Talk:Mitth'raw'nuruodo

Name
Is his full name canon? Is there a canon source which refers to him as Mitth'raw'nuruodo and not just Thrawn? If so which source that would be is not identified as such. On his legends page Mist encounter is listed as the first time he was identified with that name in that canon, no such distinction is made in this article. Either a "first identified as" tag should be added to the work which first identified him as Mitth- or this article is misnamed due to that name not being canon. --204.186.26.217 03:04, March 17, 2017 (UTC) There is no information about a source of his really name. I hate Thrawn and I don't know anything about him so I will not edit it. — Mustafar29 (Dyskusja / User talk) 20:57, March 22, 2017 (UTC)
 * An excerpt from the upcoming Thrawn novel uses the name. jSarek (talk) 03:31, March 17, 2017 (UTC)
 * The excerpt mentions the full name--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 21:50, March 22, 2017 (UTC)

Planets
Don't know why it got deleted but I'll post it again .... Thrawn narrowed down his search from a thousand systems to ninety four planets .... not ninety four systems. That is a galactic difference. Please correct it.

Thrawn Novel
Are we going to update the page for Thrawn Novel Content, i tried, but didnt allow me

(Sgt wataz (talk) 18:19, April 20, 2017 (UTC))

Thrawn in Empire's End
Can someone please give me the exact reference to Thrawn in Aftermath: Empire's End, please? In theory I could buy the book, wait for it for two weeks (which is about as long as it takes from Amazon to deliver stuff) and then discover they just name-drop him in half a sentence. So, can someone be kind and tell exactly what is there? Thank you.--Dionne Jinn (Something to say?) 04:58, May 23, 2017 (UTC)
 * "For decades, these computers have been plotting a journey. Outside the known galaxy is an unexplored infinity, Palpatine explained, one closed off by a labyrinth of solar storms, rogue magnetospheres, black holes, gravity wells, and things far stranger. Any who tried to conquer that maze did not survive. The ships were obliterated, or returned to the galaxy devoid of travelers. Communications from those explorers were incomprehensible, either shot through with such static as to make the content useless, or filled with enough inane babble to serve as a perfectly clear sign that the explorer had gone utterly mad out there in isolation. But Palpatine had one in the navy who knew something of the Unknown Regions: Admiral Thrawn, an alien with ice-blue skin who came from beyond the borders of the known galaxy. Palpatine only kept that one around because of what he knew of traversing those deadly interstices. Much of what Thrawn knew went into the computations of this machine." - Brandon Rhea (talk) 05:24, May 23, 2017 (UTC)
 * That's it? Thanks. Any data on who actually thinks that was the only reason why Thrawn was taken in? It sounds rather opinionated, considering his commanding skills.--Dionne Jinn (Something to say?) 16:21, May 23, 2017 (UTC)
 * Gallius Rax, who would be in the know of Palpatine's thinking. - Brandon Rhea (talk) 17:24, May 23, 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks again. I've been thinking that the Legacy part in this article doesn't flow smoothly with everything else, but I see now that there isn't much info to start with.--Dionne Jinn (Something to say?) 17:49, May 23, 2017 (UTC)

It's a coincidence,really,because I went to the library,and randomly picked out two star wars books.Thrawn and Empire's End.I'm almost finished with Empire's End.Didn't realize they were related,but I have a question:Which one came first in the timeline?I live my life as if I live in the star wars universe,I don't care about timeline,I care about characters and stuff.
 * Thrawn takes place several years before Episode IV. Empire's End takes place one year after Episode VI. - Brandon Rhea (talk) 22:32, October 10, 2017 (UTC)

Exile
This there good evidence that he actually faked his exile? The citation in the article is just from the book Thrawn. However, the only time he states that the exile was faked was in a conversation with someone he regarded as an adversary. In particular, he has lied many times in similar conversations as a bluff or as a trick. It seems like fairly thin evidence to come to a strong conclusion as to whether or not the exile was faked. I'm not saying the exile definitely wasn't fake, but I just don't see it as particularly compelling evidence.

131.215.167.113 07:08, June 5, 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your question. I also read the novel and I believe it's more than enough evidence that the exile was faked. It all comes down to the fact that Thrawn simply has no reason to lie in that situation. Thrawn isn't characterized as a character who lies simply to lie and there's no reason to think he wouldn't be telling the truth to Nightswan in this case. In this scene he's literally trying to recruit Nightswan to the Ascendancy and it's honestly pretty clear to me at least that he doesn't consider Nightswan as much of an adversary in that scene as you seem to think. Furthermore, he sends Eli to the Ascendancy at the end of the book. Perhaps try a reread of the Nightswan parley scene with a slightly friendlier tone? I honestly believe that it's canon that he faked the exile and everyone seems to be taking it as canon so I believe it to be canon until it's officially stated as a bluff. While there may not be enough evidence for you to consider it canon that he's telling the truth, there's even less evidence that he's bluffing or lying. It goes against his characterization and the tone of the scene. --UmbraWitchAlraune (talk) 10:27, June 5, 2017 (UTC)

Additionally, if any more explanation is required, as a writer I feel that it doesn't make narrative sense for Thrawn to have lied about lying about his exile. The way it was treated in the book, it was a late-novel gamechanging plot twist reveal. Surprise, Thrawn has been lying about being exiled the whole time and he's really still an agent for the Chiss working within the Empire. That's a pretty big game changer. So you have to ask yourself: What does the writer, Zahn, gain by dropping such a massive twist, without hints or confirmation in the novel proper that the twist is fake, only to reveal sometime long after the fact that the twist is fake. It simply doesn't make narrative sense for Zahn to do that. Without including any hints that Thrawn is lying in the novel proper, any reveal that the big reveal was a ruse is going to feel kinda retcon-y. But if all of this still isn't enough for you to believe that, at least at this point in time, we have enough evidence to assume Thrawn is telling the truth please feel free to take it up with someone like Zahn or Pablo Hildago on twitter and report back your results. --UmbraWitchAlraune (talk) 19:50, June 5, 2017 (UTC)

Minimal Casualties
In his personality section I noticed there is nothing about his trying to inflict the least possible casualties in a situation. Throughout the Thrawn novel he tries to kill only who is necessary. at one point in the novel he even calls for rescue teams to be sent out to the planet Batonn. I wanted to discuss it here before I put it into the main article. --CE3K-1977 (talk) 13:01, August 4, 2017 (UTC)
 * Well the page is currently inuse by User:UmbraWitchAlraune so any changes you have I'd suggest you leave them on the users talk page --Lewisr (talk) 13:04, August 4, 2017 (UTC)

Source?
Could some provide the source that says Thrawn intercepted the code phrase "By the light of Lothal's moons" sent by Fulcrum, I didn't remember it from the episode--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 02:54, August 11, 2017 (UTC)
 * Whilst I'm not entirely sure of a source that says he intercepted it, Thrawn must've come across the phrase at some point seens as he mentions it to Kallus in Zero Hour --Lewisr (talk) 02:58, August 11, 2017 (UTC)
 * True, but I doesn't mean that he intercepted it, it could be any other officer--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 03:02, August 11, 2017 (UTC)
 * I guess that part should be changed then --Lewisr (talk) 03:04, August 11, 2017 (UTC)

Main image vote
Maybe I'm the only one, but I'm not quite satisfied with the current main image. I think it just seems... off. A bit Frankenstein-ish, in fact. So I thought, why not initiate a vote for a change? As far as I'm concerned, despite the apparent lack of pupils, I tend to favor Option 4 because of its photorealistic quality. Orherwise, I'd take Option 2. What do you guys think? -- Lelal Mekha  (Audience Room) 13:31, November 24, 2017 (UTC)

Option 2

 * 1) -- Lelal Mekha  The Uprising crest.png(Audience Room) 13:31, November 24, 2017 (UTC)

Option 4

 * 1) -- Lelal Mekha  The Uprising crest.png(Audience Room) 13:31, November 24, 2017 (UTC)