Talk:Kit Fisto/Legends

I know we all like Kit, but I think the bit in this article about his cult fan status is out of place. Anyone Else? --Kosure 00:17, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Its part of the culture that is behind Kit Fisto. If you don't like it where it is, then make another section for it, while his bio goes on top. -- Riffsyphon1024 00:34, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
 * It is short, it is in the Behind the Scenes section, so it's okay with me.--Gen.d 15:31, 21 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Was He was stabbed in chest, slashed on chest, or slashed on side of neck?
 * It's really not important, is it? It's enough to say "He was killed". QuentinGeorge 06:49, 27 Jul 2005 (UTC)
 * It is-wattamb2000
 * In the movie, he was stabbed in the chest, in the book, he was beheaded. -TopAce, 11th August, 2005, 17:09 (GMT +1)
 * No He was slashed on waist! Look-

Contradicting Appearances
It says on one hand that Episode II was his first appearance, and then theres a list of all three movies (including Episode I). So which is right? -- Riffsyphon1024 22:52, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
 * He doesn't appear in Episode I. --Gen.d 23:23, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Then it needs to be removed. -- Riffsyphon1024 23:33, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Your wish is my command :) --Gen.d 00:29, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Decapitation
"George Lucas found decapitating a violent way of death to be displayed in the movie..." Lucas really needs to make up his mind. Kuralyov 16:06, 12 Aug 2005 (UTC)
 * Too late now. Don't bother. TopAce 20:20 (GMT +1), 12th August, 2005.

Kit's Death
I saw that Kit was slashed on the back of his waist in the movie. Then it says on wookiepeidia he was stabbed in the chest. It should be corrected.--Wattamb2001 00:43, 22 Sep 2005 (UTC) Now, where did the line which speculates his survival come from? And if it is a reasonable assumption, why isn't there a question mark after his death date? I think that line should be removed. TopAce 15:22, 19 Oct 2005 (GMT +1)
 * Maybe to avoid being wrong on small details, we should leave them out and simply say that he was killed by Palpatine's lightsaber. &mdash; Silly Dan  00:58, 22 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Aqua-Saber?
How did Fisto's lightsaber work underwater? Demented Smiloid 23:06, 5 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, considering he's from an aquatic world, and every Jedi typically custom their lightsabers, he probally added a special feature for the weapon to work underwater. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 23:17, 5 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Big Image
A nice big close up here: --SparqMan 09:54, 6 Oct 2005 (UTC)


 * Wow, that's nice, let's add it! --Master Starkeiller 12:53, 6 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * AWSOME!!!!--Wattamb2001 01:26, 7 Oct 2005 (UTC)

High General
I wish I could get Insider #84, but nooooo, they only get it in America. I removed the High General thing because I saw it being corrected in all articles a while ago. --Master Starkeiller 15:00, 15 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, he was apparently considered a High General, and therefore it should stay there. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 15:01, 15 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * Someone went and changed the Jedi General links on all the pages to High General, for reasons unknown. They have been changed back, and the Jedi General = High General note added to the Jedi General page.QuentinGeorge 21:28, 15 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * Why did you remove the "High" part before "General"? I changed it back, since it's supposed to be like that. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 23:43, 15 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * Provide a source and I will stop reverting it. QuentinGeorge 23:50, 15 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * Insider 84. It says that most Jedi Council members were High Generals. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 23:50, 15 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * Which is already explained on the Jedi General page where the link takes you. QuentinGeorge 23:51, 15 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, but it needs to be shown HERE that he was a High General. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 23:53, 15 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * The Jedi General page does not explain the difference between Jedi Generals and High Generals in any clear fashion. --SparqMan 02:00, 16 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, the page does not explain the difference very well. However, the High General page partially explains it, but I think there should be a High Jedi General page, as well as all of the other Jedi General ranks, such as Senior Jedi General. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 11:25, 16 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Kit's Age
He really doesnt look 51 or act like it for that matter! I thought he was in his late 20s like 29! O well he's still one of my favorites and hey the older the WISER! Look at Yoda hes my favortie and hes almsot 900!

Star Wars characters are not known to act or look typical for their age. We cannot know how an average Nautolan looks like: Kit is the only known Nautolan.User:TopAce 18:12, 21 Oct 2005 (GMT +1)

True
 * Yes, there aren't any other Nautolans out there that we know of yet, plus, we don't know the average life-span of a Nautolan. For all we know, they could be like Wookiees. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 22:34, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * According to the Ultimate Alien Anthology, the average Nautolan lives for 70 years, and a 50-year-ols Nautolan is considered middle-aged to old. But that book is full of mistakes, so we can't be sure. --Master Starkeiller 15:43, 23 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * I think they should take all of those older books and redo them, fixing the mistakes, adding new things, etc. But for now, we might as well use this information. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 17:33, 23 Oct 2005 (UTC)

u shouldnt use that infomation cause if it wrong you will have to change it agian
 * Okay, just a question: Where is the "c. 70 BBY" birth year from? Because if we don't have an actual date, it should be removed until one is found. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 20:19, 23 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * He has to be that old since he was a Jedi Knight training Bant Eerin when Obi-Wan was a child. QuentinGeorge 20:22, 23 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * Funny, because he looks awefully good for a close to 51 year old Nautolan. Of course, he's the only known member of his species. But still, we should find an exact year-of-birth. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 20:26, 23 Oct 2005 (UTC)

I started a good diccusion so i think someone should find his real birthdate?
 * Well, until a source presents itself, we will not be able to find Fisto's true birth year, as I believe that no source states his actual birth year. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 22:56, 23 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Fisto's lightsaber style
In the article, i read that it lists that Kit is a master of both forms I and V.

Where is the source that this form V mastership comes from?? I know for sure Kit ONLY masters Shii-Cho.

User:General Secura

Probably from the standard Wikipedia, I remember reading st:range stuff about Lightsaber styles there. Check it. TopAce, 18:35, 24 Oct 2005, (GMT +1)

No other Nautolans
Actually, that's not true. There was also Darsana, who appeared in Episode II, but the scene was deleted(see Darsana). But Kit was not the only Nautolan.
 * Okay, that's great, but now there is no need for that. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 21:17, 29 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * Darsana was not a Nautolan. He was Anselmi. Other Nautolans do appear in the Star Wars: Republic comic series. QuentinGeorge 21:30, 29 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * What issues of Republic are other Nautolans in, Quentin? Cmdr. J. Nebulax 23:03, 29 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * Star Wars Republic 54: Double Blind. I think there's one in the Darth Maul comic as well. QuentinGeorge 23:09, 29 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 23:10, 29 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * There's also a youngling Nautolan in General Grievous. MarcK 23:34, 29 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * Ah, yes, I almost forgot. Anyway, do any of these other Nautolans have names? The answer is probably "no" anyway. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 23:38, 29 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Kit being a design for a Sith apprentice
The article states that there was no need for a Sith other than human, but Darth Maul wasn't human........General Secura
 * Does it matter? Admiral J. Nebulax 21:36, 6 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * It says there was no need for a non-human Sith in 'that movie' (Attack of the Clones) - Kwenn
 * Good point. Admiral J. Nebulax 22:13, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't see why an alien Sith was impractical. As far as Dooku is concerned, Darth Tyranus could have been an alien. - TopAce 20:35, 26 Dec 2005 (UTC)

The Kit Fisto-Aayla picture


In my opinion, this picture is distasteful. I like Kit, he is one of my favourite characters and I would like to see more of him than I did in the movies, but THIS picture is just disgusting. I think it would make the article better if we removed it. There are too many pictures in downer section of the article anyway. What is your opinion on it? - TopAce 20:43, 25 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * I see exactly zero reasons to remove it. &mdash;Darth Culator   (talk)  20:51, 25 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * Yeah, why is it disgusting? It is needed there, as it shows how Kit and Aayla kinda had a thing going against the Code. --Master Starkeiller 21:39, 25 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * It diminishes Kit Fisto's image as an outstanding warrior and Jedi Council member. - TopAce 22:14, 25 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * His image is irrelevant. It is a canon picture which depicts an event which is relevant to both Fisto's and Secura's biographies. &mdash;Darth Culator   (talk)  22:18, 25 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * I see no reason to remove it. Admiral J. Nebulax 22:20, 25 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * You are all perverted. - TopAce 20:25, 26 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * And you have the right to say that? It is a necissary picture. Admiral J. Nebulax 20:27, 26 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, I have the right to say that. We no longer live in a world of no freedom of speech.
 * But you have no right to judge the people who want the picture to stay. Admiral J. Nebulax 20:36, 26 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * Watch Species II. - TopAce 20:40, 26 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * Do I care? Just because you don't want the picture doesn't mean it gets taken away. Admiral J. Nebulax 20:41, 26 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * I still have the right to raise my opinion (let's not start this discussion over again from this point)- TopAce 20:49, 26 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * Your opinion is noted, but the picture stays. Majority wants it to stay, minority wants it removed. It stays. Period. --Master Starkeiller 21:03, 26 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * Okay, I thought that more people would find it distasteful or incogruous. I don't know. Anyway, sorry if I offended anyone, I often tend to become tactless when I want to sound my opinion in something I disagree with, even (especially) if I know I have no chances of winning. - TopAce 21:08, 26 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * But why would more people would find it distasteful or incogruous? Anyway, you didn't offend anyone, I just don't understand what's wrong with it. --Master Starkeiller 21:10, 26 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * It shows Kit saving Aayla's life - that's the context of the picture. And even without that context, I don't see why a picture of two characters kissing is 'perverted' or 'distasteful'. Would you object to an image of Han and Leia kissing? Or Anakin and Padmé? - Kwenn
 * Another thing, TopAce, keep your comments and opinions to yourself. Admiral J. Nebulax 22:28, 26 Dec 2005 (UTC)