Talk:SuperShadow

Archive

Vote for renaming
See below for th MickeySuttle/SuperShadow discussion.

So, should the article be renamed or not? I'm for, as it conforms to the naming policy. - Sikon [ Talk ] 19:19, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Renaming Vote
Vote

For

 * 1) Jasca Ducato 19:22, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) One page only, listed under Mickey Suttle. &mdash;Darth Culator   (talk)  20:53, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Against

 * --Darth Mantus 12:41, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Neutral/Comments

 * I'm pretty satisfied by the evidence presented that StuporShadow.com is indeed run by Suttle. However, it still seems to me that Suttle and his website are two different things. Should we have two different articles - Mickey Suttle and SuperShadow (or SuperShadow.com, with Supershadow as a disambig for the two), or just one (in which case my vote is in favor of the move)? jSarek 20:42, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

VfD
On April 28, 2005, this article was nominated for deletion. The result was Keep. See Votes for deletion/SuperShadow for a record of the discussion. -- Riffsyphon1024 05:49, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

Image
Does anyone know where that image of him came from? I'm surprised that it was allowed to get out. There's a discussion at Wikipedia as to where a source proving that is him is. Adamwankenobi 13:03, 6 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * I believe we should follow the example of Wikipedia, and remove the photo until we have a source. I'm the least happy about this, but it only makes sense to have only pictures that are backed up by sources. CantorOrion 23:05, 22 Dic 2005 (UTC)

FAQ
Should we add something about how the FAQ addresses Suttle in a fawning, self congratulatory manner, and how he is sometimes abusive toward his fans? -- SFH 00:38, 12 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Answer SS-related questions on Answerbag
Many rely on Answerbag for, well of course, answers. More SW fans need to know the truth behind SS. There are SS-related questions that need answering and debunking of already-posted answers. Please answer the following with the truth:

"Who is Supershadow of supershadow.com?" (misconception needs debunking)

"Are there any independent sources that verify the claims SuperShadow makes on www.supershadow.com? Namely, that he is a high-paid Lucasfilm consultant and personal friend of George Lucas?"

"If scripts 7, 8, and 9 are already written and George Lucas wants to do other films than Star Wars, can't they get some other talented producer/director to make them in the same mood and style as the first six?" (An SS-related answer also needs debunking)

"Where can I find the books that tell the story of Episodes 7-9?' (Another SS-related answer, needing to be debunked.)

Answering requires creating an account first, but it is well worth the effort of letting fellow AB users know the truth behind Supershadow.

If you have anything to say about it, reply to my talk page on Wikipedia. --68.102.193.78 04:33, 7 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Kaleesh
I was reading his "George Lucas" Q&A, and on November 25, "Lucas" said that Grievous' species were the Kaleesh. We should probably update the section. -- SFH 02:42, 19 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * Oh it already has been. Never mind. -- SFH 02:45, 19 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Fictional Bio
Maybe we could make a fictional bio of "Nebar Foxis". In his biography, we can put him as a renagade jedi who made his (false) philosiphy, and looked for force-powerful children to teach. Fireball93 00:26, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * No. Wookieepedia is not the place to put fanon. --Imp 00:53, 21 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * I learned that the hard way. I was banned on my first Day!!! Thanks Imp. Like I knew all the rules. WELCOME TO WOOKIEPEDIA FOLKS!!

I'm sorry. I lost my temper.

FB93

NPOV

 * This article can just wear an NPOV tag forever if people are going to be oversensitive about it. It's perfect as it is. You can't expose someone as a liar and a fraud without sounding at least a little biased. &mdash;Darth Culator   (talk)  18:03, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Anyways, he deserves to be ripped apart (unfortunately not physically). But still, if someone adds a REALLY offensive comment than just revert it. Jasca Ducato 18:18, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)
 * You know, after reading the Wikipedia article, I think their article is more biased against him than we are. -- SFH 21:25, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)
 * Regardless of his actions, this wiki follows a neutral POV. Just 'cause we all hate him doesn't mean we can break the rules. --Imp 14:47, 17 Jan 2006 (UTC)
 * Agreed. There are plenty of ways to expose someone as a liar without being biased against him. You must let go of your fear that anyone will believe him. Fear leads to Anger. Anger leads to Hate. Hate leads to suffering. ;-) Weak minded fools who believe some random web loser's claims of glory and fame is going to believe almost anything. --SparqMan 17:29, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

New quote
As much as I loved the old quote, the new one is much better. StupidShadow crap is banned from discussion on the official site, for Xendor's sake! He's officially a "big fraud"! How much more clearly do the noobs need them to say it? &mdash;Darth Culator  (talk)  18:15, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
 * It's still inappropriate. We should really be trying this page as neutral as we can. You can say he is a fraud and remain neutral. Say it, support it with facts. End of story. These quotes that everyone keeps putting up are childish and make this place look bad. The problem is not SuperShadow. While I agree it's frustrating what he has done/is doing the problem is really the retards who believe him. The man is entitled to spout whatever nonsense he wants on his own site. He pays for the webspace he can do what he wants wth it. Anyway, the quote should be taken down.--DannyBoy7783 21:57, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
 * It's an official policy from the discussion board on the official site. That doesn't need to be supported, it is a fact. &mdash;Darth Culator   (talk)  23:11, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not saying the quote needs to be supported. That wouldn't make any sense at all. I'm saying in general. That is what we do here - present information and when necessary back it up. Anyway, the quote is just ridiculous. It becomes inappropriate for posting at this wiki because of the wording. Put the information that topics on him aren't allowed in the article on him but not the quote. This is a site about facts not opinions. You guys can do whatever you want but it makes wookieepedia look bad when you have attacks like that.--DannyBoy7783 00:51, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * "He's more machine now than man; twisted and evil." "Will somebody get this big walking carpet out of my way?" "He is the Chosen One. You must see it." "He's a card player, gambler, scoundrel. You'd like him." When has the lead quote of an article been anything BUT an opinion? SM-716 01:09, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * How often has the lead quote been about a real person and not in-universe?--DannyBoy7783 02:51, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Point taken. But it is still a fact that a moderator on the official site said that about SuperShadow. The quote itself expresses Lad's opinion of SS, but it is still a proven fact that the quote was made. So what would be the solution? I guess if anyone can find a positive quote about SS from someone in a position of relative authority in the Star Wars community, add it to the top of the article. SM-716 21:42, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * While that's a good idea it's probably unlikely. The factual basis of that quote should be incorporated into the article but the quote should be removed (I think).--DannyBoy7783 00:43, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Any Point?
Is there any point to linking to the Wikipedia article? It's identical to this one.--Vercalos 03:53, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * There are slight differences, unless they've copied us. -- Riffsyphon1024 04:18, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Ah.. Looks like they copied it.--Vercalos 04:20, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Mickey Suttle
Does anybody else here think we should change the title of this article to "Mickey Suttle"? I mean:- Any thoughts? Jasca Ducato 15:37, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) It is his real name and he has not always used the persona SuperShadow, so it would fit in with Wiki policy.
 * 2)It would help convince people who come to Wookipedia and type in SuperShadow when the see the name Mickey Suttle glaring at them!
 * That's probably a good idea. &mdash;Darth Culator   (talk)  18:52, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Good, if nobody objects by the 28th then i'll change the article title. Jasca Ducato 18:39, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Much like the picture below, do we have any real confirmation that Suttle is StuporShadow? If not, we may want to hold off on moving the article. jSarek 19:50, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
 * We also need proof that that pic is actually him. Otherwise, it's caption will have to read "an alleged picture of Suttle." Adamwankenobi 20:36, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
 * He's best known as SuperShadow. I don't really see the advantage of moving it. &mdash; Silly Dan 22:42, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, Mitth'raw'nuruodo is best known as Thrawn, Qymaen jai Sheelal is best known as Grievous, and the Alliance to Restore the Republic is best known as the Rebel Alliance, but their articles are placed under their true names, not their best known names. If Mr. Suttle is, indeed, SuperShadow, then we should probably use that name for him. jSarek 02:32, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Thankyou jSarek. And i know i cant provide a source (yet). That picture is Mickey Suttle. I'll keep looking for a source but plenty of sites have that picture when regarding SadoShadow. Jasca Ducato 18:44, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Ermm, since no-one has actually opposed the moving of the article... I'll check back at 6:00pm GMT and if no-one has yet opposed then i'll move the article. Jasca Ducato 09:22, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Consider me opposing until we can confirm his identity in some way. That said, I also wonder if, even if we do confirm his name, we shouldn't instead create two articles, one about the site and the other about its creator, much as we've done for theforce.net or some of the other fan sites. jSarek 09:36, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't that just give more talk pages for us to complain about him? -- SFH 18:42, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Thats true SFH. I have some sources if you want to take a look.
 * 1) &mdash;   (Look at the   SS  logo he puts on the page)
 * 2) &mdash;  (Read section 2)

And follow this link, and this one. Thats all i've got time to look for at the moment but i'm say yes to a move.

P.S. Mickey Suttle is SadoShadow. Jasca Ducato 21:19, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * You can even look up the owner of supershadow.com, and it says right there it's him. CooperTFN 21:27, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Is that proof enough? It CooperTFN also says in the discussion below that the picture was found on the website he worked at, so it is a picture of him. That's more than enough evidence, i think, to warrant me changing the article title. Jasca Ducato
 * Seeing as no-one had opposed the move save jSarek, and i have supplied him with sutible proof and sources, and i have given him a whole day to leave a message here. I'm moving both the article and its talk page over to Mickey Suttle and Talk:Mickey Suttle respectively if anybody still wishes to discuss it. Jasca Ducato 19:43, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
 * One day is not enough for a vote to be held or a decision to be made, so I am reverting it. My reasons are mainly due to the number of titles that now double redirect to it. -- Riffsyphon1024 04:44, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Fine then, despite the fact that its wiki policy to change his name. If you want a vote lets have one, i vote move to Mickey Suttle! Jasca Ducato 08:58, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Look, if your not actually going to even reply to this message then i'll just change the article back to Mickey Suttle! Jasca Ducato 18:44, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty satisfied by the evidence presented that StuporShadow.com is indeed run by Suttle. However, my second point - that Suttle and his website are two different things - hasn't fully been addressed.  Should we have two different articles - Mickey Suttle and SuperShadow (or SuperShadow.com, with Supershadow as a disambig for the two), or just one (in which case I concur it should probably be at Mickey Suttle)? jSarek 12:10, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Please could anybody with any view on this problem please see the renaming vote at the top of the page, Thankyou. Jasca Ducato 19:42, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Picture
Sites say that's the real SS at the computer, but do we have any proof of this?
 * It's from the website of the company he works for, but it's been taken down since it was first discovered. CooperTFN 21:28, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Yuuzhan Vong
Is it really noteworthy that he doesn't consider the Vong to be canon? It's not really that terrible, considering some of the other stuff he's pulled. -- SFH 00:35, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

"the wookipedia traitor"
i would be a little more careful about what we say that shadow cant see, this guy made a comment to shadow, today, dont ask how i know he said it. but he apparently was ad maybe still is a high level person on this site, so be careful now, ok, this guy is obbsed with shadow, and could tell him secret things...
 * What Wookieepedia secrets do we have, anyway? It's a freely accessible wiki, for pete's sake. &mdash; Silly Dan 22:55, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
 * That's nice. Now guess how much we care. Give up? Not a whole hell of a lot, that's how much. Unless Angela is actually StupidShadow in drag, there's exactly nothing to worry about. &mdash;Darth Culator   (talk)  22:58, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

it merged with this section for some reason, ok...

i warned you, we have to end this is, shadow is to annoying... he pulls to much stuff...

we either declare a all out war on shadow, or somehow let lucas on him...

ok, we need to do a war where we slowly get rid of his ideas that are fake, ok...
 * "we have to end this". Why? It sounds like you want this to end because you like and/or believe SuperShadow. Admiral J. Nebulax 00:06, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Sounds to me more like "68" dislikes him. Who doesn't?  &mdash; Silly Dan 00:11, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Honestly, who cares?--DannyBoy7783 03:48, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Meh. But it would be cool to wipe him of the face of the internet.-user:remoh


 * I agree... but seriously, who believes him? I don't and would never! User: Ruffles
 * I agree with remoh, it would be nice. But Reuufles, the problem is that quite alot of people believe him, maybe nobody here on Wookiepedia. But everywhere else... That's the problem, he's not just some stuck up, self-indulgent dick who thinks he's above even George Lucas when it comes to Star Wars canonicity. He's a stuck up, self-indulgent dick who thinks he's above even George Lucas when it comes to Star Wars canonicity with a massive fan base behind him! It's sickening! Jasca Ducato 09:03, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I know, sometimes people are just a teensie bit guillable, but anyway that's why we are here, to correct stupid things like that and put the REAL stuff in.

Idiotic Statements
Here is one of the stupidest things I have seen in a long time... (I can't figure out quote boxes yet.)

Hey SS, since Luke's kid is the grandson of the chosen one couldn't he have dormant Force powers that allow him to bring characters like Anakin, Darth Maul, The Emperor that created the double-bladed light saber, Palpatine, Yoda and Jango back to life and turn to the dark side when Luke becomes emperor and create a Darth Vader that has no memory of Anakin Skywalker. (SuperShadow: I can see this happening. Anything is possible. You have a vivid imagination that is very impressive. This idea will be forwarded to Lucas.)

What a fool. -- Doo Doo 08:12, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

What about this?

SS: There is zero chance Anakin used the dark side to defeat Dooku. Anakin remained focused and this caused his vctory. 0% percent chance of persuading me otheriwse.

A fan objects...

SS: I suppose it could have happned, great idea.


 * There's always "My I.Q. is 4.7 million, which makes me the greatest massive super genius in the Universe. I’m not bragging mind you." -LtNOWIS 21:06, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Talk about self-contradictory. He basically just proved his has a low IQ in that one sentence bragging about how high it is. Correct me if i'm wrong but i don't think "the greatest massive super genius" is correct English, which requires a decently standard IQ! Jasca Ducato 08:28, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Very, very, VERY Sad
Is it just me, or is it sad that we have a whole page devoted to some stupid fan?
 * This is here to inform the general population of his idiocy. -- Riffsyphon1024 18:22, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
 * It's sad that it's necessary&mdash;but it is necessary. &mdash;Darth Culator   (talk)  19:14, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Mr./Ms. Untitled! I mean I was just about to make a new headline probably saying something like "What the...?" I understand this site has already gone through the "vfd" process, but why should a fan get his own page? I thought this wikicity was on characters, events, THINGS...from Star Wars. The only out-of-universe articles are about templates or user pages or "wookifying" type methods or "the ways things are done 'round here". There should be NO page on a fan. Seriously...Mr./Ms. Untitled and I should have regular pages just for ourselves too then! This page is one of those definitely helping to slowly bring down Wookieepedia. HE HAS HIS OWN PAGE! We're always saying how NOT to usually believe what SuperShadow says. For being a mysterious, contraversial figure he gets an article written and disputed over him? It shouldn't exist! Wolfdog 06:09, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 * We can't simply ignore him. If he's ignored his fanon creations will slip into the canon wiki and mess everything up without having the ability to check against them. -- Riffsyphon1024 06:17, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Hey, I know it's too late to delete his page now. But I might as well just have a little bit of fun...Wolfdog 06:25, 5 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Hey, I know it's too late to delete his page now. But I might as well just have a little bit of fun... Erm, no not really. Mickey Suttle/SuperStupid is a key figure in Star Wars. Granted it's because he's an a***hole who pollutes it but still. We cant just launch him into the Sun and erase him from history unfortunatly. Jasca Ducato 08:03, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 * But if we could, we'd be very happy. Very very happy.-User:Remoh

New Girlfriend Pics
Oh my gosh... has anyone been to his girlfriend site lately? Talk about an obvious (and poor) Photoshop job! Look at the skin tones between the face and the body... http://www.supershadow.com/starwars/girlfriend.html Cutch 04:42, 6 March 2006 (UTC)