Talk:Palpatine/Legends

Archived talk: Darth Sidious | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 15

Warning: Information overload!
There's too much info in this article! Waaaay too many tangents have been added, references to things that do not directly relate to Palpatine/Sidious, things that he only ever had marginal, if any, contact with, and it's all so flowery and overly-hyped. Basically what I'm trying to say is that there is way too much nonessential info crammed into this article, which has inflated it waaaaay past what it should be. I mean, do we really need all the stuff we have about Chandrilla's other Senator and the ballyhoo that surrounded the dissolving of the Imperial Senate?--Goodwood 21:40, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
 * If it's relevant to Palpatine or Palpatine's actions, then yes. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 21:41, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
 * True to a point, but like I said, a lot of the article is pure fluff that is in desperate need of a trim.--Goodwood 21:45, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I disagree, as I always have and always will when it comes to making major changes to this article. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 21:47, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Something tells me that it wasn't just because of the lack of sourcing (per new guidelines) that saw this article stripped of its FA status. If you catch my drift, Jacky.--Goodwood 21:52, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
 * There's two things you need to know: 1) There is no need for a cleanup tag. If you feel it needs to be trimmed, then by all means try to trim it. But a cleanup tag is not necessary under the circumstances. 2) In all likelihood, I might revert some of your changes if you don't discuss them first. It'd be best to discuss what you wanted "trimmed" here before you edit the article. &mdash;Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial Emblem.png|20px]] 22:26, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay, I think I see what you're saying (well, not really). You're claiming ownership of this page and that anything anyone does to it must meet with your express written consent, eh? That's complete and utter bollocks and you know it - no one "owns" an article, as it says right below the edit window. Sorry, but your excuse is as stupid as a certain person "sparing" you against being tagged with a 3RR violation.--Goodwood 22:48, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
 * That comment, "I might revert some of your changes if you don't discuss them first," strikes me as highly inappropriate. Threatening to revert any changes made to articles that you seem to think belong to you, is if not a violation of our policies, then very close to it. Other users have merit, and I do not understand why you cannot accept this. I advise you develop a little faith in others; it'll do you a world of good. We're not bad people; we're not out to ruin you or your work. - Graestan  [[Image:Jedi_Order.jpg|20px]] ( This party's over ) 22:58, 19 August 2007 (UTC)