Talk:Leia Organa Solo/Archive2

Main Image
that's the second one i've seen changed without premission or disguession on the talk page. Valin &quot;Tnu&quot; &quot;Shido&quot; Suul 21:25, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Here's the image


 * It would be very tempting to say "I told you so"... but I won't ;) --Tinwe 10:09, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Princess Leia's theme
Shouldn't there be a section for Princess Leia's theme.  Jaina Solo  Goddess Stuff 01:16, 19 September 2006 (UTC) I see that one was added, but the grammar and construction was terrible. Leia's Theme has it's own page for some reason...
 * Leia's theme, as in her theme song? -Finlayson 02:51, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes.  Jaina Solo  Goddess Stuff [[Image:JainaPurple.jpg |30px]] 11:20, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Princess_Leia%27s_Theme

...so I just copied what was written there onto Leia's page. --Promus Kaa 17:55, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Why Is This Article An Improvement Drive?

 * Why is this article an improvement drive? it seems great to me, nothing seemed wrong with it, it has massive amoutns of information, and some unessesary such as the outfit catagory, but what is wrong with this article?
 * It wasn't as good when it was nominated. Since it's nomination, it's grown from 31 kilobytes to 68 kilobytes. But it stays on the nomination page until it stops getting votes. If nobody else votes for this page, it'll stop being a nominee be October 14.-LtNOWIS 02:48, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I dont care, its a good page, regardless if people like it, votes do NOT matter, people think the Kit Fisto article is good, and it sucks, it's like at most two pages long if I were to print it, thats not a good article, people just vote on the most popular, not on facts, and the fact is Kit Fisto is nothing, just pointless.
 * Sign your comments please. -Fnlayson 17:58, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I guess when it's improved then it would be taken care off. Jaina Solo ( Goddess Stuff ) [[Image:Jaina_sig.jpg|25px]] 18:03, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I just read the whole thing, and it's desperately in need of improvement. .  .  .  .  08:52, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Well add missing items to the I-drive/Expand List above or specify what is lacking. -Fnlayson 14:06, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I've also turned my significant writing energies to Leia after Jaina Solo pointed out that she needed some work. I've done all I can for her brother, and I've just about done all I can with Leia- massive text expansions galore! Atarumaster88  [[Image:Jedi_Order.jpg|20px]] ( Audience Chamber ) 20:34, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I think the article is good. But I'll do what I can on it too.  -Fnlayson 20:51, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Princess of a place that no longer exsists?
Can you still be a Princess of a place that no longer exsists? I mean, I could say I'm the owner of this sandwich, but if this sandwich is obliterated, I no longer own it. Thoughts? . .  .  .  12:23, 11 October 2006 (UTC) Indeed you can still be the Princess of a place that no longer exists. There are several real world examples, but a good GFFA example is Prince Xizor, who retained his title and rights despite the obliteration of his father's kingdom. --SparqMan 08:13, 17 October 2006 (PDT)
 * This is covered in The Black Fleet Crisis, I believe, only about being senator of Alderaan. In that it says that, since some Alderaanians survived they still needed representation so Leia could serve as senator. Presumably the same applies to her role as a princess. Green Tentacle (Talk) 12:27, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Hmm. I see where you're coming from, but a Senator is a represenative of her people, whereas a Princess is a ruler OF a place. .  .  .  .  05:54, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
 * The planet Faleen still exsisted though... . .  .  .  01:53, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Name
The article uses a few different name schemes for the subject, including given name, surname, royal name, married name and a combination of those. Given Leia's royal status, I recommend we default to the style preference of calling her "Princess Leia" in every instance after the first to avoid any confusion. --SparqMan 15:11, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree that right now there are too many name schemes, so I like your proposal. Or how about just "Leia"? For example, The New Essential Guide to Characters and The New Essential Chronology (the "Profiles in History" part at least) use more commonly first names instead of a surname or a first name/surname combination, and I don't see a problem with that, even though the latter would be a more encyclopedic way of doing things. I couldn't force myself to refer to Leia as "Organa" or "Organa Solo" when I wrote the early life part. It just seemed... wrong, somehow. So I used "Leia" or "the Princess" instead. IIRC, there was a thread in the Senate Hall about the proper style of referring to individuals in the articles, but I don't remember a consensus being reached. --Tinwe 10:14, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * No matter how "wrong" it feels, there are only two proper styles after the first full naming: "Organa Solo" or "Princess Leia". --SparqMan 17:43, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I do see your point, and if Wookieepedia was a real-world encyclopedia, I'd agree. However, what I failed to emphazise in my last comment was that both NEGTC and NEC are written from an in-universe perspective &mdash; and they use first names when referring to individuals, beside the more formal first name/surname combinations and surnames. Maybe that's the GFFA way of doing things then ;) And if it is, maybe we should consider it too, given that our character articles are IU. Unencyclopedic in the conventional sense, maybe, but looking at our other articles, people seem to prefer using first name to surname. I'm not saying the people are necessarily right, I just thought I'd bring the issue up. Thoughts? --Tinwe 21:01, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Organa or Organa-Solo. QuentinGeorge 21:13, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Is the Luke ~ Leia "Love Triangle" necessary?
Do we really need references concerning a sexual attraction between Luke and Leia? Can we 86 the image of the two of them about to kiss? '''I'm through arguing this disgusting topic. Keep it, then. Incest wins.'''
 * Yeah, if we chose to deny that such an attraction was there, which Splinter of the Mind's Eye proves there was. Adamwankenobi 01:38, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Everyone knows that was a desperate attempt to retcon the fact that they weren't brother and sister when Empire Strikes Back came out. Lucas admitted the "love triangle" plot was abandoned for Reurn of the Jedi... that she was meant for Han. Come on, man. It's creepy.
 * But it is nevertheless a part of canon and cannot be ignored. Adamwankenobi 01:46, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * And please...sign your comments with four tildes. .  .  .  .  01:48, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * ONLY THE MOVIES ARE CANON. And yes, I'm one of those fans. When Return of the Jedi came out, we were meant to view Luke and Leia's kiss in Empire Strikes Back as Leia's attempt to make Han jealous, not sexual tension. Those are Lucas's thoughts on the subject, my friend... argue the relevence of the kiss with him. I mean, do we really need to explore that moot point from the movie with a scientific explanation for incest. I know it happened, but we can ignore it easily. Just axe the article. What's the big deal?68.219.86.69 02:24, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * If you are a movie purist, then maybe Wookiepedia is not the place for you. Splinter of the Mind's Eye is, and always was canon. Lucas has acknowledged that the EU is a part of the story, I don't see why the fans should hold onto a childish sentiment that it's not. .  .  .  .  02:27, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Look, it's canon until Lucas decides to ignore it altoghter and do whatever the hell he wants to with his story. I KNOW the EU is "canon", I'm not arguing that point. I'm reading her article, and there's this story why she almost boned her brother. It wasn't supposed to happen. Lucas wants us to ignore it. Lucas retconned it himself in the next movie. By including it you're going against the actual flow of the story. It's like "Haloween III"... just forget it. It was a mistake. Lucas decides what's etched in stone as far as Star Wars goes, not us.68.219.100.200 02:44, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * ONLY THE MOVIES ARE CANON. Doesn't sound like you think that the EU is canon. Anyway, Lucas "ignored" Jar Jar Binks in Episode IV...does that mean he doesn't exsist? Just because Lucas doesn't continue something through to the next film, doesn't mean it never exsisted. Plus, Han picks up on the whole love triangle thing in ROTJ, when he suspects that Leia still loves Luke. .  .  .  .  02:47, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * REALITY. I'M TALKING ABOUT REALITY. The TRUTH of the matter is Lucas hadn't decided to make them brother and sister at that point. Do you get it? You know that right? We're not supposed to think that the last of the Jedi wants to nail his own sister. Get it? LUCAS CHANGED HIS MIND. You're including as Star Wars "canon" that it was almost a possibility that it happened? LUCAS DISAGREES WITH YOU! That's the ONLY reason why it was included in "Splinter", because fanatics couldn't comprehend the notion that he changed his mind!68.211.166.67 03:20, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Splinter has yet to be retconned. The Empire Strikes Back has yet to be retconned. Therefore, they are both parts of the continuity. Therefore, they are both parts of the canon. Lucas presented them with love intrest in IV and V, and to my knowledge, those films still exsist. That cannot be ignored. .  .  .  .  03:23, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm sure movie purists find canon more disgusting than incest. .  .  .  .  03:42, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * LOL! Sad but true. Adamwankenobi 03:43, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Romance

 * Can we get a "Romance" section like in Luke Skywalker's article? And yes, Luke needs to be in there... ;) QuentinGeorge 11:17, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Duel on Mimban
Do you think we should have an image from the Duel on Mimban? I think that it's a very significant event - a lightsabre duel with her father! . .  .  .  02:01, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Tape??
It says in the behind the scenes part that tape was used because of the no underwear in space thing. I don't get how the tape was used? Quinlanfan 20:46, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Probably on the skin acting something like a bra. -Fnlayson 21:59, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
 * One word. Ow. Commander Jorrel Fraajic [[Image:Insignia.jpg|20px]] Communications Relay  22:14, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Clothes
67.72.98.117 18:15, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Is it just me or does the clothes that Leia wears in the begining of ANH look like a night gown?