Talk:Galactic Civil War/Legends

The main picture
I think it's silly to have the main picture of the article a cut down of the cover of Battlefront. It's just idiotic Anakin Thomas 07:26, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
 * It DOES seem a bit half assed, but what would be an appropriate picture which essentially epitomizes the GCW? -- Falmarin 03:59, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

A good guide for this article might be the style of the World War II article on Wikipedia. We need not describe each detail of every event (links to those descriptions on other article suffice), but we do need a better overall picture of the struggle, especially the post-Endor era. --SparqMan 00:41, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Well, you have to realize that the most important events of the war center around what happens concerning Luke Skywalker and Leia Organa. So obviously some backstory will be necessary.--Naryathegreat 02:44, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC) To respond to Anakin Thomas's concern, I would ask you why you think the main image is "idiotic". Like Wikipedia's World War II article the image represents the entirety of the conflict without resorting to ugly frames. When I uploaded this picture, it replaced a bad-resolution screenshot of some stromtroopers from Empire at War. If you can think of a picture that better represents the entirety of the conflict, please share it with us, because we'd be glad to see it. --Thetoastman 00:00, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Of course, but this article should probably be used to tie together the articles on known on-goings of the Rebel Alliance and other rebel groups, rather than a summary of Episodes IV, V and VI. --SparqMan 02:57, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * What is the policy of Star Wars Wiki with the creation of user made maps for the use in articles such as this? That is something that made the WWII article so much more relevent; the use of maps. I wonder if we could draw up a map of Imperial / Rebel fleet movements, et al. using the map found on the Star Wars galaxy article and correlating information with other EU sources (such as Star Wars: X-wing, Star Wars: TIE Fighter, X-Wing Alliance, Shadows of the Empire, Star Wars: Dark Forces, and other material which depict events during the GCW. Another point which I noticed on the WWII page was how the home fronts were handling the war; we could do something similar where we describe how certain important planets and sectors fare during the GCW. It's quite a daunting task, but I think that if we were able to come up with a good list of good EU sources, then we may be on the right track. -- Falmarin 20:03, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes quite daunting. First we have to know where everything is, by using those maps (Nav-computer.com's is much more detailed). But this is no walk in the park to chart the fleet travels. Europe was only so big. Here we are talking about the area of a few thousand light years in a series of engagements. -- Riffsyphon1024 20:09, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * How acuurate is Nav-computer.com's map; I remember a canon map which looked similar to it, although it was no where near as detailed. Is the Nav-computer.com's map a composite of different canon maps? Also, trying to figure out which engagements are important enough to include in the article will be quite hard. I've personally ordered a batch of the Star Wars Empire (comics) to get a larger picture of what was going on during the GCW. I'm also planning on playing through Star Wars: X-wing and recording system names, events, etc. -- Falmarin 19:35, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * The Nav-computer map is quite accurate. Yes, it's a composite of canon maps, with the addition of planets whose positions were described well enough in text references to locate - typically, these are mapped in grey instead of blue, though there are exceptions to that rule if the planet's position was decribed very precisely (e.g. Vandelhelm). jSarek 21:42, 6 Aug 2005 (UTC)
 * You don't have to play all the game missions. Try to find a pilot file of the completed game, and just browse through the historical mission briefings. Star Wars: TIE Fighter will be difficult though, since you can't see the debreifings. Moff Rebus 22:48, 6 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Start of the Galactic Civil War
Look at the Galactic Civil War article on Wikipedia, the war began with the Great Jedi Purge during the rise of the Empire in 19 BBY, it did not began with the formation of the Rebel Alliance in 1 BBY. The Purge should not be considered as a separate conflict. If you don't believe me, look up at the Wikipedia:Talk:Galactic Civil War. -- Eddyward Telerionus 17:33, 6 Aug 2005 (UTC) But, still on the Wikipedia version of the talk page, it says that the events of the prequel trilogy set the stage for the war. The war began in 19 and 1 BBY and ended in 19 ABY. There's nothing wrong with the Wikipedia version of the article. -- Eddyward Telerionus 23:35, 7 Aug 2005 (UTC) It is probably best to acknowledge that while no one point in time can identified to mark beginning of the Galactic Civil War, independent skirmishes and guerilla wars began in X BBY with hostilities accelerating into the formation of major resistance networks in Y BBY that eventually coalesced into the Rebel Alliance, which declared itself and its supporters in open rebellion, in Z BBY. --SparqMan 06:23, 8 Aug 2005 (UTC)
 * I looked at that page, and the argument *against* your view presented there seemed far more convincing; just because one anon decided to make a revert doesn't mean the decision was finalized. It's rather clear to me that the GCW didn't begin until organized, unified armed resistance to the Empire sprung up, and that didn't happen until the Corellian Treaty and the formation of the Alliance to Restore the Republic. jSarek 21:34, 6 Aug 2005 (UTC)
 * I say it's difficult to have a conflict involving a group called "the Rebel Alliance" before there WAS a rebel Alliance. Resistance against the Empire does NOT mean it was the Galactic Civil War. Otherwise, the Clone Wars would also be folded into it. So, I agree with JSarek. QuentinGeorge 22:20, 6 Aug 2005 (UTC)
 * As an analogy, most Western sources don't consider the Sino-Japanese War as part of WWII, even though it, unlike the situation here, DID involve combatants from WWII. QuentinGeorge 22:33, 6 Aug 2005 (UTC)
 * It's odd though trying to understand your point, when Palpatine brought peace to the galaxy in 19 BBY with the end of the Clone Wars, and there were various uprisings and massacres between then and the formation of the Rebel Alliance. Wars don't happen until two opposing forces, and equally armed mind you, face off. -- Riffsyphon1024 23:45, 7 Aug 2005 (UTC)
 * In fairness, the Rebel Alliance was never armed equally with the Empire. --SparqMan 06:23, 8 Aug 2005 (UTC)
 * World War I also set the stage for World War II, and yet they're still considered two different wars, and rightly so. jSarek 05:43, 8 Aug 2005 (UTC)
 * There's plenty wrong with the Wikipedia article, and I've tried to argue my point over there, but the article keeps being reverted. As JSarek said: WWI, the Depression and the Sino-Japanese war all "set the scene" for WWII, but aren't included as part of the war. If you want a SW example: consider that the Clone Wars didn't begin with the Battle of Naboo - even though the events of that battle are extricably tied to the Clone Wars. No, the CIS had to be formed first. Get it? QuentinGeorge 06:16, 8 Aug 2005 (UTC)

There's no such thing as X, Y, or Z BBY. Some people (including y'all) say that the Civil War began in 1 BBY with the formation of the Rebel Alliance, but others (including me) say that the war began with the Great Jedi Purge in 19 BBY during the rise of the Empire at the end of the Clone Wars. The debate over the start of the war has no end. -- Eddyward Telerionus 17:53, 10 Aug 2005 (UTC)
 * They're called variables, John-1107. – Aidje talk 21:48, 10 Aug 2005 (UTC)

There are no variables in the Star Wars timeline, i already said that some like y'all said that the war began in 1 BBY with the rise of the Rebel Alliance while others like me said that the war started in 19 BBY with the Great Jedi Purge during the rise of the Galactic Empire. I repeat: the debate over the start of the war has no end, but i will end it in one way or another. -- Eddyward Telerionus 22:12, 11 Aug 2005 (UTC)
 * Do you not understand what variables are? X, Y, Z can substitute for any numbers. -- Riffsyphon1024 22:23, 11 Aug 2005 (UTC)
 * I partially understand the definition of variables, but i already said that's impossible for the Star Wars timeline to have any variables. -- Eddyward Telerionus 21:57, 12 Aug 2005 (UTC)
 * Any timeline can have variables; all it means is "at some point in time". Have you not yet taken Algebra? – Aidje talk 22:51, 12 Aug 2005 (UTC)
 * "the debate over the start of the war has no end, but i will end it in one way or another" - that's the logic we like to see. --SparqMan 23:22, 11 Aug 2005 (UTC)
 * Sounds more like dictatorship than simple faulty logic to me. Even better. – Aidje talk 22:51, 12 Aug 2005 (UTC)
 * Either the ROTS ICS or the VD said that "Palpatine would use Separatist holdouts and Rebel uprisings as excuses to keep his massive military force", in other words, the Rebels (being one faction of the GCW) did not appear until after ROTS and the Jedi Purge. The Purge itself was not a part of the GCW. VT-16 15:18, 24 Aug 2005 (UTC)
 * Considering the fact that rebels can exist in multiple forms can you really know when the struggle shifted from a political resistance to military actions? Also, how do you determine which factions were members of the Alliance and which were just individual factions? Unless we get some new information on the time between ROTS and ANH I suggest that the start of the War be displayed as an indeterminable time. Use a range or something but seeing the information we have I would think it to be impossible to nail down an exact start. The Alliance is not a formal organization (at least not at the beginning) and therefore could not officially declare war. Just my opinion. --OompaLoompa of DOOM 23:58, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
 * The whole point of ROTS was the formation of the Empire and the beginning of the Rebellion. That's why there were characters like Bail Organa and Mon Mothma--characters that were still leading the Rebellion at the time of ANH, and also why Organa's ship was the Tantive IV among other things. The Galactic Civil War dates should be 19 BBY - 19 ABY. It's even easy to remember! There's a similar debate going on at the Rebellion Era discussion. The dates for these two should be the same, obviously. Right now GCW is 1 BBY - 19 ABY and RE is 0 BBY - 5 ABY, but this cuts out everything that is obviously rebellion--Kyle Katarn stealing Death Star Plans, etc. And The Rise of the Empire is said to end at O BBY. This doesn't make any sense; the Rise of the Empire ended when Palpatine made "The first Galactic Empire." Then the Rebellion--and the Civil War--began.

To much backstory-stuff
I realize that both Vader/Anakin and Luke and Leia are pivotal characters in the Civil War, but I think that their backsories should not be included here; they are available under the respective articles anyway. KEJ 11:22, 16 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * A late reply but Yes, I agree. The article just sums up the movies. We need more backstory information concerning the war itself, like teh battles of X-wing, Battle of Turkana, Operation Strike Fear, Operation Skyhook, Admiral Thrawn etc. I propose the article should enter the category of 'we are doomed' MoffRebus 01:09, 8 Jan 2006 (UTC)
 * As a first action, expanded more the first feats of the Rebellion and I butchered the dark Trooper section. Sorry for it guys if you have spent time and effort on this. There are other places you can incorporate anything good you think that is missing about the DTs, like Dark Trooper, Dark Forces, Kyle Katarn. MoffRebus 03:21, 10 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Expanding

 * In answer to the request for expansion, perhaps we should enter a description of Galactic campaigns like in the Clone wars article?
 * I agree. It's silly that while the CW gets dozens of events mentioned and 100s of battles listed, the GCW gets three major battles and 10 or so briefly mentioned afterwards. There's the Kwymar Suppressions for one, a whole campaign against several systems in the Outer Rim. That's some while before Yavin, too. I think we need to go through this article, and any major 'war' article, for that matter. VT-16 19:14, 2 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * I just added every battle I knew to the timeline. It's rather bigger now.
 * Just a quick comment: the main article references the liberation of Coruscant as being in the year 6 BBY. Surely that cannot be accurate?
 * What do you mean? It sounds accurate to me. That would be about 1 year after Endor. Rogue Squadron infiltrates the planet and brings down the shields.... I suppose it could've been 7 BBY, maybe, but 6 BBY seems pretty accurate to me. Mind specifying why you doubt it? Also, Coruscant was "liberated" 3 times I believe. Once in 6BBY when the Alliance took it from under Isard's small garrison, and again around 9BBY I think (my memory is pretty rusty hear so give or take a year or two)when the Imperials reclaimed it, and then the New Republic reclaimed it shortly afterwards. Maybe you were thinking of one of those?--OompaLoompa of DOOM 17:01, 25 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I have added lots of Information to the Galactic Civil War Grand Admiral J 2:00 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Improvement drive
I suggest we strive to complete these article quality-essential tasks:
 * Make it less detailed on very specific events (such as the whole dealio with Episode 4, which is extensively detialed here).
 * Move the timeline of events to Timeline of the Galactic Civil War.
 * Add sources. --Imp 19:37, 21 Dec 2005 (UTC)

What about including a bit more information about the campaigns of GA Thrawn and the Emperor Reborn? Right now, it's just glossed over and they were major events in the GCW. Ace Venom 22:07, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Backward pic line up?

 * The first pics at the top are misarranged. Is this the same for every one?

Image
god, i hate the battlefront image. Jedi Dude
 * Deal with it. -- God
 * If you don't like it, propose another image. Otherwise, stop whining and follow God's advice http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/2086/tongue1ao.gif. --Sentry [ Talk ] 08:10, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
 * well nice the anon as some input..byt seriosuly what was wrong with the image before it? Jedi Dude
 * The image before it was a screenshot from Empire at War. A low-res screenshot.  With a bunch of stormtroopers standing around.  From an unnecessarily-zoomed-out point of view, so much that practically the only way you could tell they were stormtroopers was by the fact that the 2-pixel-wide figures were all-white.  There was a lot wrong with it.  I've said it before, and I'll say it again: this is by far the best picture I could find that really encapsulates the Galactic Civil War.  If you've got a better one, please show it, seriously, because I'd be happy to replace this one.  --Thetoastman 18:52, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I see someone changed the main picture (to a fan-doctored one, no less. There only 30 fighters in the film :P). I'll fix that image, but I'd rather have the old one. VT-16 11:53, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I changed it back. First of all, there was not a 'lot of whining' to get the image changed, it was two or three people who were basically rebuffed by precedent and didn't even bother to go through a proper debate.  Second of all, to argue that a picture of the swarm of X-Wings en route to the Death Star from Yavin should be the main image in the Galactic Civil War article is preposterous.  And finally, even if that image was to be used, it should be much less wide, brighter, larger, and generally less unsuitable for the top of a major article.  --Thetoastman 23:47, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I say we change it to the rebel's advancing on the Death Star in ANH.--The All-knowing Sith&#39;ari 21:35, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Improvement Drive
Whether or not the required expansion gets enough attention, how should we lay the rest out? I'm intending to take the project on if not. ..

Planned Sections: Necessary:
 * The Bacta War could fall under the Fall of Coruscant.
 * The next section - Warlordism - would cover the War against Zsing, Rogriss v Ackbar v Teradoc
 * An empire resurgent - Thrawn
 * Reborn Emperor
 * Return of the Jedi - Carida, Daala
 * Pellaeon-Daala unification, Empire Reborn, attacks on the Jedi. End with battle of Orinda and Adumar
 * Battle of champala, anx minor, deep core battles
 * End of the war
 * Expansion of Endor, Yavin + Hoth
 * Grammar, spelling, prose

It sounds like alot of work, I know. . . Rhysode 09:57, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Seems like a good idea to me. We might also want to shorten the Ssi-Ruuvi Invasion sections, while also mentioning the Nagai/Tof Invasion and Black Fleet Crisis, using the For main article, see blah blah blah format. &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 12:09, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Quote
Couldn't we get a better quote? The current one is referring to the Jedi, and really has nothing to do with the Galactic Civil War. Anyone got any ideas? Unit 8311 16:06, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Start date?
Just when did the GCW start? Some said it started in 19 BBY, it now says 2 BBY, and other sites have claimed other dates. Is there a canon source that specifies an exact date? Unit 8311 16:00, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Officially, it started with the Corellian Treaty, since that was the formal creation of the Alliance. But Palpatine's comment in RotS seems to imply the civil war is geared also towards the remaining Jedi, so it could technically be expanded to the end of the Clone Wars - \\Captain Kwenn// &mdash; Ahoy! 16:24, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I suppose Palpatine could have just been saying that to convince Anakin. And besides, there was hardly a 'civil war' with the Jedi. Unit 8311 16:53, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Time between Bakura and Pellaeon-Gavrisom treaty?
There is nothing here really on the time between the defeat of the Ssi-Ruu on Bakura and the signing of the treaty. Should this be included, as it is part of the Galactic Civil War? All that stuff about Thrawn, the ressurected Emperor, Daala, the Empire Reborn- all of that. SithGirl132 21:45, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
 * There's plenty of content on that period. The time span is 15 yrs.  Bakura happens in 4 ABY and treaty in 19 ABY.  The article needs some dates..  -Fnlayson 22:03, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually it skips things between Palpatine's return and Caamas Document crisis. -Fnlayson 22:09, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
 * It skips the time starting at the Jedi Academy Trilogy up until the beginning of the Caamas Document crisis. SithGirl132 22:38, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Yea, right. Jedi Acedamy happens shortly after Palps is finally defeated. -Fnlayson 00:22, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

More Gall then Hoth
Why is there a more detailed look here at the Battle of Gall then at the events of TESB? Gall has it's own article, and that battle isn't even all that important to the war. It's all about rescuing Han and has little to do with fighting the Empire. --JMM 15:20, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Rouge Squadron? Really?
I was surprised to find that the word Rogue in Rogue Squadron seems to be routinely misspelled.

Let's be clear. There is no such thing as Rouge squadron, which summons to mind a group of fighter pilots in a musical revue. Come on, people. It's a five letter word; really not that difficult.
 * It could be simply a misspelling or a typo. They happen.  Fix them and move on.  Check out the note about signing comments. -Fnlayson 14:29, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Sepan Civil War and the Galactic Civil War
This was deleted on the Senate Hall, so hopefully it won't get deleted here. But anyway, I've been going through this article, rewriting and expanding as I go (and cleaning up the terrible grammar and blatant mistakes), and sourcing as much as I can. I tried to remove the section within this article on the Sepan campaign and had it reverted by Greyman. I asked why, since I reasoned the Sepan Civil War had nothing to do with the GCW. I was then informed that there was some sort of consensus that made the Sepan Civil War/Campaign a part of the Galactic Civil War, despite lots of evidence to the contrary. So let me try to explain and we'll see what happens...

First off, the Sepan Civil War started in 27 BBY, before even the Clone Wars! It was a local conflict between two rival planets for control over the Sepan system. Attempts to diffuse the Civil War were made by the Jedi, but once the Clone Wars rolled about, the War was largely forgotten and left alone until 3 ABY, when the Empire finally decided to dispatch a fleet under Admiral Harkov to settle the civil war and restore order.

Now, this was the Empire operating to diffuse a civil war that had lasted for three decades, perhaps more (judging from the wording in the article). The Empire's goals were to establish order throughout the galaxy, after all. The Imperials attempted to halt fighting between the two planets, but ultimately, in an ironic twist, the two planets joined together against the Empire. Ultimately, the Empire defeated the unified Sepans, and forced them to sign a peace treaty, thus ending the civil war (until 40 years later, when it would start again).

So how exactly does this make it a part of the Galactic Civil War? There was no Alliance involvement; it was an Imperial force attempting to quell a local civil war within their territory. The Sepans were not aligned with the Alliance, nor were they fundamentally opposed to the Empire - they were fighting their own civil war and merely joined together to fight a common foe who they saw as encroaching on their territory. The Galactic Civil War is defined as the struggle between the Empire and the Rebel Alliance; why should we throw local wars into the mix? The only common grounds the Sepan Civil War/Campaign shares with the GCW is that it involves the Empire and happens to take place early in the GCW. But it's like saying that the Nagai-Tof War is a part of the Galactic Civil War because it involved the Empire and Alliance, but clearly that war was a war unto its own, just like the Sepan Civil War.

Further evidence can be pulled from the articles themselves - they're categorized under the Conflict category, rather than "GCW Battles" or whichever one refers to battles of the GCW. In fact, the GCW is stated as running concurrently with the Sepan Civil War, and the GCW articles states that the Sepan Civil War is a war running concurrently with it - because they are not one and the same, but happen to occur at the same time. And the Rebel Alliance had nothing to do with the Sepan Civil War - they weren't combatants. So how can the Sepan Civil War be an element of the Galactic Civil War? For a real world reference, it's like saying the War of 1812 was a part of the Napoleonic Wars because they both happened to be occurring at the same time and because the British were fighting in both. It's a nonsense notion.

So when/where was a consensus reached that the two wars should be one and the same? If that did happen... why? Can someone bring some substantial evidence to the table (something perhaps I overlooked, I'm not infallible), rather than just blowing me off? Thank you. --Danik Kreldin 22:13, 9 September 2007 (UTC)


 * It was deleted by another Administrator from Senate Hall simply because I already advised you to take it to this talk page, and you instead decided to post a forum about it. I'm glad to see it here, on the GCE talk page where it belongs, and you can be rest assured it won't be deleted here :P Also, I didn't "blow you off" simply because I advised you bring it to this talk page&mdash;my comment was, "Also, please take this to the Galactic Civil War talk page, as this doesn't belong here and I won't reply further" which, in other words is, I don't want that stuff on my talk page when it is a discussion about an article with which the community should decide. So, in short, thank you for posting it here. Also, I honestly don't care if that specific piece of information is omitted or re-added to the article. My whole point in removing it was that that specific page has been the topic quite a lot in IRC and private IRC conversation, and from my understanding it felt within the realm of the Galactic Civil War. However, I know I'm not perfect, nor do I pretend to know everything about the Star Wars universe, and I could have misunderstood what was being discussed&mdash;especially since I have never played the computer game in question which holds the information pertaining to the Sepan Campaign. Also, you implying that I may have been lying about a "consensus" on IRC is unwarranted and it could be taken as a Personal Attack&mdash;however, I'm not like that. If you want proof, Graestan was one of many who were in on that conversation. One more thing, something which you seem to be forgetting, which is something else I told you was "Feel free to revert it, cause basically that's the point of a wiki&mdash;anyone can edit" (taken straight from my talk page). And I honestly meant it. If you had of added it back into the article, even with a very short version of what you posted above, either in the edit summary or here on the talk page, I wouldn't have cared one bit, and I would have applauded you for doing it. So, honestly, after reading your summary above, go for it and add it back in, because your reasoning is sound. However, don't be surprised if others post here who don't see the situation your way&mdash;just as I won't surprised, nor care, if people think my reversion was incorrect. Please don't perceive any of this stuff as a "hard-line" against you, as talking on the internet often takes all the emotion (whether is be good or bad, but mostly good) out of persons comments. I simply want you to be aware of everything, especially why your forum was deleted and why I refused to continue the conversation on my talk page. Cheers, Greyman ( Paratus ) 22:55, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I really think that knowledge of the sources is required before judgment is to be passed, Danik Kreldin. In Star Wars: TIE Fighter, which I have played more than once, the Empire discovers that the Rebels are interfering with the conduct of the war between the Ripoblus and Dimoks, bringing what was an independent conflict into the larger war. It's very similar to the Soviet Union and China assisting the North Koreans in the Korean War, prompting the United Nations to come in on the side of South Korea. In fact, I believe the campaign in the game may even be a reference to either that or the Vietnam War, or even the Afghan civil war of the 1980s&mdash;the concept of a "Private Little War" being tampered with by opposing superpowers is very common in science fiction. I do realize that the Sepan campaign and Sepan Civil War articles do not make this clear, and plan to address the issue. In the future, I do suggest that any relevant sources be checked before such drastic edits are to be conducted. - Graestan  [[Image:Jedi_Order.svg|20px]] ( This party's over ) 00:09, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, I understand now. That's what I thought I had read in IRC when it was being discussed. However, like I said earlier, I've never played the game. Greyman ( Paratus ) 00:12, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Almanian Uprising & BFC
While important for establishing an element of crisis for the New Republic, is this book summary helpful to the GCW overview given the lack of direct Imperial/Rebel conflict? Seems to me that it can be crunched down to just a few necessary lines, but I know a few people are making consistent edits here, so I don't want to disrupt a greater plan. Any protest? -- SparqMan  Talk 05:12, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * And the same goes for the Black Fleet crisis. Thoughts? -- SparqMan  Talk 20:10, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Casulties
I'm wondering if we have a canonical figure of the deaths for the war. In the New Essential Chronology I think is says that billions died in the Vong War but I'm not sure. Please tell me. DarTah Ravin' 13:38, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

How long the war last
How long is the war? Longer than the Clone Wars?(Eagle Eye 370 08:16, 30 August 2008 (UTC))

TFU
Should we add info from Force Unleashed about formation of the Alliance?QuiGonJinn 10:37, 30 August 2008 (UTC)QuiGonJinn