User talk:Sam sparrow

{| id="w" width="100%" style="background: transparent; "
 * valign="top" width="50%" style="background: silver; border: 2px solid #000000; padding: .5em 1em; -moz-border-radius: 1em"|

Welcome, Sam sparrow!
Hello and welcome to Wookieepedia. I hope you like the place and choose to join our work. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Wookieepedia aspires to be a reliable source for all Star Wars fans to read and draw information from, and as such, fan-created continuity and fan fiction are not allowed within our articles. All in-universe material must be attributable to a reliable, published source.

Do not remove talk page and forum comments, including your own, as they are part of the public record. Remember that you should always sign your comments on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~.

For an optimal viewing experience, Wookieepedia recommends using the Monobook skin. For help changing your skin preference, see Help:Skin.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wookieepedian! If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the Senate Hall, visit our official IRC channel, or ask me on my talk page. May the Force be with you! &mdash; Trak Nar  Ramble on 06:21, April 27, 2012 (UTC)
 * }

Verify
Thank you for contributing to Wookieepedia! Please note that at least one of your recent additions added unverified information to a mainspace article. Additions to Wookieepedia's articles must be verifiable by a reliable source per our sourcing policy, and unverified information may be reverted or deleted. Continuing to add unverified information may lead to you being blocked from editing by an administrator. Thank you.  Trak Nar  Ramble on 06:21, April 27, 2012 (UTC)
 * To clarify, you need to source your information on the heights of those Trandoshans. Otherwise, it's speculation, which is treated as fanon, and thus will be reverted each time until you can provide a verifiable source.   Please source your edits.  Thanks.  Trak Nar  Ramble on 06:27, April 27, 2012 (UTC)

Verify, again
Once again. Please be sure to attribute your information to a reliable, canonical source, else it will be seen as speculation and summarily reverted. Thank you.  Trak Nar  Ramble on 06:50, September 28, 2012 (UTC)
 * This is your final warning. Please make sure that you attribute your information to a reliable canonical source, else it will be deemed speculation and promptly reverted.  Further failure to supply a source for your edits, primarily concerning the heights of characters, will result in administrative action for edit-warring.  Please make sure to attribute your edits to a reliable source.  This is your last warning.   Trak Nar  Ramble on 01:55, October 2, 2012 (UTC)

Blocked
You have been blocked from editing for three (3) days for consistently adding unverified information to articles, despite numerous warnings. Remember, Wookieepedia is an encyclopedia, and as such, any information that you add to articles must be readily verifiable by a reliable canonical source. That means that you must attribute your edits to a source. I cannot make this any more clear. Every single edit that you have made thus far as been reverted, as it was not attributed to a source. What is your source for Derrown's height? If you have a source, supply that source.

During this block, please take the time to read our sourcing policy. When you return, make sure that you thus attribute your edits to a reliable source. You had been given plenty of warning before this, and plenty of leniency. After this, the administration cannot grant you any more leeway. Please see to it that we do not have to block you again, and please source your edits. Thank you. To contest this block, please contact the blocking administrator with the reason you believe the block is unjustified.  Trak Nar  Ramble on 05:55, October 2, 2012 (UTC)

Just Verify It.
Seriously. Verify your source for Derrown's height. And don't change sourced information to reflect something else, particularly in status articles. Last warning. After this, I will not hesitate to block you without further warning.  Trak Nar  Ramble on 09:02, October 5, 2012 (UTC)

Blocked
You have been blocked from editing for 1 month. I don't have to say anything more. Your talk page speaks for itself. To contest this block, please contact the blocking administrator with the reason you believe the block is unjustified. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 02:26, October 13, 2012 (UTC)

Unverified info, again
Again, make sure information you add is verifiable. This also means that if information is sourced one way, you should check the source again before changing it, like in this case, where the sourced info is completely different from what you changed it to. Trip391 (talk) 06:20, July 18, 2015 (UTC)

Canon article creation/expansion
Canon articles are not to be made by copy and pasting content from Legends articles, but simply removing Legends details, links, and sources. They must be written from scratch. While some information may be shared between Canon and Legends, copying from Legends is not always accurate, is poor editing practice (plagiarism is never allowed), and is not to be done. Trip391 (talk) 15:28, September 17, 2015 (UTC)

Warning
Thank you for contributing to Wookieepedia! Please note that at least one of your recent additions added unverified information to a mainspace article. Additions to Wookieepedia's articles must be verifiable by a reliable source per our sourcing policy, and unverified information may be reverted or deleted. Continuing to add unverified information may lead to you being blocked from editing by an administrator. Thank you. Unless you can provide a source for your additions, I'm just going to keep reverting you and you'll likely be blocked. Cade   Calrayn  05:13, November 9, 2015 (UTC)
 * Dialog-error.svg You have been blocked from editing for completely and utterly failing to heed any of the warnings placed on your page and doing the exact same thing every time after I block you.. To contest this block, please contact the blocking administrator with the reason you believe the block is unjustified. Cade  StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit.svg  Calrayn  01:40, November 14, 2015 (UTC)

Editing
I'm no admin, and please don't take this against you, but you might want to slow down on editing just a few words on various pages, which you've been doing a lot for the past while. Again, sorry if this sounds like a personal attack. NoahR9 Chat with me! 08:57, May 14, 2016 (UTC)

The inquisitors' articles
Please stop adding "Fifth Brother outranks Seventh Sister" info to various articles, it is completely unverified, and we don't know what the numbers exactly mean at his point.  AnilSerifoglu  (talk) 23:46, May 23, 2016 (UTC)

Ok, the Fifth Brother supposedly out-ranking the Seventh Sister is apparently un-sourced, but how is giving more details on her personality is? Her actor clearly states that she is a cunning thinker and i've seen the many times the Sister defeats Kanan and Ezra.

Advice
Dear Sam sparrow,

I am concerned that you have lately been engaged in edit wars with other users on several pages including the Seventh Sister and Darth Maul. I think it is pointless and counter-productive to fight over things such as the wording and unverified material. I appreciate that you are only trying to help but you have to learn how to back down when that help is not needed. Those articles that you have been editing are of a good standard. Until more information t is released, it is best no to speculate. I understand that you have Asperger's Syndrome. I too am Asperger's but we all need to learn social etiquette and how to avoid antagonizing other people. My advice would be to back down and leave those particularly troublesome articles alone.

Instead, you could try something that is both constructive and fairly free of conflict. I am presently working on the LEGO Star Wars: The Yoda Chronicles mini-movies. As you can see if you scroll down that page, the mini-movie articles are presently red links which means they have not been created. I have attached links to their YouTube videos. If you would like something constructive to do on Wookieepedia, you are invited to help create those articles. The YouTube videos are only two-to-three minutes. If you watch them and take notes on the plot summary, that would be a great help to me. I'm presently busy with my PhD and working on articles related to the novel A New Dawn.

If you need any help or advice. Please feel free to leave a message on talk page. I promise I'll respond there. Andykatib 10:37, May 25, 2016 (UTC)

I understand, but i've noticed that several of the articles i edited have spelling mistakes; misplaced comers, full-stops, capital letters, or somewhat over-sized spaces between words.
 * I understand your frustration about your edits being reverted. We have no problems with you correcting spelling typos and spacing errors. Some of the other users seem to a bit nitpickish because they like conformity. However, you don't need to go into a lot of detail with the character's biographies, which are meant to be brief and concise. Sometimes, the best solution would be to back down if the other party is really difficult. We have to pick out battles. For me Wookieepedia is somewhere to relax and de-stress. Another solution would be finding a niche area. Right now, I'm going after the characters and events related to A New Dawn and the LEGO Star Wars videos. Andykatib 23:09, May 25, 2016 (UTC
 * Good to see that you have decorated your user page. Good to know that you are also enjoy Harry Potter. I have read five of the books and watched all of the movie adaptations. Happy editing. Andykatib 11:05, October 29, 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, you're very friendly.

Recent edits
Hi Sam,

Thank you very much for your edits to the Padmé Amidala article. I just made some spelling corrections and reorganised them into section but it was appreciated. In the meantime, you will be pleased to hear that I have issued a warning to User 103.254.154.227, that anonymous user who has been stalking you. I told him that his actions are unacceptable and to stop. He seems to be tailing you for no other reason than to reverse your edits. Hopefully, that would put a stop to his harassment. Wish you all the best with your editing on Wookieepedia and please let us know more about you on your user page. Andykatib 22:04, May 27, 2016 (UTC)

Thank you very much Andykatib, your very nice and supportive. Thanks very much.
 * As I can tell, you have really improved yourself since your previous edits and they contribute well to the articles' quality. I just want to give you a few tips. When adding an redundant information from a material, it would be better to incorporate it without copying it word for word into Wookieepedia's articles. Also you should sign your posts in talk pages (you can do it by simply using the signature button above). Keep up the good work! TanDivoInsignia-SenateMurders.svg  AnilSerifoglu  (talk) 01:14, May 28, 2016 (UTC)
 * You're welcome, Sam sparrow. Always willing to help. Andykatib 01:28, May 28, 2016 (UTC)

Hello Andy its me Sam sparrow. I'd like to thank you (again) for your help, thank you very much, you're very nice and supportive. However, i'd like to ask you a few questions; they're relatively minor things about a few articles, but they could improve them if we change them. 1: Why isn't Ahsoka Tano on the list of the notably practitioners of Form V? On her article it clearly says she is skilled in the form and isn't she one of the main characters of Clone Wars. So wouldn't that make her a notably practitioner of the form? PS: Thanks again, i really appreciate your support.

Hello, is me Sam again. Listen for some reason every time i try to edit the page of the Inquisitorius it won't save it; it says it was aborted by an extension hook. Why is that? Can you help me?

Hello, Andy, its Sam again. How are you going? Good i hope. I have recently added a bit of information to my profile, would you like to have a look at it? I have been experiencing more problems recently, mainly on the Mace Windu page, with several users.
 * Hi Sam, how are you doing? Good to see that you have expanded your user page. One idea would be to have an infobox with some templates that tell us more about you. You can also upload a maximum of three images for your user page. There are some rules and guidelines for that. I understand you have been having some problems with other users regarding the Mace Windu and Kit Fisto pages. My advice is to avoid fighting with other users over trivial issues like wording. Try to channel your energies into positive things such as expanding articles. There are some Canon versions of some The Clone Wars articles like Nuvo Vindi, Ahsoka Tano, Pong Krell, and the Blue Shadow Virus which can be expanded. One condition is that we must not copy and paste content from the Legends versions because that would constitute plagiarism. The best way would be to write it from scratch. Right now, I'm working on Star Wars Rebels and LEGO Star Wars: The Freemaker Adventures. I would suggest leaving articles that don't need to be fixed alone in order to avoid conflict with other Wookieepedians. Hope this helps. Andykatib 23:02, October 29, 2016 (UTC)

Hello, its me Sam again. Listen i've been having problems with Anil; he keeps reverting my edits, mainly on the Mace Windu article. Recently he did it again WITHOUT giving a reason, and just now i reverted it back to the version that me and Lewisr agreed to leave it WITH giving a reason. I tried to explain my reasons to him multiple times, but he just said i put improper sources (which Lewisr had actually removed BEFORE he reverted it) and that i only put a few new lines in, which is not true, as i had put in more information on the section describing Windu's fight with Sidious. Also i corrected the line that originally Koon was speaking for "all present", which technically he wasn't, as Anakin spoke first and he is NOT a member of the Council. So i changed it to "Skywalker spoke first, solemnly apologizing for everything Tano had through. Koon then spoke for all of the Council present, humbly admitting to Tano that they had been wrong to accuse her". So can you do something about; you stopped someone else from reverting my edits, remember and i was very grateful for that (i'm not saying you HAVE to, i'm just asking). Also i'd like to ask are you an admin?
 * Hi Sam, I don't have any intentions to start an edit war or something, and I am sorry to know that you think my actions are some kind of a personal attack. My change on your edits was because of NPOV initially, and the most recent one was about sourcing. Yes, even the lastest one had issues like: And I gave you my reasons every time I revert an edit (wrote you on talk pages twice about sourcing, and three times about NPOV), and explained that direct urls of Wookieepedia pages and some YouTube clips of TV series shouldn't be used as references. I would be glad to help if you have any more questions on that. Have a good day. TanDivoInsignia-SenateMurders.svg  AnilSerifoglu  (talk) 14:21, November 16, 2016 (UTC)

OK, Anil i'm glad its nothing personal, i really am, but can you at least let me explain what i have done recently, and this time could you please acknowledge it and express your opinion? I stopped putting in personal opinion and improper sources days ago; in fact, just in case you didn't notice, Lewisr made the sources proper BEFORE you reverted it. Also i didn't put in just a few new lines; i put in more information on Windu's fight with Sidious; i added several lines that describe him deflecting Sidious's first blast of Force Lightning, which disfigures him. I also changed the last line from "plunging miles" to "plunging many stories" because doesn't it say he plunges "stories" in the Revenge of the Sith article? Also i doubt they were "miles" high (even though the Senate building is undeniably huge). Also i made the last section on "Attack on the Temple" more accurate; it originally said "Koon spoke for all present" did it not? Technically that's not entirely true, because Skywalker spoke first and he is NOT a member of the Council is he not? So i changed the line to "Skywalker spoke first, solemnly apologizing for everything Tano had been through. Koon then spoke for all of the Council present, humbly admitting to Tano that they had been wrong to accuse her". Isn't that a better way to put it? And if you don't believe me, why don't you look at the source number 33 (one that leads to "The Wrong Jedi episode gallery). I have also added that its was Windu's suggestion execute Vos. I've have just put back the info and this time could you please not revert it? But, if there's something you think is wrong with it could you please let me know BEFORE you change it, so we can discuss it and find a solution? Please reply and express your opinion.

PS: I didn't do improper sources on purpose; i used urls of Wookieepedia pages and YouTube clips of TV series simply because they're the best i can do. Also every time i try to do another type of source, it comes out red and big when i save the page, which is not a very pleasant sight for a wiki article is it? PPS: I understand your reasons and the need for a NPOV and proper sources, i really do. But the problem is you didn't seem to acknowledging my reasons and how are my recent edits "irrelevant". Sam sparrow

Mace Windu
There was no source for where your information came from, hence why I said unsourced info. And actually it wasn't me who changed it so don't blame me. The person who edited it changed it because they felt it wasn't from a neutral point of view so instead of having a go at me actually look at who edited it and take it up with them, Also make sure you sign your comments --Lewisr (talk) 00:31, September 26, 2016 (UTC)

OK i get it, sorry for blaming you. But still, i don't think Windu was genuinely sorry about his treatment of Ahsoka; if he was he would said he was wrong instead of saying it was a test. We '' l discuss it, ok?


 * It's fine, I see your point but what you just said there 'I don't think' isn't coming from a neutral point of view, you can't put your personal feelings into the article as whoever is reading the article may feel completely different to you --Lewisr (talk) 00:37, September 26, 2016 (UTC)

I know what you mean. But still, i really don't think its good to say he "recanted his condemnation of Ahsoka". Its good to point out the reasons behind her expulsion (though i and other people don't think they were very good reasons), but still. If you son't want to continue this conversation, that's all right with me, but you want to continue, that's ok.


 * It isn't entirely necessary to point out all the details about Ahsoka's expulsion on a page about Mace Windu, I don't really know how you cam write about that section on his page as we don't know enough about how he felt, as Plo Koon said that the council was wrong to accuse her, maybe Mace would have said it? We don't know, he could indeed be very sorry about it but he could also just shift the blame we just don't know, if it was me I would leave it as there's more important things about him that could be added to his page --Lewisr (talk) 00:51, September 26, 2016 (UTC)

I understand what you mean. All right, i'll leave it alone. For now...


 * That didn't last long, huh. See, you're fighting for something that's not really worth it man, as many have pointed out above. As the old saying goes, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it," and the Mace Windu article is fine as is. Seriously, you're fighting for a couple of links. It's just not worth it, dude. -- NoahR9  http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/starwars/images/4/46/First_Order.svg/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/20Chat with me! 04:02, September 27, 2016 (UTC)

OK, I'm sorry, i got a little carried away. But tell me, can you seriously call Ahsoka's trial being unfair from a "point of view". The trial was simply a formality, and plus, the so-called evidence against her was only circumstantial. And the main reason the Council cast her out (as stated in the article) was to keep their relationship with the Senate intact. You could hardly call that "fair" could you? PS: Please don't call me dude.
 * Well, yeah, it's unfair, but it's much more NPOV to call it "Ahsoka's trial" than "Ahsoka's unfair trial." Also, sorry for calling you dude. I call everyone that, even girls... -- NoahR9 http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/starwars/images/4/46/First_Order.svg/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/20Chat with me! 04:09, September 27, 2016 (UTC)

I'm not saying Ahsoka's trial should be called "Ahsoka's unfair trial" (in fact i never intended to call it that). All i'm pointing is that it wasn't exactly proper, as the Council made their decision before the trial even began. Also i have expressed my opinion (which others on the internet share) that Windu was not genuinely apologetic to Ahsoka; he did say, quite solemnly, that she had become a greater Jedi because of her ordeal, but took no REAL responsibility for his mistake; he did not admit that he had been wrong to accuse her. Instead, he stated that "the Force works in mysterious ways", and even implied that he thought Ahsoka should be THANKFUL for the experience, as he stated that "you have become a greater Jedi than you would otherwise". Consider this. PS: I accept your apology for calling me "dude".
 * Neither am I, it was an example. NoahR9  http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/starwars/images/4/46/First_Order.svg/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/20Chat with me! 05:36, September 27, 2016 (UTC)

Sorry i didn't quite understand that, neither what? Oh and i suppose it would be nice to chat with you, but not necessarily right now, as i am also doing other things. PS: no offence.
 * I mean I'm not saying to change the articles name either, I just mean that as an example of the mindset you're in with a point of view, as pointed out below.  NoahR9  http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/starwars/images/4/46/First_Order.svg/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/20Chat with me! 06:47, September 27, 2016 (UTC)

NPOV
Regarding the Mace Windu article, please refrain from making edits that are clearly based on your point of view, such as things like "unfair" or "Windu went too far"&mdash;see what I mean? You can't put your personal interpretations into your edits as it clearly conflicts with Wookieepedia's NPOV policy. As for my own edit "Windu recanted his condemnation of Tano"&mdash;I wrote it like that because prior to her innocence being proven, Windu and the Council judged her guilty of treason. Afterwards, they reversed their position with Plo Koon apologizing on behalf of the Council as a whole. The fact that Windu said Tano's ordeal was a great trial does not conflict with the Council's apology. He simply added to what his colleagues said by mentioning that the Council regarded the framing and subsequent trial of Tano as "The Force working in mysterious ways." On this I think you're a bit confused on the details as your edits indicate you believe Windu's response was from his own point of view. However, he said and I quote: "This was actually your great trial. Now We see that. We understand that the Force works in mysterious ways [...]" Based on his dialogue, Windu is clearly speaking on behalf of the Council when he referred to Tano's great trial, so we can't single him out for this viewpoint as none of the other Council members refuted his statement.

I know it's not always easy to keep your own views out of your edits. I've made the same mistake in the past, but it would just be a lot easier on everyone if we adhered to the NPOV policy. To you it seems like Windu was not truly apologetic, but that doesn't mean you're right. All we can do is work with the information we have and as it stands: Windu, speaking on the Council's behalf, condemned Tano as a traitor to the Republic and the Jedi. When she was found innocent, he no longer held this position. Far from it, he joined with the rest of the Council in welcoming Tano back with open arms. The fact that he didn't explicitly say "sorry" does not mean we can assume he was unapologetic about the whole situation&mdash;not when Plo Koon apologized on behalf of the Council, which includes Windu. I hope this all helps. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask. JRT2010 (talk) 06:27, September 27, 2016 (UTC)

I understand what you mean; we do need to keep a NPOV on the articles. However, when it comes to Windu's statement it doesn't sound like he's feels responsible for his actions. Just because Plo Koon apologized on behalf of the Council doesn't mean all of them are apologetic to her. In fact, from a certain point of view (Ahsoka's for example) Plo can be seen as the only member of the Council who genuinely apologizes to her (from the expression on her face you can tell she is not impressed by the apologies of Tiin, Mundi and Windu). But from another point of view, the other Council members can be seen as apologizing in their own ways. I won't do it again, but don't call me confused. You might want to discuss this more, or not. PS: just so you know, i was cyber-bullied on Transformers wiki; they kept telling me my edits were "stupid" and that i should "F**k off". Eventually, my dad tried to help, but they just claimed i was "pretending to be him and blocked me permanently. I'm not lying about this; i never lie. I'm not saying you're like them; you are polite and much more reasonable. I just want to know, i don't really like edit wars. I promise i will try my best not to put biased views on the articles again.


 * I don't care for edit wars either and I appreciate the fact that you will make a better effort to adhere to the NPOV policy. Believe me, I had the same problem in the past and I know that following Wookieepedia's rules can be something of a "trial and error" process. Also, I'm sorry to hear you've been cyber-bullied. Nothing in my message was meant to make you feel bad. Again, if you have any questions feel free to ask. Also, please remember to sign your posts. JRT2010 (talk) 07:55, September 27, 2016 (UTC)

I understand. I'll ask any questions if i need or want to. Thank you for being understanding. Sam sparrow (talk).

Hello, its me Sam sparrow again. Listen, i understand your point about giving a NPOV for Mace Windu, but let us examine some facts. When Windu condemns Ahsoka, he says "it is the Council's opinion that padawan Ahsoka Tano has committed sedition against the Republic". That doesn't mean that they've PROVED that she's guilty. Also after it is discovered she is discovered innocent, Windu does join the rest of the Council in offering to welcome her back, but the apologies seem to get less and less sympathetic. The fact that Koon said "our apologies" doesn't mean he was actually speaking for all of them individually. Also Windu finally says "this was actually your great trial, now we see that. We understand that the Force works in mysterious ways, and because of this trial you have become a greater Jedi than you would have otherwise". This statement doesn't sound very sympathetic overall, he doesn't take responsibility for the rather questionable decision he made, and the statement "because of this trial you have become a greater Jedi than you would have otherwise" POSSIBLY implies that he believes Ahsoka should be THANKFUL for the not-so-pleasant experience. Also, while the other Council members are shocked and saddened when she refuses to rejoin, Windu expressed neither of those emotion; he only appears DISGUSTED; as she walks off, his fists clench and he stares after her rather coldly. If you don't believe me take a look at the scene. I'm not trying to be biased, i'm just pointing out facts, trust me, and i want to know what you think. I eagerly (but patiently) await your reply.


 * Most of what you wrote in your latest message is still your personal interpretation: This statement doesn't sound very sympathetic at all; POSSIBLY implies that he believes Ahsoka should be THANKFUL; he only appears DISGUSTED... These are not facts; your own statements are clearly based on your point of view. Interpret Windu's disposition any way you want, but as long as you make POV or play-by-play edits, odds are they will be reversed, which has been the case with several (if not more) of your edits on the Windu article. If you really can't let this go, then I suggest you take your concerns to an administrator. JRT2010 (talk) 18:33, October 22, 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, forgive me, i though you were an administrator. If you want me to stop bothering you, just ask.

kit fisto
I forgot to include why i reverted your edit but it was because you did not add any source to say where your information comes from, in future please add a source --Lewisr (talk) 05:06, October 26, 2016 (UTC)

I don't know HOW to add a source. And please don't do that, please. --Sam sparrow.


 * If you don't know how to add a source then you should check out the policies on how too add them, can't link it but go to the help section and you can find it there --Lewisr (talk) 05:16, October 26, 2016 (UTC)

I can't put in a source; it keeps mucking it up. Please stop, please. I'm not trying to be fanon.

If you can't add a source then I suggest you don't make edits as if its unsourced someone is likely to revert it, I've tried helping I can't do anymore than what I've done --Lewisr (talk) 05:37, October 26, 2016 (UTC)

What i've added is a fact so technically doesn't NEED to have a source. And I'm not very happy at the moment; i've got other people on this wiki who are reverting my edits without any proper explanation. So please leave me alone, please, i've done nothing wrong.

It is not a fact, even if it was a fact you would atill need to add a source. Im sorry but the reason people are reverting your edits is because you are not adding a source or the edits are totally unnecessary --Lewisr (talk) 05:48, October 26, 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, but i really don't like it when someone says my edits are "totally unnecessary". I was cyber-bullied on Tranformers wiki; they kept saying that my edits were "stupid" or "crap" or "totally" unnecessary" and that i should "F**k off" I'm not lying about this; i HATE liars. I'm not saying you are like them, not at all, i'm just saying i don't like the reason you giving for reverting my edits. And you can't condemn me just because i don't know how to add a source, especially when i try to add a source it doesn't come up properly. PS: Why don't you just add a source yourself? Surely you how to add one? And haven't seen the fact between Sidious, Kolar, Tiin Fisto and Windu?

Okay so totally unnecessary i wont use but the fact that your edits have been unsourced is actually a valid reason for your edits to be reverted. I am not condemning you, all i said was that your edits were unsourced hence why i reverted them. I cannot add sources whilst on my phone, you need to read the help section on here and that will tell you how to add sources correctly --Lewisr (talk) 06:02, October 26, 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, i didn't know you were on the phone. And what i don't understand is why you seem to be so insistent (no offence) on there being a source even if it really did happen. No one else has done this over such a small sentence.

As I have said already, it is a policy on here that information added needs to be sourced even if its a single sentence --Lewisr (talk) 06:12, October 26, 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, i didn't mean to argue so much. I just didn't fully understand the policies. I've finally managed to add a reference to the page. Is that better?

Sourcing
Hi, when you add sources you need to make sure you source it to the right place. On your last edit on the Ahsoka page, all the information comes from the Ahsoka novel so you need to source the novel rather than the Siege of Mandalore page --Lewisr (talk) 23:56, October 28, 2016 (UTC)
 * Also about your recent Ahsoka edit, it is nice to expand the article with details from the recent Ahsoka novel. But you should be cautious not to copy-paste from other articles. You may look at my current rewrite on the "Ahsoka" article as an example how to incorporate without copying word to word. TanDivoInsignia-SenateMurders.svg  AnilSerifoglu  (talk) 01:51, October 29, 2016 (UTC)

I didn't copy-paste. Just because it looks similar doesn't mean its copy-pasted. But thanks for telling me anyway. Nice changes.
 * Your recent edits on "Ahsoka Tano" and "Bariss Offee" articles are REALLY good and they give juicy information. I see that the only issue they have is about its references. In Wookieepedia, we don't put urls directly as a source. This page has all you need to know about sourcing policy, and it can show you how to put a proper reference. Also, if you want to source a page outside of Wookieepedia (StarWars.com, SW Youtube Channel, a non-SW related magazine website etc.) you should take a look at the templates on this page. Feel free to ask if you have any questions, or anything you don't understand about sourcing on these pages. TanDivoInsignia-SenateMurders.svg  AnilSerifoglu  (talk) 16:34, October 29, 2016 (UTC)

Mace Windu (again)
Once again, please stop adding POV/unverified information to the articles, as you have continued to do on the Mace Windu page. In one of your latest edits on that article you said and I quote "There's a lot of reasons to think that; he didn't sound very sympathetic when he said it and when Ahsoka walked away, his fists clenched and he stared after her with a rather cold expression." Unless, for example, a source stated that Windu was insincere when he called Ahsoka a greater Jedi because of her ordeal, then this wouldn't even be an issue and you could edit the article as such without it getting reverted over and over again, provided you cited the source. But without such a source, the reason you gave for that edit amounts to viewer-based pov and speculation. JRT2010 (talk) 21:43, November 13, 2016 (UTC)

OK, listen, i understand the need for sources and a NPOV, i really do, but how are my recent edits like that? Months ago i put in stuff that others claimed was unsourced and not; that Windu was not apologetic to Ahsoka. At first, i persisted, but i eventually stopped. Now, i'm just trying to put in some small, but technical facts. Let me point them out: Number One; i know there is (as far as i know) no source that states Windu was insincere when he says Ahsoka had become a greater Jedi because of her ordeal, but there is also no source that states that he really did regard her as greater Jedi. So wouldn't it be better to say that he "declared her a greater Jedi"? Number two: technically Plo Koon did not speak for all present (i know he said "you have our most humble apologies" and "the council was wrong to accuse you"), which makes it reasonable to assume he was speaking for all members of the Council present, but there is no source that states he really was speaking for the Council. Furthermore, Anakin spoke first and he is NOT a member of the Council is he not? So what do you think?


 * Sometimes you just have to take things at face value and that what they said is what they mean, if no source says Mace was insincere when he said it then we have to take what he said as him meaning it, as otherwise we'd be misinterpreting the quote. And the same applies with Plo Koon, if he says the council was wrong to accuse her then it means that the council was wrong end of story, and he did speak for all the council as no one else spoke up at that time stating otherwise, it's best to leave it without making anymore changes as they are insignificant to the Mace Windu page --Lewisr (talk) 05:01, November 14, 2016 (UTC)

"insignificant"? I think that's going a little too far. Anyway, i know my information is not sourced, but i have examined every bit of the scene and what i did say about Windu's words and behaviour is true; he did frown and clench his fists when she walked away, and he did not sound very sympathetic when he said his bit; by saying the whole ordeal was simply a "great trial" he takes no responsibility for the Council's rather flawed decision to expel Ahsoka and he's acting like it doesn't really matter. His words do contradict with the Council's apology; the others didn't say "the Force works in mysterious ways" or "this was her great trial". And his frowning and clenched fists when she walks away clearly shows suppressed anger. Also, as i said, there's also no source that says he really did regard Ahsoka as a greater Jedi. PS: May i remind you i put the information describing the events involving Ahsoka's departure in his page there in the first place?; look at the history. PPS: do you think Windu should be described as plunging "miles" or "many stories" when he is thrown out of the window by Sidious?
 * At this point, I'm just going to refer you to the NPOV policy. Please keep it in mind when editing articles in the future. Thanks. JRT2010 (talk) 05:18, November 14, 2016 (UTC)
 * I just mean that its really not that important to analyse every movement he makes in the situation, the most important thing is what he says, it wasn't just his decision the council all agreed to expel Ahsoka so he has no reason to take blame for the councils decision. Thats your opinion that it shows supressed anger, maybe he was frustrated that the whole situation was a waste of time and Bariss was the true culprit and they didn't even figure that out? There is no evidence to suggest he was angry with Ahsoka so there is no way it should be reflected in the page --Lewisr (talk) 05:33, November 14, 2016 (UTC)

How is his word better evidence?; he didn't think Ahsoka's word as good enough. And may i remind that he was the one who declared her guilty and expelled her; he said "it is the Council's opinion that Padawan Ahsoka Tano has committed sedition against the Republic". Just because their opinion doesn't mean that she actually is guilty. And he is the technical second-in-command of the Order; only Yoda outranks him. So technically he does need accept the blame. And did i not note that he frowned and clenched his fists ONLY when Ahsoka walked away? Is that not enough "evidence" that he's showing suppressed anger at her?
 * As Lewisr told you, "if no source says Mace was insincere when he said it then we have to take what he said as him meaning it, as otherwise we'd be misinterpreting the quote." I strongly suggest you stop at this point. You claim to understand the need for an NPOV? Good. Now please follow it. JRT2010 (talk) 05:51, November 14, 2016 (UTC)
 * His word is better evidence because he said it and its not been interpreted another way. 'The Council's opinion' not Mace's opinon so he doesnt take full responsibility for the actions of the council, what evidence is there to show hes showing supressed anger at her? Unless you can find a Canon source that says he was showing supressed anger at her and not that doesnt include how you are seeing it then it can be added --Lewisr (talk) 05:57, November 14, 2016 (UTC)

May i remind you guys that you keep telling me virtually all the information needs to be sourced? There's no source that says he really was sincere and he didn't sound very sympathetic when he said it. I'm not writing that he's insincere, i'm just changing "regarded her as a greater Jedi" to "declared her a greater Jedi", which he did. How is that misinterpreting? PS: how about a compromise; i put that information back, you leave it and we BOTH stop?
 * No, for the reasons we've already explained over and over again. Furthermore, your reason for altering the text is unacceptable, because you seem to want it to read in a way that leaves Windu's sincerity open to question. As we've explained, "if no source says Mace was insincere when he said it then we have to take what he said as him meaning it, as otherwise we'd be misinterpreting the quote." JRT2010 (talk) 06:06, November 14, 2016 (UTC)

"Unacceptable"? that's a little extreme and how so? I've explained my reasons over and over again, and you don't seem to be acknowledging them. I told you already, there's no source to suggest that he was insincere and no source to suggest he was sincere. And as i've already said his sincerity IS questionable, as was his decision to expel Ahsoka. I'm not trying to be biased. And you haven't answered my question; why doesn't this information need to be sourced? PS: are you an admin? (and please tell the truth)
 * The episode gallery for the episode states that Mace, ki adi mundi and tinn observe that Ahsoka has passed a major trial in her training and has emerged a greater jedi, I think that pretty much solves this now --Lewisr (talk) 06:16, November 14, 2016 (UTC)
 * it was not solely his decision to expel Ahsoka so that doesnt bring his sincerity into question, otherwise you have to question the sincerity of all the othee jedi as they also agreed to expel which you arent doing --Lewisr (talk) 06:20, November 14, 2016 (UTC)
 * Sam, in case you want to verify it for yourself, here is the link: http://www.starwars.com/tv-shows/clone-wars/the-wrong-jedi-episode-gallery JRT2010 (talk) 06:29, November 14, 2016 (UTC)

OK, lets say Mundi, Tinn and Windu were sincere in their belief that her ordeal had been a great trial and she had become a greater Jedi because of it, maybe that is true (from a certain point of view). But lets think, BECAUSE of it? That makes it sound like they don't think of her traumatic experience as bad but rather a GOOD thing. Also, the word "observe" makes it sound like they didn't really regard her as greater Jedi, but they merely "claimed" she was. Furthermore, them claiming the ordeal was simply a "great trial" shows that they took no responsibility for their rather flawed decision to expel her.
 * I'm sorry but you are still presenting your own point of view, calling it a flawed decision to expel her? The source says they observed and that she has emerged as a greater jedi that is from a canon source, so if anything is to be added to the article it is that --Lewisr (talk) 06:51, November 14, 2016 (UTC)
 * Sam, Lewisr has provided you with a legitimate, canon source, which could and should be added to the article&mdash;not your viewer-POV edits. Like Lewisr, I consider this matter closed and so should you. JRT2010 (talk) 06:54, November 14, 2016 (UTC)

All right, all right. I've just changed "regarded Tano as a greater Jedi because of her ordeal" to "observed that Tano had become a greater Jedi because of her ordeal", since the source says "observe" not "regard". Is that better? PS: i'm going to stand by my opinions, but i won't put them on the pages, i promise.
 * As long as you don't add them to the article then you're entiled to your opinion. Now lets leave this matter aside as its been resolved --Lewisr (talk) 07:09, November 14, 2016 (UTC)

Ok, you win. Also i almost forgot, there's one last question i'd like to ask you, and it has nothing to do with Windu. Are you absolutely sure that Ahsoka takes place one year after Offee's betrayal? The novel Ahsoka takes place exactly one year after the events of Revenge of the Sith, the latter of which takes place approximately one year after Ahsoka's departure from the Jedi. So technically it would be two years after Offee's betrayal wouldn't it? Sam sparrow
 * It has been confirmed in a recent reference book Star Wars: Galactic Atlas that the trial takes place in 19 BBY which is one year before the events of the Ahsoka novel so yes i am sure--Lewisr (talk) 07:34, November 14, 2016 (UTC)


 * "Observe" is a synonym for "regard"&mdash;in other words they essentially mean the same thing. Because of this I don't see the change as necessary. Either way, it is clear that Windu does view Tano as a greater Jedi than before (i.e. he's not merely "declaring" it; he means it). However, I'll accept the change in wording for the reason stated above. Eventually I plan on rewriting that entire section, as well as the other parts I haven't gotten to yet. Also, please remember to sign your posts in the future. JRT2010 (talk) 07:14, November 14, 2016 (UTC)

What do you mean "rewrite that entire section". May i remind you i put that section there in the first place; look at the history. Sam sparrow
 * I mean I'm going to make improvements to enhance the article's quality. If you end up disagreeing with the way I edit the section concerning Tano's ordeal, we can certainly discuss it. Until then, keep in mind that anyone can edit this article or change sections in it, regardless of who wrote said section. JRT2010 (talk) 08:08, November 14, 2016 (UTC)

edits
Hey Sam, i really think you should look at editing another page a you're constantly in an edit on the mace windu page, or if you want to continue editing the mace windu page you should carry on with your edit to do with the bad batch as that was a very good start --Lewisr (talk) 05:10, November 15, 2016 (UTC)

Well, i was under the impression that we did agree to leave it like that, but then Anil reverted it again, claiming it was "irrelevant". You put back the sourced information of Windu's words. I put back the information on Skywalker's apology and the fact that Koon was speaking for the Council and not for "all present" (remember Anakin spoke first and he is NOT a member of the Council), and also decided to add a bit more info about Windu's fight with Sidious and the fact that Ahsoka frowned at his claim that her ordeal was a "great trial". May i ask why you removed that bit?
 * Anil has his reasons for editing, that is something you need to speak to him about to save a constant edit war between you two, I edited that bit out because we agreed to leave it at that, I hae not edited out anything else as currently I feel the article is fine just it may need expanding in some areas--Lewisr (talk) 05:44, November 15, 2016 (UTC)

I understand, but i've been trying to reason with Anil for ages; he doesn't seem to be acknowledging my arguments. All he says is "cleanup", "unnecessary", "irrelevant", or "your own point of view".

PS: I'm not suggesting you become involved if you don't want to.

PPS: I don't wish to be biased or anything, but i sometimes get the impression that he's stalking me.
 * The only thing I can suggest is to leave a message on his talk page and to explain your reasoning, Anil is a reasonable person im sure you can reach a decision between you both that suits both of you, and I know that you do not intend of being biased, I doubt he is stalking you though --Lewisr (talk) 05:56, November 15, 2016 (UTC)

I have already explained my reasons to him multiple times, but i suppose i could try again. Thanks for the advice. Sam sparrow

Hello, its me again. I have (as you may have noticed) just reverted the Mace Windu article back to the version we agreed to leave it on. Last night, Anil reverted it yet again, WITHOUT giving a reason. I tried to explain my reasons to him (again), but he just said i had put in improper sources (which you actually had removed) and that i only put in a few extra lines, which is not true, as i had added more information to the section that describes Windu's fight with Sidious. I think he's properly being a bit stubborn. And i'd like to ask you a question; where are you sitting? I'm in Victoria. I'm not asking for your address i'm just trying to be friendly. Like, what time is it for you? Sam sparrow
 * Hi Sam, I have seen what has been happening and I really don't know what can be done apart from just accepting it and moving on to making different kind of edits to avoid constant wars, like the bad batch one you did on Windu's page. I am not here to take sides so please don't think I am when I say to leave it be now I am currently in England, it's 04.43am what time is it there? --Lewisr (talk) 04:44, November 16, 2016 (UTC)

I understand your neutrality, i really do and i won't push you, but can't we contact an admin? And its 3:53 in here; i've just come back from school and had a nice snake of Nutella.
 * Thank you for understanding, I am trying to be of as much help as I can I hope you know! You can contact an admin but I don't know what can be done really but it's upto you, well fair enough hopefully you've had a good day! Btw please remember to sign your messages --Lewisr (talk) 04:56, November 16, 2016 (UTC)

Duel in Palpatine's office
Hey sam, I've changed a part of the edit you just made to 'plummeting to his death' with a link to Mace Windu's databank, hopefully that will stop an edit war from occurring on that part --Lewisr (talk) 21:25, November 20, 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for that, you're being very helpful. Sam sparrow
 * No problem, always happy to help out --Lewisr (talk) 06:43, November 21, 2016 (UTC)

inuse tag
Please respect the inuse tag by not making edits to the Jedi High Council article while inuse message is displayed, in order to avoid edit conflicts. That includes minor edits such as making corrections to spelling errors. Thanks. JRT2010 (talk) 08:43, December 3, 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but i don't know what an inuse tag means. Also what's wrong with my recent edits? Do you really have to disagree with every edit i do? PS: I'm not trying to start edit conflicts. -- Sam sparrow
 * Sam, a inuse tag appears at the top of an article as Inuse and means that no other users should edit an article as a courtesy to whomever added it at the time. added the tag here, and you subsequently edited it here. He's not at all "having to disagree with every edit you do" at all.  NoahR9  http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/starwars/images/4/46/First_Order.svg/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/20Chat with me! 09:21, December 3, 2016 (UTC)
 * And for the record, just because I put the inuse tag up after your edit doesn't mean I disagree with it. You made a major edit while I was in the middle of expanding the article, so I added the tag to avoid edit conflicts between us. I've reviewed your edit and although it could use a little trimming for brevity, I think it's fine for the most part&mdash;no NPOV issues this time. I will remove the tag as soon as I'm finished. Until then, please refrain from editing the article until I'm done. JRT2010 (talk) 09:28, December 3, 2016 (UTC)
 * OK, i understand, thanks for letting me know. And i'm glad you are expanding the article. Sam sparrow
 * Please remember to sign your posts correctly with ! Thanks!  NoahR9  http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/starwars/images/4/46/First_Order.svg/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/20Chat with me! 09:49, December 3, 2016 (UTC)

Jedi High Council
The words great trial do not need quotation marks. First, it makes the line seem sarcastic and second, the episode gallery refers to it as a major trial without quotation marks. JRT2010 (talk) 03:01, December 4, 2016 (UTC)


 * I'm not trying to make it sound like they didn't mean it, what i'm trying to do is point out that just because they said it was her great trial doesn't mean it actually was. Also, if i may point out, only Windu said it was her great trial did he not? And he said great trial not major trial. So technically the episode gallery got it wrong. Also, i'm not saying we should do this, but maybe should we also add that they expelled her despite the fact that it was against Jedi tradition? As Yoda and Obi-Wan pointed out, it was against Jedi tradition to expel one of their own without a fair trial. And as stated by Dave Filoni, the Council allowed politics to compromise their principals. I'm not saying we should add this, its just a suggestion. I don't want to start another edit war, i'm just trying to help. I respect you and the others, i really do, and i don't like getting into arguments. Sam sparrow (talk)
 * Filoni's statements can be added to the Behind the Scenes section, provided you cite the proper source. Furthermore, "great trial" and "major trial" are essentially the same thing, except worded slightly differently. You don't have to use the exact words, so long as the wording doesn't alter the meaning. Hence, "great trial" and "major trial" are interchangeable. As for the episode gallery ( http://www.starwars.com/tv-shows/clone-wars/the-wrong-jedi-episode-gallery ), it is a Canon source and specifically states that Ki-Adi-Mundi, Saesee Tiin, and Mace Windu observe that Ahsoka has passed a major trial in her training. The wording of the image caption is quite clear in this case; Ahsoka passed a major (or great) trial. JRT2010 (talk) 03:57, December 4, 2016 (UTC)
 * Regarding Mace Windu and Yoda's concern about Anakin, only Yoda said that he feared there would be great danger in training Anakin. Windu never expressed fear about training Anakin. His main concern was that Anakin was too old to commit to the life of a Jedi, as clearly stated on his Databank profile. JRT2010 (talk) 04:03, December 4, 2016 (UTC)

Removing stuff
Hey Sam! I know you aren't deliberately removing the sources etc from the page but please be careful when you're making edits as that's twice you have done that! --Lewisr (talk) 00:43, December 27, 2016 (UTC)

Dooku Assassination
Regarding the Jedi Council's role in the assassination plot and Quinlan Vos' fall to the dark side, I do not believe it is correct to neutrally state that the Council "conceded" to Kenobi's argument (i.e. it was well-intentioned, but morally wrong, etc). That is from Kenobi's point of view. The others initially protested, but Yoda silenced them to allow Kenobi to finish. That does not indicate that even the Grand Master agreed with Kenobi, but simply that he wanted to let him speak his mind. JRT2010 (talk) 00:53, December 27, 2016 (UTC)
 * I see what you mean, but then, why does it say Windu and Yoda conceded that it was wrong on their respective pages? Also, i've given an argument similiar to yours over the Council's treatment of Ahsoka. I'm not saying we should dwell on this, i'm just pointing out some things. Sam sparrow (talk)
 * Then whoever added that line to those pages was also mistaken because I've read the passage concerning Vos' return to the light and how the Council handled that situation. You basically summed up what Kenobi said, but there is no indication that the Council agreed with what he said. I think the writer left that scene up for interpretation by presenting both sides of the argument: The need to weigh one man's life against billions, as Windu put it, versus the moral implications of resorting to assassination as a means to an end. As it stands, we can only present both sides of the argument, but without definitively stating that one is superior to the other. By the way, thank you for bringing those pages to my attention. You're welcome to make the necessary corrections, or I can. JRT2010 (talk) 01:08, December 27, 2016 (UTC)
 * Regarding Ahsoka, I assume you are referring to Windu's line about "great trial". The reason we have it in the article as a definite fact is because it is supported by the Databank gallery for that episode. JRT2010 (talk) 01:11, December 27, 2016 (UTC)

Anyway, i accept your reasons for the edits and your thanks for me bringing your attention to those pages, you're quite welcome. Sam sparrow (talk)
 * I accept your reasons, but may i point out a few things? Just because Windu said it was her great trial doesn't mean it actually was, and the statement takes away the Council's responsibility. Also, unless i am very much mistaken, you once said that his word is better than my opinion. That's not an unreasonable point, but if i may point out, Windu said during the judgement meeting "it is the Council's opinion that Padawan Ahsoka Tano has committed sedition against the Republic". So simply speaking, he thought the Council's word was better than hers. And just because its their opinion doesn't mean she really was guilty, which she wasn't.
 * And as I've also repeatedly told you, her ordeal was indeed a great trial because that is what the databank states. To quote the image caption: they observed that "Ahsoka has passed a major trial in her training." As I already told you, the word "major" is a synonym for "great." Please do not argue with me over two words that mean the same thing. The Databank states that she passed a major trial (aka great trial). It is canon and not up for debate. JRT2010 (talk) 01:31, December 27, 2016 (UTC)
 * Furthermore, while the WP:NPOV is a strongly upheld policy on the site, so is the WP:ATT. In other words, if a source specifically says something, it will have to be put into the article one way or another. The Databank is a source; it specifically states that Windu and his colleagues observed Ahsoka passing a major trial in her training. Therefore, we can state it as a fact without breaking the NPOV since the Databank presents it as a fact. JRT2010 (talk) 01:39, December 27, 2016 (UTC)

1: They didn't give her a proper trial; the judgement meeting was merely a formality. 2: They allowed politics to compromise their principals; as Obi-Wan and Yoda pointed out, it was against Jedi tradition to expel one of their own without a fair trial. Furthermore, as effectively admitted by Windu, one of the reasons they expelled was to keep the already delicate relationship between the Council and the Senate intact. Anyway, i have accepted your reasons and i don't want a war, i'm just pointing out some things.Sam sparrow (talk)
 * I'm not arguing with you over those two words; i know they have almost the exact same meaning. Also the databank didn't say it actually was her trial, it just said they observing that it was was. I know the databank is a canon source, but there are some notable inaccuracies in certain pages. For example, in Ahsoka's bio gallery it makes it sound like the Jedi expelled her BEFORE she escaped from prison, whereas in the actual series, they expelled her AFTER she was captured while on the run. Also in General Grievous's databank, it says he overwhelmed Kit Fisto in lightsaber combat, which is not true, as during their fight on screen, Fisto clearly has the upper hand against Grievous. Also, if i may point out "observe" is NOT a synonym for "regard"; it was not among them when i researched it. Besides, have you just ignored the others i've pointed out about the Council's decision to expel. We can't deny that it was flawed for the following reasons:
 * First, any discrepancies between canon sources like the Databank and other Star Wars material can be referenced in a Behind the Scenes section. Second, your recent edits have been deleting the Sources and Categories of the Mace Windu article. I'm sure it's not on purpose, but take care not repeat this mistake as you've already been told about this by Lewisr. Thank you. JRT2010 (talk) 07:58, December 27, 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but i don't understand what you mean; i haven't been deleting sources.Sam sparrow (talk)
 * Actually, yes you have. Lewisr informed you about it in a message above this section on your talk page. You can check the history section for yourself as well. JRT2010 (talk) 08:02, December 27, 2016 (UTC)

How exactly have i been deleting sources may i ask? I don't remember erasing any of those blue numbers, which are the sources. PS: I have checked the section and history many times.Sam sparrow (talk)
 * here, here, and here. As for how, you tell me. You're deleting them, though not on purpose I'm sure. JRT2010 (talk) 08:12, December 27, 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but i don't see any changes in there that have any to do with sources; just changes in sentences. I'm not doing anything wrong and if i am, i'm not doing it on purpose.Sam sparrow (talk)
 * I'm not referring to the footnotes. I'm talking about the "Sources" section which is listed below "Appearances" and above "Notes and references." For example, under Line 351 in the first link I posted above, it clearly shows that you erased both the Sources section and the article categories. If you're still unsure as to how you're doing this, I suggest you look at your edits more closely from now on before posting them because we shouldn't have to keep correcting these mistakes, especially now that Lewisr and I have tried to make you aware of them. JRT2010 (talk) 08:29, December 27, 2016 (UTC)

Right, terribly sorry, i didn't notice that section of the page, so sorry. I'll be more careful next time.Sam sparrow (talk)

NPOV
You've been told this before. Do not add POV-based and/or unverified information as you did on the Jedi Council article. To quote you, "technically only Koon genuinely apologized.." Unless it has been said in a source that only Koon genuinely apologized, your recent edit and the reason for it are considered viewer-POV and speculation. JRT2010 (talk) 11:15, January 9, 2017 (UTC)

And I've told you again and again why i think that. But, never mind, if you insist i'll stop. Sam sparrow
 * Yes, I insist that you adhere to the policies of this site which apply to all of us. Regardless of what you think about the Council or its motives, you cannot add unverified/viewer-POV information because it will be reverted. Due to your numerous NPOV issues with certain subjects&mdash;most notably the Jedi Order, the Jedi High Council, Ahsoka Tano, Mace Windu, and now Ki-Adi-Mundi&mdash;I strongly suggest that before editing articles relating to the aforementioned subjects, you should first leave a message on the article Talk Page so that I or another user can tell you if your edit would be considered unverified information, POV-based, or some other violation of the site's policies. Keep in mind that it's only a suggestion. I can't tell you what to edit. However, I believe it's the best option moving forward at this point. Otherwise, I think you'll go on breaking the NPOV and other policies, which forces myself and other users to revert your edits. JRT2010 (talk) 12:19, January 9, 2017 (UTC)

Ok, i understand, thanks for the suggestion, and i'll try to remember.Sam sparrow

Mace Windu
I reverted some of your edits to the Mace Windu article, section Duel with Darth Sidious, because it read too much like a play-by-play version, which you might expect to see in a novel but not necessarily a wikia. I've seen you do this before; sometimes you add a lot of detail to the point where the page reads like a play-by-play. It's not uncommon to feel the need to just add more and more detail, but for the sake of concision try to avoid adding redundant details, including information that's not particularly relevant to the subject matter. JRT2010 (talk) 07:21, January 23, 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree to the part about how Windu never stopped doubting Skywalker, although I moved it in order to shorten the sentence which was too long. As for the parts in the Duel with Darth Sidious section, again it reads too much like a play-by-play. While the article itself is not "featured status" quality, basic rules, such as writing quality, still apply. JRT2010 (talk) 07:40, January 23, 2017 (UTC)

Right, but sometimes details are needed, sometimes not. I'll be careful not to put too much "play-by-play" stuff in wiki pages, but its good to have details sometimes. I've just edited the page again, with a bit more detail, but shortened. PS: When the databank says "powerful, tempestuous Jedi" it sounds like its describing Skywalker himself, not Windu's opinion of him. PS: What's your own personal opinion on Mace Windu? I'm not suggesting that we add our opinion on the article, i'm just curious about what you think of him. I've noticed that different people have different opinions of him; some believe that he's "awesome" and "bad-ass". Others, however, believe that he is deeply flawed and that he is in fact a representation of the flaws of the old Jedi Order. Sam sparrow (talk)
 * "Powerful, yet tempestuous"&mdash;I can see how it might read like that to you, but the full line is: Mace was troubled by Palpatine’s request to make Anakin his representative on the Jedi Council, warning his fellow Jedi Masters that it was dangerous to pair the Supreme Chancellor with the powerful, tempestuous young Jedi. In other words, he's warning them that it is dangerous to pair Palpatine with a "powerful, yet tempestuous Jedi" like Skywalker. Furthermore, in Episode II he did state to Obi-Wan that "The boy has exceptional skills." As for my opinion about him, it's not relevant to the article&mdash;nor is anyone else's opinion for that matter. JRT2010 (talk) 07:57, January 23, 2017 (UTC)

I never said your opinion was relevant to the article, i'm just asking you as politely as i possibly can to tell me your opinion of him. I'm not say we should put our opinion on the article, i'm just being curious, and curiosity is not a sin.Sam sparrow (talk)
 * Granted. However, in this matter our opinions are irrelevant. Whether or not he was a "flawed Jedi" or "symbolic of a flawed system" is, as you said, a matter of opinion&mdash;none of which, to my knowledge, is supported or outright confirmed in canon. What we know about Mace Windu from canon sources is that he was a legendary Jedi Master. He could be stern and dispassionate, which is what a Jedi is supposed to be according to the Jedi Code, yet loyal and mindful of his obligations to both the Jedi Order and Galactic Republic. He was the great champion of the Jedi Order, who sacrificed his life for the galaxy whereas Anakin Skywalker chose to put one life ahead of everyone else. JRT2010 (talk) 08:24, January 23, 2017 (UTC)

I see. As for me, i sort of have a mixed opinion of Windu. On the one hand, i think he is a cool fighter and that his loyalty to the Jedi Order and the Galactic Republic quite admirable. On the other hand, i think he can be very inflexible, arrogant, hypocritical, and even judgemental. As stated by the article, he is largely obstinate to anything that contradicts his views (though it should be noted the Clone Wars did force him to rethink SOME of his beliefs). He makes a lot of misjudgements; e.t.c he refused to believe that the Sith had returned, he refused to believe that Dooku could be capable of assassinating another being (ironically he himself comes up with the plan to assassinate Dooku), and he refused to believe that Ahsoka Tano was innocent.

Now for his hypocrisy. As established throughout the prequels and the Clone Wars series, he is staunchly committed to the ancient ways and traditions of the Jedi Order, and is disdainful and distrustful of the Galactic Senate. He is also disdainful of the Jedi who violate the Jedi Code. However, he himself violated Jedi tradition and philosophy on three notable occasions:

1: He expelled Ahsoka Tano. As Yoda and Obi-Wan pointed out, it is against Jedi tradition to expel one of their own without a proper trial, and it is the Jedi's duty to stand by their own. We cannot deny that this decision was flawed for the following reasons; 1: they expelled her without a proper trial (the meeting in the chamber of judgement was just a formality). 2: they allowed politics to compromise their principals. If you think about it, this decision actually is very hypocritical, especially when it comes to Windu; not only does he violate traditions that he has dedicated himself to, but he also yields to the will of a corrupt government that he has never really trusted or liked in the first place. He also shows no sense of loyalty or concern towards a girl who has faithfully served the Jedi Order her entire life.

2: He came up with the plan to assassinate Dooku. Although it should be noted that this decision was well-intentioned, it was nevertheless morally questionably, and as stated above, it is also ironic, as he had previously refused to believe that Dooku could be capable of assassination.

3: He attempted to execute Sidious while he was unarmed, something against the Jedi Code. Although it should be noted that Sidious was probably just feigning helplessness, and as Windu said, he was too dangerous to be left alive because he controlled the Senate, it is nevertheless questionable. Furthermore, as stated in the article, in concentrating all of his attention on Sidious, Windu failed to anticipate Anakin's intervention, which led to his death. This is probably the most notable example of the flaws of the Jedi always focusing on one thing, which tends to be the greater good. Doing the right thing at all costs is admirable, but it is also an absolute, as stated by Dave Filoni.

Here is another example of his hypocrisy. Throughout the Clone Wars series, he makes sure that Anakin and Ahsoka sre held responsible and sometimes even punished for their mistakes. However, Windu doesn't seem to be capable of acknowledging or learning from his own mistakes. The most example of this, is what he say after Ahsoka's trial. He says "this was actually your great trial, now we see that. We understand that the Force works in mysterious ways, and because of this trial you have become a greater Jedi than you would have otherwise". The statement doesn't sound very sympathetic, he doesn't take any responsibility for the Council's failure or his misjudgement of Ahsoka (if i may note, he was the one who was most openly cold and accusing towards her during the Judgement meeting). Also the stateemt that "because of this trial you have become a greater Jedi than you would have otherwise" possibly indicates that he believes Ahsoka should be THANKFUL for the experience, which is not apologetic at all id it?

Another example of Windu's inability to acknowledge his mistakes is during Dark Disciple; he disregards the fact that it was his idea to assassinate Dooku in the first place, instead placing all of the blame of the failure on Ventress.

Well that my opinion of him.Sam sparrow (talk)
 * As long as your opinions do not translate into viewer-based POV edits, you can judge as you like. JRT2010 (talk) 09:44, January 23, 2017 (UTC)

Thanks
Hi Sam Sparrow,

Thanks for clearing up my edits on the Sabine Wren article. I appreciate your help with the grammar and structure. Wish you all the best and may the Force be with you. Have you heard that they have released the name for Episode VIII: "The Last Jedi"? Sounds interesting. Andykatib 09:54, January 24, 2017 (UTC)

Thank you very much, your quite welcome. Yes, i have heard about the name for episode VIII. Sam sparrow

Sourcing
The citation codes you've used on the Dooku and Grievous pages go at the second and all subsequent insertion points of citation. You need to enter the full code at the first insertion point of citation, unless someone else has already done it. Refer to Sourcing (in particular, section How to reference articles) so that you may learn how to create citations in articles properly. JRT2010 (talk) 15:30, January 30, 2017 (UTC)

WIP tag
I reverted your edits to the Bombing of the Jedi Temple hangar because it is currently tagged with a WIP. I thought it was Inuse at first glance, but the same rule still applies. As stated by the template at the top of the article: "Please avoid making minor edits to this page while this message is displayed, in order to avoid edit conflicts." Any remaining issues with the article can be addressed once the tag has been removed. Until then, please refrain from editing the article until Thatgirlwiththestaff has removed the tag. JRT2010 (talk) 11:02, February 19, 2017 (UTC)