58, 8 May 2005 (UTC)


 * You need to upload images using Special:Upload. If they are missing, it's because no image with that filename exists on this wiki yet. Angela (talk) 01:55, 9 May 2005 (UTC)


 * How do you make images larger?KFan II 23:47, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

Quotes
Is it really necessary to include all those quotes? There are other wikis that deal with quotes, so they seem to me to just be clutter here. --Fade 08:51, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

I've added a link to the appropriate Wikiquote page. Seems much easier than loading up a character's page (especially when the character, like Palpatine, has generated so many quotes) with tons of quotes. For some smaller characters, the list approach might be ok.Murphy 11:53, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

Well, that's been reverted. I, and I think Fade would agree with me here, believe that the quotations would be better suited as left to the wiki that deals with them, wikiquote. Other character pages do not include quotes for the precise reason that there's already somewhere else for them and including them clutters the page. Murphy 15:02, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

Quotes removed --Imperialles 12:48, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

Hmm...
My article has been vandlaized, it seems. It also seems someone has made Palpatine the fused Sidious and Palpy. Or is it fused at all? NO! Just put them together under Sidious, let's get this over with, I mean, life is short. KFan II 03:33, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Do you not realize that you've already been banned once for your arrogance? Perhaps you would do well to simply stay away from these two article altogether. – Aidje talk 03:45, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
 * "My article" is a dangerous term. Attachments are dangerous things. No one owns a wiki. Possesion is a path to the dark side.--Eion 06:01, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Look, you've been outvoted and it's a rule that people are put under their real names wherever possible- stop 'claiming' articles for your own and getting stroppy about them. Life, as you say, is short. --Fade 09:40, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

A Final Vote on Combination
To settle this dispute on the merging of Darth Sidious and Palpatine, we will have one more vote. This vote will last exactly one week from this posting. The decision will be made by consensus, meaning an overwhelming majority of votes one way or the other. If there is no consensus, then I will either find another way to settle this, or hold a general assembly. Below vote whether For Merge or Against Merge. -- Riffsyphon1024 22:42, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

Against

 * 1) Against -- Riffsyphon1024 22:42, 22 May 2005 (UTC)