Talk:Starkiller Base

Planet kill count?
I've seen several other sources now claim that Starkiller destroyed several planets at once. Here, that's just sourced to the new movie. I can picture that scene, and I thought the beam was being channeled through some sort of way stations before firing on the one planet. Wikipedia's plot summary says the base was capable of destroying systems but only mentions "the Republic capital" and fleet as its casualties. Are we positive it destroyed multiple planets with one fire? That seems a bit silly, but then again, almost everything about Starkiller Base did. --BDD (talk) 17:35, December 28, 2015 (UTC)
 * It was either multiple planets, or Hosnian Prime and several moons (plus the ships in orbit). Poe said later in the film that the Starkiller "destroyed the Hosnian system." - Brandon Rhea (talk) 17:46, December 28, 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks. But geez... that means the laser was somehow created to go through one planet or moon, then veer off towards others? No one expects totally realistic science from Star Wars, but... really?? --BDD (talk) 21:44, December 29, 2015 (UTC)

Hypersace?
So is it ever stated anywhere that the Starkiller base is mobile and capable of hyperspace travel? Does it travel to a system to drain it's star? How does that work?

Finn wasn't the one giving the blueprints to Starkiller base. Some scout patrol did as they say in the movie. All Finn did was say he knew how to shutdown the shields and it was required for him to be there to do it.

I know that. What I meant in my question is if Starkiller base itself is capable of travelling in hyperspace to different star systems? It would seem a huge waste of resources if they could only fire the weapon twice before the star is used up, forcing them to abandon the superweapon because it's no longer usable.

The Base moved from star to star, abosorbing them; surely the system should be listed as "Varies?" Also, the planet didn't explode, it collapsed.
 * Best we know, that information has not been given yet. --  Riffsyphon  1024 01:50, January 1, 2016 (UTC)
 * Addendum: Pablo confirms that it does move. Just nothing in published material yet. File:Pablo_Hidalgo_It_Moves.png --  Riffsyphon  1024 03:31, January 1, 2016 (UTC)

Power Source
The article for this page has a whole paragraph explaining the power mechanism from the novel (Dark Energy). In the next paragraph, it states that it is powered by the Sun (as it appears to be in the film). It is very jarring to read. Is the novel's version of the power source canon? 104.148.132.78 01:05, December 31, 2015 (UTC)
 * It's explained in the novel. And there is a paragraph in the article sourced in the novel, explaining it: " Enormous arrays of specially designed collectors use the power of a sun to attract and send dark energy to a containment unit at the core of the planet, where it is held and built up inside that containment unit until the weapon is ready to fire". The sun is basically fuel that the weapon needs in order to collect dark energy. --Janustheanus (talk) 18:44, January 1, 2016 (UTC)

Image from space
I found an image about Starkiller Base as seen from space, should it be added to the page?

--Ninjinfox22 (talk) 01:30, January 1, 2016 (UTC) Ninjinfox22

That would be good.Evil Intern (talk) 01:15, January 2, 2016 (UTC)

Pablo Hidalgo Tweets
Should we really say that the base is mobile? Sure, he says it on his account, but he has right there in his description "Don't cite tweets as canon." So there really is no answer to how the base could replenish its energy at the current moment. Ganondorf 04:32, January 12, 2016 (UTC)
 * He just doesn't want joke tweets used as canon, nor should his tweets be assumed as new canon. However, he can clarify existing content, which this falls into. He's a member of the Lucasfilm Story Group so clarifying tweets are perfectly valid. - Brandon Rhea (talk) 13:04, January 12, 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh, ok. Thanks for clarifying. Ganondorf 07:03, January 14, 2016 (UTC)

Dark Energy
The novelization refers to the base as running on "Dark Energy" and "quintessence". However, WP:CANON states:

"Del Rey states that film novelizations, film junior novelizations, and the Star Wars: The Clone Wars film novelization 'are canon where they align with what is seen on screen in the 6 films and the Clone Wars animated movie.' Wookieepedia Canon articles treat these novelizations as non-canon Legends material."

Shouldn't this material go in a separate Legends page, then, not the main Canon article?

--MugaSofer (talk) 20:43, January 17, 2016 (UTC)
 * That only applies to the first six episodes. The Force Awakens novels are all canon except for cases of direct contradictions, i.e. dialogue. Cwedin (talk) 20:53, January 17, 2016 (UTC)
 * The original novels set around that time period are canon, yes, but novelizations inherently involve a degree of contradiction with the source material. That's presumably why we have official word that they're just that - novelizations of official canon material.--MugaSofer (talk) 21:29, January 17, 2016 (UTC)
 * Pablo Hidalgo of the Lucasfilm Story Group said that new material in the TFA novel can be considered canon, while differences must defer to the film. The Episodes I-VI novels still exist in a grey area so, until otherwise told to us by Lucasfilm, we consider those Legends. - Brandon Rhea (talk) 21:38, January 17, 2016 (UTC)
 * Huh, I wasn't aware of that quote. All I've seen him say on the issue was (plus the ambiguous pre-TFA quote.) Actually, having reviewed the book, I think this is a direct conflict with canon - in the novelization, the weapon is explicitly described as igniting the cores of the target planet into a "pocket nova", which then generates a shockwave that destroys the other planets in the system. This directly contradicts what is seen onscreen. That's in addition to the dark energy/power of the sun issue.--MugaSofer (talk) 22:36, January 18, 2016 (UTC)
 * Brandon, thanks - do you have the link to the Pablo quote re: the TFA novel? Vympel (talk) 03:49, January 19, 2016 (UTC)