Talk:DS-1 Orbital Battle Station/Legends

Just a thought. The official site puts the first Death Star's diameter at 120km, and the second Death Star's diameter at 160km: --Beeurd 20:52, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
 * This is one of those scaling things that cause so much conflict between various groups of fans (try walking into a SW message board of some sort and ask the length of the Executor sometime ;-) ). I say cite both numbers and their sources/rationale and leave it to the reader to make up their mind. JSarek 22:15, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
 * I was thinking we should mention at the bottom of the article about the confusion. It seems silly to put a figure different to every official source without explaining why. But that's just me. And yeah, I do know about the Executor's length (I support the 17.5km length) but somehow I hadn't realised the discrepancy with the size of the Death Stars. --22:52, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
 * JSarek, the canonical diameters of the Death Star and Death Star II are 160 km and >800 km, respectively. This is proven by the films, which are the highest canon.  The Death Star I's diameter was also stated to be 160 km in the original Incredible Cross Sections book, which has been said to represent the best research of the films.  The issue concerning the size of the Death Stars is not open to debate to anyone who knows these things.  The EU diameters of 120 km and 160 km must be pointed out to be incorrect, and probably in a separate "Behind the Scenes" section of the article.
 * The Inside the Worlds of the Original Trilogy factbook which came out last Autumn, uses the filmatic evidence and says 900 km for the DS II. So that´s it, really. But I agree on having the '160 km' reference in a separate "behind the scenes" note. VT-16 17:11, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Imperials Aboard
Besides Motti, Tagge, Yularen, Bast, Tarkin and Vader, who were the other imperials at the Death Star conference table?
 * They probably don't have names, or their names are on a Wizards of the Coast trading card. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 12:43, 13 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * One of the officers seemed bald and slightly old. He partially resembles the description of the mysterious Romodi.Qui-Renx Jinn 10:37, 08 Dec 2005
 * And what does that have to do with anything? Admiral J. Nebulax 20:49, 8 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * Wasn't General Cass also present? Or am I mistaken?--jerry 02:10, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Prototype
It was confirmed in Kevin J. Anderson's books that this was the prototype. And besides, I'm sure Lucas would accept that, seeing as he himself was trying to come up for an excuse in the commentary for why it would have taken 20 years. Adamwankenobi 13:02, 13 Nov 2005 (UTC) I've reworded it to reflect the different sources on the subject. Let's leave it at that. It's a compromise. Adamwankenobi 13:18, 13 Nov 2005 (UTC) You know, actually, Lucas' comments could very well combine with those ideas in Kevin Anderson's books for a satisfying explanation. Anderson's books could explain the whole prototype issue, while Lucas' could be taken as referring to the death star, after the prototype, and once the actual Death Star is actually beginning to be built. Adamwankenobi 15:07, 13 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, it was confirmed that it was the first Death Star in Episode III on the DVD. So, you're wrong. Official sources come before other books. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 13:05, 13 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * He said that as an offhand comment. Anderson's idea makes MUCH more sense than Lucas' excuse. He would gladly accept it, I'm sure, if only he knew about it. One of the main reasons he through it in in the first place was to attemot to please all the fanboys. The explanation given by Anderson would be much more logical. Adamwankenobi 13:08, 13 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't care what Anderson said. He did not make Star Wars, he only wrote books. I have respect for Anderson because he has written many good books, but if George Lucas, the creator of Star Wars, says that it was the Death Star I, then it is the Death Star I. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 13:10, 13 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * He doesn't know about Anderson's books, apparently. What Lucas said completely doesn't make sense. Just accept it. Lucas' opinion is not written down. Anderson's is. Adamwankenobi 13:12, 13 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * Deal. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 13:19, 13 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * Good. Adamwankenobi 13:20, 13 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * Good peaceful solution after all :-) I think it's actually the best thing to either reflect both sources, or to mention in the 'Behind the Scenes' section that there are conflicting sources. I think that Lucas' statement on the ROTS-commentary does open up for some kind of retcon maneuver, KEJ 13:24, 13 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * I'll get it into the "Behind the Scenes" section now. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 13:25, 13 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, in The New Essential Chronology, it says that the original design done by the Geonosians had a few design flaws, which is why they built the prototype Death Star in the first place. But this was not in 19 BBY. Therefore, the Death Star seen in Episode III is the first Death Star, considering the prototype Death Star wasn't built until a few years later. There. If you have the book, Adamwankenobi, you can see for yourself that what I'm saying is true. Therefore, that last part of the "Behind the Scenes" section could be removed, as well as the little sentence in the "Appearances" section. That solves the dispute. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 16:11, 13 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * The upcoming book on the destruction of the Death Star may keep in line with Anderson's books, however, so we should keep the disputes section. Adamwankenobi 16:26, 13 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, it may also stay with what it says in The New Essential Chronology. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 17:36, 13 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * I know. :( Adamwankenobi 18:18, 13 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * Hey, we only want to get the facts here, no matter what the good source is. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 19:58, 13 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Hammertong?
Why does this page redirect from "Hammertong"? Anyone know what that is, if anything actually Star Wars related?--Knightfall 23:40, 30 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * I believe Hammertong was not the death star per se, it was the main weapon of the Death Star. Geekmasterflash 23:49, 30 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * Here we go: "501st were there to collect an experimental Mygeetan power source needed to power a top-secret tributary laser-stream project known only as "Hammertong." Geekmasterflash 23:53, 30 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * Yet it does not say that it was for the Death Star's superlaser. Admiral J. Nebulax 23:55, 30 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * Correct, however there is a book entiled Hammertong, and this could enlighten us if anyone has it. Geekmasterflash 23:57, 30 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * http://www.theforce.net/swenc/entrydesc.asp?search=10891 CooperTFN 00:00, 1 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but I would say Hammertong either should get its own entry or a section on this entry after reading that. Geekmasterflash 00:02, 1 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * Well then, somebody remove the redirect, if possible.--Knightfall 00:04, 1 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, the information on that link is very poorly written, and, if anything, "Hammertong" should get its own page. Admiral J. Nebulax 00:08, 1 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree. I linked to that because they didn't seem to know what the name meant. Don't know what the quality of the writing has to do with anything either way. CooperTFN 00:19, 1 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, for a source, quality of writing is very important. Admiral J. Nebulax 00:21, 1 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * Quality of writing matters for plagiarism. Accuracy matters for a source, and everything on that page is accurate. A Hammertong article would need to be rewritten and greatly expanded no matter what CUSWE had. CooperTFN 00:27, 1 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * Quality, accuracy, and credibility of an article all count for being a good source. Admiral J. Nebulax 00:29, 1 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * So go write a more eloquent version. CooperTFN 00:32, 1 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * Oh, and credibility's still spelled wrong. =p CooperTFN 00:34, 1 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * CooperTFN, shut up. Sources are supposed to be in good quality, no matter what. Admiral J. Nebulax 21:13, 1 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Alternative lead quotation
I rather like, "Dangerous to your Starfleet, General Tagge; not to my battle station." --SparqMan 09:16, 8 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Emperor's Tower
The article says the first Death Star had a tower for Palpatine, similar to the one on Death Star 2. Is this accurate? Did the emperor have plans to go the Death Star?CptKenobi 03:12, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * As far as I know, there was no tower for the Emperor on the first Death Star. Admiral J. Nebulax 12:40, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * I *think* this is discussed in the Death Star Technical Companion, but I can't confirm it as I don't own that book. What I *can* confirm from that book (thanks to it being repeated in the second edition of A Guide to the Star Wars Universe) is that the first Death Star had a throne room dedicated solely to the Emperor's use, just like Death Star II and every Imperial-class Star Destroyer and Executor-class Star Dreadnought produced. jSarek 07:13, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Wookies
Isn't the sentences about the wookies being enslaved to build the death star relevant?--Xilentshadow900 01:16, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * Is there a source for it? Admiral J. Nebulax 01:21, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * Dark Lord: The rise of Darth Vader --Xilentshadow900 01:22, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * I knew there was a battle; I just didn't know that's what it was for. Admiral J. Nebulax 01:23, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * Oh, did you read it?--Xilentshadow900 01:26, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Alternate Name
Did the Death Star have a military designation like most ships and space stations? If it has shouldnt that be the name of the article with death star just redirecting to it? --Razzy1319 07:59, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * Are you kidding? That wouldn't make any sense, and "Death Star" is the most common name anyway. -- Riffsyphon1024 08:05, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * That was very stupid. The most common term, and the only one, is "Death Star". Admiral J. Nebulax 13:03, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * Vulture droids arent under the title Vulture droids, Star destroyer titles are under their class names, droids are under their series names. Encyclopedic names doesnt title their articles under the most common term, the articles are titled according to factual information. Anyways, was just asking if their was such a name. --Razzy1319 17:02, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, there isn't. Admiral J. Nebulax 17:03, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Genesis and stolen plans: a list?
Given the rather convoluted history of both the genesis of the Death Star project and the numerous stolen plans that seem to crop up in every EU source, should/could we have a more listlike section for of each of these for more clarity? Cutch 03:53, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I really don't think a list is needed. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 11:13, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 * So you're saying that you think the article is clear&mdash;even the section detailing the origins of the project? I certainly disagree. Cutch 12:55, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 * With an expansion of the current info, it would become clear. A list is unneccessary when a well-written article can provide so much more information - Kwenn 12:58, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, then: consider it a call for expansion, specifically focusing on its creation. Cutch 13:02, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 * That's why I said "I really don't think a list is needed". It wouldn't look good. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 21:43, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Number of plans
I'd like to clean up this part of the article, but have no idea where to begin, and am looking for help. Okay, so... how many plans were lost? First, Leia rescues a solider on Ralltiir who tells her about a new superweapon belonging to the Empire; then, according to Empire at War, Han Solo was hired to plant an EMP Grenade on a crate bound for one of Tarkin's research stations. Once detonated above Corulag, Raymus Antilles managed to acquire new intel regarding Tarkin's project, including its name.

In terms of stolen plans, I count : the set taken to Polis Massa, the set stolen in the Battle of Danuta by Kyle Katarn, and the vast majority of the set stolen in the Battle of Toprawa. Finally, there was the non-existant set on Kalakar VI. Simultaneously, the Rebel Alliance base on AX-235 learns of the Death Star. This base was attacked, while the main set from Toprawa, along with the other two sets, were beamed to Tantive IV by Bria Tharen via Operation Skyhook.

Is this right? If so, the section on it in the article is far from comprehensive. What I'm worried about is where all the EaW stuff fits in. Cutch 03:41, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I say we should disregard the EaW stuff. It has gone against canon already (for example: Wayland being discovered a lot earlier). Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 11:25, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I know you don't like games in the canon, Neb, but it has to be accepted. The NEC accepted the abduction of X-Wings from Fresia, after all. Cutch 16:39, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but when it was mentioned in The New Essential Chronology, it definitely became canon. I have no problem with that. The fact is, gameplay has gone against canon in numerous games at numerous spots. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 19:47, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, the Solo mission and Corulag raid don't really conflict... and, if I know Licensing, they'll do everything they can to reconcile EaW with the canon. That being said... anyone know of any addendums to the above? If not, I'll probably add this as an in-depth section in the History part. Cutch 21:10, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Let's just leave the EaW stuff out for the time being. Judging by the rest of canon, I don't think Solo had anything to do with the Alliance until he met Skywalker and Kenobi. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 22:29, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Technically, he did have something to do with the Alliance before A New Hope: see Bria Tharen's raid on Ylesia. Cutch 22:34, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I forgot that. However, I still doubt the whole "Solo-planting-an-EMP-grenade-on-a-crate-headed-for-the-first-Death-Star" deal. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 22:37, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay. The reason I'm so gung-ho about all this is that, while I'm sure it will clear up the complexities in the construction of the Death Star, I don't think the forthcoming novel will be as likely to address the missing plans. So, discounting the EaW stuff for now, does anyone else have any other info? Cutch 22:39, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I think that's about it. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 22:40, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Why wouldn't the novel detail the plans? We don't know what timeline it will cover. Besides, I assume the Lucas marketing machine will churn out some kind of Insider tie-in article, which should hopefully clear things up - Kwenn 22:44, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
 * True. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 23:48, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Another one might be the datacards Garm bel Iblis and Moranda Savich come across in Interlude at Darkknell, though I think those weren't plans so much as proof that a superweapon existed. &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 23:51, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Do you know what exactly was on the datacards? Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 23:54, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
 * A Rebel agent named Aach says they are "inside information" about the location of "Tarkin's project", stolen by an Imperial defector. Ysanne Isard is told that they came from the Despayre system.  They are heavily encrypted, so none of the characters find out precisely what's on them until the datacards are sent to the Alliance after the story is over. It appears that after getting the data, the Rebels learn for the first time exactly what Tarkin's project is supposed to do. &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 00:09, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh. Thank you. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 00:10, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Too...many...sets...of...plans....Cutch 00:22, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 00:55, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Hoping to find some time to clean this up pretty soon... Cutch 04:06, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I could always do it for you, if you didn't have enough time. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 11:14, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
 * All done!!! Whaddaya think??? Cutch 19:03, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
 * It looks good. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 19:19, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I agree that it needs more info about the onboard battle prior to Yavin, but I didn't want to go into Summary Land. Cutch 19:26, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Another thing we could do is add the main articles (like Battle of Yavin and the battle onboard the Death Star once that information is added). Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 19:27, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I concur. Cutch 19:29, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Now, let's see if we can expand the article a little more. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 19:29, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

New pics
Now that I've expanded so much of the article, methinks its time for more pics. Let the games begin!!! Cutch 00:01, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
 * How many more images are there of the Death Star I? Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 00:52, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Ordering
I suggest putting the specifications after the histroy section. Having those stats at the start doesn't seem as interesting as the actual story of it all. --Eyrezer 04:38, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I suppose most articles are like that, so we might as well. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 11:23, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't mind&mdash;as long as Death Star II is arranged that way as well, for consistency's sake. Cutch 22:28, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Isn't it already like that? Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 23:22, 31 May 2006 (UTC)