Talk:Darth Maul/Legends

See also Archive.

Source for Ultimate Test?
The Dark Side Sourcebook states something rather different, I hear...what's the source for that section?132.170.46.109 03:07, 24 February 2008 (UTC)Light

Why his Saber design is based on Zannah's

 * From Abel G Pena's Grievous articles, we know Zannah wielded a double-bladed red lightsaber. We know that Exar Kun's was blue. The source for Darth Maul's research of his lightsaber design never specifies who he based it on - only that it was a "Sith Lord of the past". It's more likely to be Zannah purely because a) His is red, like hers, and not blue like Kun's and B) Darth Bane created a new holocron when he started his order, and it's quite likely Exar Kun was not even IN the holocron Maul had access to. Regardless, Zannah based her design on Kun's, so the ultimate pedigree of Maul's design still dates back that far. QuentinGeorge 12:45, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
 * ...Maybe I overlook? Because I just read Unknown Soldier: The Story of General Grievous again and couldnt find a clue about Zannah. Anyway, we know Kun and his tales survived even in Jedi Holocrons, so it is reasonable to expect his tales would survive in the Sith holocrons. Plus, color of blade depends on the crystals only, doesnt affect the design of hilt much. I personally prefer mentioning only Exar's involvement in the article, because it's the only thing we are really sure. Darth Kevinmhk 13:57, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Isn't the bit about Zannah on the Hyperspace supplement to US:TSoGG? Cutch 06:32, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes. And it was confirmed by Abel G Pena. Once again the fact that it was based on Kun's was always fanon - it's never stated anywhere. QuentinGeorge 11:33, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Additionally, Zannah's was a proper double lightsaber like Maul's - Kun's was just two normal lightsabers fused together. QuentinGeorge 11:34, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Observe -


 * Kun's


 * Zannah's


 * Maul's

QuentinGeorge 11:38, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
 * There is no "proper" double-bladed lightsaber - Kun's saber was modified from a single hilt, it was Zannah & Maul's design which were merged by 2 normal hilts. Maul based on Kun because Kun was - at least for now - the earliest known user and thus by far the most possible inventor. And, by the same rule, Pena didnt directly confirm Maul based on Zannah's, too. Darth Kevinmhk 15:51, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Alright, I am not a hyperspace member, so I cant read the online supplement. Does Pena confirm that Maul base on Zannah? If not, its canonical value would just be the same as Maul base on Kun. Darth Kevinmhk 15:55, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't know of any sources that specify that Maul based his saber on Kun's, but according to Shadow Hunter he did know that Kun was the inventor of the double-bladed lightsaber. Lieutenant Gerard 16:44, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Zannah's actual hilt isn't known to be what N-K "Necrosis" used for in SWG he's only using one of the two types of double-bladed hilts so that image isn't accurateIvor 16:49, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
 * "the fact that it was based on Kun's was always fanon - it's never stated anywhere" From "Star Wars- The Ultimate Visual Guide" ; "Darth Maul uses his Master's Sith Holocron to find schematics for devices and weapons- including his double-bladed lightsaber- that he builds for his own personal arsenal. Based on the weapon used by the Sith Lord Exar Kun, Maul's lightsaber is actually two single-bladed weapons that he has joined at the hilts." --Refuse Winst 05:53, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Special Notice
Listen, Im not sure when people are going to notice this, but Darth Maul is not a Dark Lord. In the Rule of Two, one is the reigning Dark Lord and the other a Sith Lord. Maul is a Sith Lord and the apprentice. Sidious is the Dark Lord and the Master.

Seriously, If Maul was a Dark Lord he would have killed Obi-Wan and Qui-gon without breaking a sweat.

You people seriously need to research your stuff more.
 * First, new topics go at the bottom. Second, impolite anons get banned very quickly. Third, if you start complaining about how weak Maul was, you will be banned. Fourth, your arguments don't carry much weight. Chack Jadson 19:52, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I can see have trouble looking eye to eye with the truth. I'll put my post in the New Topics section. We'll see how much weight my argument carries then.


 * By that logic, Darth Vader is NOT a Dark Lord of the Sith. I'm pretty sure that's been part of his gig since 1977. JediFett421

Things to add

 * Although the story is mentioned, the list of Darth Maul's victims does not include those people that he killed in Shadow Hunter. Would someone who has recently read the book expand on it please? If no one does, I'll remove the tag I added before it is displayed. Atarumaster88 19:47, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Hey, I don't have Shadow Hunter, but I know he killed a Twi'lek Jedi Master, his human female Padawan, and this one random guy. There's like nothing in this article about that and I am thinking of just putting a small amount of detail in there to draw attention to get someone to EXPAND IT! Atarumaster88 13:07, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I have read the book and will add it. Ugluk
 * It has been updated but i left the tag up since i assumed i was supposed to. Ugluk
 * Names for his TWO main kills in Shadow Hunter: Darsha Assant (padawan) and Anoon Bondara (master). He does not kill Lorn Pavan (random guy), Pavan goes to give the Holocron to a senator and the Senator turns out to be Palpatine so we can OBVIOUSLY assume that Pavan is killed and the Jedi Order and Old Republic do not benefit from the holocron.

Tatooine and the Chosen One

 * I alluded Maul's knowledge of the Chosen One to the page, but it was changed. That's fine with me, but I think it's important that someone incorporate this into the section somewhere. Page 41 of The New Essential Cronology clearly states that Maul was dispatched not only to prevent the Queen from reaching Coruscant, but to prevent the Jedi from finding the Chosen One. Before my edit, it seemed to imply that Maul was sent to assassinate Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon, which isn't entirely true. Surprisingly, NEC seems to imply that Anakin was the most important asset on Tatooine, and that it was the prime objective for Maul -- despite what TPM may have you believe. Again, I think it's important that we add this to Maul's mission. This section could be expanded to include it, for it's quite brief as it is.
 * Also worth noting is that Maul did not track them to Tatooine using the force, but by a tracing sequence (stated in both TPM novel and movie, I believe). Unless there is a verified source that states Maul tracked them using the Force, I motion for this to be removed. Since this is next week's featured article, I suggest we quickly resolve these issues. Thanks. --Bodknocks 20:48, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Maul was sent to prevent the Jedi from finding the Chosen One doesn't mean Maul really know who or what the Chosen One is. (Maul won't question his master at all anyway, so why should Sidious tell him? Especially Maul was just one of the subsitudes until Sidious could seduce Anakin) Especially when Maul arrived on Tatooine Jinn already found Ani. I don't recall EP1 novel ever has Maul think/talk about the Chosen One. Darth Kevinmhk 02:52, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Whether or not he knew about the Chosen One is irrelevant. NEC says, "[Sidious] dispatched his apprentice Darth Maul in order to prevent the Jedi from meddling with Anakin Skywalker's fate." Maul's entry makes no mention of this, and I think it's important to include it. We don't know if Maul knew about Chosen One, but regardless it was a vital part of his mission. --Bodknocks 04:39, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Alright, I think we can include it, but I hope it will be in a way not imply Maul knew of the Chosen One, because I really havent find any source to support that yet. Darth Kevinmhk 06:11, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Agreed. It should be left ambiguous, just like the section in Palpatine's article... which happens to cover the exact same thing we've been discussing, strangely. Anyway, we should all keep an eye on this entire article and make sure it's primed for next week, where it will be featured. --Bodknocks 07:17, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * In my original submission to What's the Story for the Dusty Duck, I included that Darth Maul was looking for "the boy", meaning Anakin, but it was changed by the judges for the final entry as Darth Maul looking for the Jedi. ...If that helps. --Hedec Ga 07:05, 03 September 2006

spelling
when i edited the page i spelled falleen and possibly CabaZan wrong could somebody check that? Ugluk

Make up
I suggest adding something that discusses his make up, specifically why he wears it. that was the information I was looking for and was disappointed not to see it.
 * It's tattoos, not makeup. -LtNOWIS 09:49, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * And it is mentioned in-article. They're Sith tattoos. Jasca Ducato Sith Council (Sith campaign)[[Image:SOFD.PNG|20px]] 10:38, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Next time try reading the whole article. Ugluk 02:29, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

List of Kills
Someone needs to find the old list and add it in somewhere, because I liked it, anyone agree?

Can't Darth Maul do Force Lightning? wheres it say he can do force lightning?
 * He certainly can, he just prefers raw power over Force power. As for your list, it would get removed real fast. We already had some List of Duels, which also got removed. List of kills is almost the same thing. - TopAce 17:30, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Not to mention almost all (if not all) of his known kills are already in the article, i know because i added them myself. Ugluk 02:30, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * in Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace (game) he uses it?

Cyborg maul image
I was on Starwars.com and noticed that the photomasher image this week was of the cybornetic Darth Maul. http://starwars.com/community/fun/photomasher/index.html?id=20060818 What is interesting is that this image differs slightly from the version displayed on this page. The photo masher version has a more Darth Vader like aesthetic to it. Other than that, the image seems almost exactly the same. I thought this was strange and wondered if anyone else might know more about it? -Smeagol 15:26, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Its properly exactly that, a more aesthetic cgi'ed copy of the image, nothing more =] Jedi Dude 15:29, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
 * After a little more comparison, it seems clear that they are actually entirely unique drawings with a lot of subtle differences. I personally prefer the version that is already in use in this article, though it is lower resolution.  I just wonder where the image masher version came from.  Smeagol 19:30, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
 * A bit old, but, both images are from Visionaries. They are both based on the same lineart, which is used in the comic on page 13, but are colored differently. The one in the comic follows the more minimalist style present in the rest of the comic, while the other version appears as a single illustration after the comic, and is colored and shaded in a much more detailed and realistic manner.

plasma complex thing
If Maul was sent to assasinate Qui-Gon and Obi Wan(the article says so),woulden´t it be more logical if he would have waited in some corridor and ambushed the jedi from behind a corner, than he was dumbly standig in the hangar like a boss in a video game :D, waiting for the jedi to come for  him? Hominid 19:15, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


 * But the Sith believe in power above all else (sort of), so Maul wouldn't be afraid of facing the two Jedi, so he'd want to face them head on and not ambush them. Good theroey though ;-) SecondSight 19:17, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Typical overconfident Sith.--Darth OblivionComlink[[Image:Sith_Emblem.svg|30px]] 19:20, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Stupid tattoo-face. Idiot that he is, letting himself be killed by a Padawan...
 * Keep opinions off of talk pages. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Imperial_Emblem.svg|20px]] 19:45, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * AND PLEASE SIGN COMMENTS! Ugluk: Destroyer of Redlinks 21:28, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
 * AGH!!! Sorry! I always forget to sign!--71.52.235.26 19:45, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Age
What's the source for Maul being born 54 BBY?
 * TimeTales gives the source as "SW Journal: Darth Maul. [Page 17]" - Kwenn 19:49, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Zabrak?
Is Maul's status as a Zabrak G-Canon?--Etapelba 21:26, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure. It wasn't mentioned in the films, and I don't know if GL said anything about it. I think it's C-canon.--Darth OblivionComlink[[Image:Sith_Emblem.svg|30px]] 21:30, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I have a feeling that Lucas didn't make Maul & Eeth Koth be the same species. I wonder which book first mentions Maul as a Zabrak?--Etapelba 08:16, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I have a feeling that Lucas did. Jasca Ducato Sith Council (Sith campaign) 09:19, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Sure, you're probably right. I'm just wondering if it's G-Canon, or if it isn't, which book is it first mentioned. --Etapelba 05:35, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Is about the difference in their appearances? Maul and Eeth Koth are different subspecies of Zabrak.-- Lord Oblivion Sith holocron[[Image:Sith_Emblem.svg|30px]] 05:48, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
 * No. I'm wondering if it's G or C canon. I haven't read the Ep I screenplay or novel. I think that in Saboteur he's only described as an Iridonian and in Shadow Hunter his species isn't mentioned, but in Labyrinth of Evil or Episode III Obi-Wan mentions he's a Zabrak.--Etapelba 20:08, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
 * The Zabrak hail from Iridonia. So a Zabrak is an Iridonian, or vice versa. Jasca Ducato Sith Council (Sith campaign) 20:11, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but does the Episode I novel include that Maul is a Zabrak from Iridonia?--Etapelba 09:44, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, I don't really understand why you want to know that. Many characters' races, seen in the movies, are not really established during the making of the films. That task is often secondary, and backstories of characters, including their race, are established especially for the universe coherence. And the official Databank says Darth Maul is a zabrak, so... Kaal 12:52, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm just curious, sometimes it's hard to know where G-Canon ends and C-canon begins. I assume it's mentioned in the screenplay.--Etapelba 05:05, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Image
That image we have in the infobox...is just plain bad. Do you think we could have a portrait, something along the lines of this - .  .  .  .  22:07, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I do agree with you. However, I'd rather have the current image then that one. In fact, I prefer this one over both. Any objections? -- Redemption Talk [[Image:Uglykotoricon.svg|15px]] 02:49, 21 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Is there one that's a tad further back? .  .  .  .  03:45, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Title
Why is the title of this article Darth Maul?
 * Erm, because that is his name. That might have something to do with it. Darth Abeonis Sith Council (Sith Campaign) 08:47, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes but all titles are omitted in the name of an article--Herbsewell 15:47, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Maul vs. Vader fight canon?
Was this fight made canon? Seems as though it was. Just not sure by what. The non-cannon tags hasn't been in the Anakin/Vader article for a while. If so, they should be removed in this article. TIA -Fnlayson 21:39, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that fight is canon. .  .  .  .  21:54, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * OK, looks like the mention Leland Chee's blog is it. I was expecting a mention in another source. -Fnlayson 22:08, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Lightning
Has Darth Maul ever been canonically noted as being able to use force lighning, and if not would this lead one to believe that his fall to the dark side was not complete as a result of never knowing the lightside of the force as Anakin or Dooku had, among this the only telekenetic power I've noted him as using was force push/pull for retrieving a saber or in TPM when he opened the hangar door... I'm quite interested to know if anything else has been shown in a canon source
 * Well everyone knows that Maul was never a Jedi in the first place, so what understanding he had of the Jedi, and the light side as a whole came from Sidious. Darth Abeonis Sith Council (Sith Campaign) 09:04, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Right my question would be though, I've heard it said that there is a story that has Maul brought to the lightside after his final death, and having a regular force-ghost, so is this possible considering that, through the lack of an apparent ability to use lightning that he still had, in some way shape or form, good in him, considering that his power with the dark side hadn't truly come from hate but from what he was taught?  N.Y.N.E. Comlink[[Image:sithempire2.png|30px]] 18:52, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * That sounds like fanon to me and goes totally against his character. I don't think there could be any good in him having been trained from a young child to use the dark side. What's your source? Also, I doubt Maul had yet learned how to preserve himself as a ghost. Sidious would have no reason to teach him that if he himself knew.--DannyBoy7783 09:10, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
 * That is speculation, yes. And as for becoming a Force ghost. I highly doubt it, not in Palpatine knew how to accomplish that; thats why he spent all that time and effort trying to keep himself alive all the way up until 11 ABY. Jasca Ducato 10:03, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Maul used some red variant of Force Lightning in the TPM PC game. But I don't know about the canon status of that. DarthMRN 19:13, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I don't think Maul would have learned Force Ghost. I thought only Qui-Gon, Yoda, Annakin, Obi, and Luke knew it?

I Felt I Had To
[]

I stuck in this hyperlink to this Fan Vid because it is an awesome Fan Vid and I consider it an incredibly notable Darth Maul appearance, even though its not canon, so please don't critisice me, just watch it. Its great. Lord Vatrir
 * Wow, I just found out there is a hyperlink to the official website of Contract of Evil, and here I am, putting a hyperlink to watch it on Youtube. This is awkward. Darth Vatrir (Pronounced Va-Trear)

Spy Droids
Can anybody tell me how the spy droids are called which Darth Maul uses in Ep. I to find Obi Wan (I think)?

Cheers Droideka

probe droids

Darth Maul Concept Section?
I was wondering if we could put a concept section in for Maul. I found an interview with the art designer, Ian McCaig, and it has some great information on Maul's evolution and there are a handful of great pictures that can go with it. A few are concepts of Maul as well as version like him that came earlier. Or perhaps we could make a page on it? I know at this point Maul isn't as important as he was in 1999 but creating a new sith lord for the movies after 20 years was a big deal. Thoughts/opinions? Failing all of that, would it be acceptable to put the images up on McCaig's page as examples of his work? --DannyBoy7783 22:46, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * What about creating a gallery for Darth Maul conceptual art? Maybe that would be better. Or if there is a Darth Maul image gallery already I could just add it there.--DannyBoy7783 23:05, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Demolition?!?
Since when was this canon? Cutch 22:08, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
 * No idea, although I believe some appearances in that game are canon - Wade Vox and Aurra Sing, for instance - \\Captain Kwenn// &mdash; Ahoy! 22:19, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
 * It was never stated to be non-canon...and much as I hated to add that Maul was in it, the Prima Game Guide gave a little story about him being spotted by Jabba, as you can see here. &mdash;Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 23:46, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Uff da. Cutch 00:07, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, then ask Leland Chee.--Herbsewell 15:54, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
 * You can if you like but I just have to ask...why? It's in 2 canon sources, and it's not like it would be the first time he came back or anything so I hardly think it's contradicting anything. &mdash;Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 00:23, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not really supporting that notion. I'm just coining the phrase many wookieepedians have seem to adopted.--Herbsewell 00:51, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I always kind of just thought Maul was an Easter Egg. As far as I know, Leia as Boussh and Lobot's appearances aren't canonDarth Ceratis 01:37, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Who's bright Idea was this
This Image is kinda blurry and makes Maul look like a clown. the former one is much better Valin &quot;Tnu&quot; &quot;Shido&quot; Suul 20:45, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Considering your past presentations of infobox images, I do not think you are really qualified to give your input on an image. Image is exactly like Luke Skywalker image...oh wait...never mind. Of course you don't like it...-- Redemption [[Image:Redemptionusersymbol.png|25px]] Talk 20:59, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't like ity because it'sa poor Image. it cuts his head off. and for Maul the tint is all wrong. it makes him look stupid. I loved the New Grevious Image however Valin &quot;Tnu&quot; &quot;Shido&quot; Suul 21:10, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * It's the best one we've got. The previous one sucked. The image is actually extremely high-rez. (I think this is the 50th time I'm saying this) Get your monitor fixed. -- Redemption [[Image:Redemptionusersymbol.png|25px]] Talk 21:21, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * My Moniter is fine. the Image is Bad. Just like Lukes. and it's not just quality of picture. it's centering and position as well (especaily when it comes to Lukes) Valin &quot;Tnu&quot; &quot;Shido&quot; Suul 21:37, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The image quality is fine, yes. But I agree with Tnu, sort of. That image is too much of a close-up. It's so close, it cuts off the bottom of his chin and the top of his head. We can't even put one on Boba Fett that chops off the tip of his jetpack. This needs to be zoomed out. I'll see if I can find a better image, and propose it here on the talk page. Maclimes Zero''' (talk) [[Image:Infinite_Empire.png|10px]] 21:45, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Excellent, I don't even have to upload anything, because we already have a perfectly good promo shot. I recommend we use this one. Any objections? Maclimes Zero''' (talk) [[Image:Infinite_Empire.png|10px]] 21:53, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * It sucks. We don't want a "perfectly good" image. We want the perfect image. And as sure as hell isn't that one. -- Redemption [[Image:Redemptionusersymbol.png|25px]] Talk 21:55, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * That's your opinion by the way.--Herbsewell 21:57, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * And their opinion on the current one isn't just their opinion? Can't use that excuse here, kid. -- Redemption [[Image:Redemptionusersymbol.png|25px]] Talk 21:59, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * LOL Tell us how you really feel. ;) Frankly, I'm not a huge fan of it, but that extreme close-up image is not the perfect image either. So we're still in the same boat. Maclimes Zero''' (talk) [[Image:Infinite_Empire.png|10px]] 21:58, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Shouldn't there be a vote?--Herbsewell 21:59, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * How long are we going to hold these votes?--Herbsewell 18:46, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Two or three more days considering it's New Years and people have better things to do then vote on an image. -- Redemption [[Image:Redemptionusersymbol.png|25px]] Talk 18:51, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * From my understanding, votes usually last two weeks normally, but picture votes only last one. So this vote will be open to the 5th Jan 07, at least. [[Image:DarthAbeonisSig2.gif|Jasca Ducato]] Sith Council Sith Campaign 18:56, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Option 1

 * 1)  Redemption [[Image:Redemptionusersymbol.png|25px]] Talk 20:59, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Head shot. .  .  .  .  06:31, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) QuentinGeorge 02:47, 6 January 2007 (UTC) - Down with low res.

Option 2

 * 1) [[Image:DarthAbeonisSig2.gif|Jasca Ducato]] Sith Council Sith Campaign 20:56, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Herbsewell 23:56, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) Valin &quot;Tnu&quot; &quot;Shido&quot; Suul 00:13, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) Option 1 makes me feel sick. Those teeth look like they haven't been brushed in years. Unit 8311 17:03, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Number 1 bugs my stomach to, number 2 is a proper portrait shot that hows his lightsaber as well. Darth Vatrir
 * 6) Way betterlighting that number 3 and i agree with Darth Vatrir about number one

Option 3

 * 1) Just a suggestion. Good picture, informative, shows his lightsaber ignited, and lets face it, its an iconic pose. Just a thought.Darth Vatrir
 * 2) *It's also a crappy screenshot... -- Redemption [[Image:Redemptionusersymbol.png|25px]] Talk 02:36, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Swiss Cheese
That's what this article is. The cannon, non-cannon, and ambiguously canon bits are all over the place and it makes it really hard to just read the canon stuff. I think the non-canon stuff should be pushed to the end of the article, just so there can be a continous flow.Darth Ceratis 01:39, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The non-canon and ambiguously canon material are in the article where they would take place in the timeline. If you don't want to read them, then there's lovely big tags around them that inform you when they start and stop...simply read outside these tags. &mdash;Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 01:58, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I know why they are where they are, and I know the tags are there so we can get around them, but I don't think it can really work that way in an article whith this much non-canon in it. you can only read for about two paragraphs before you are stopped by non-canon, then when you start up again you get stopped just another few paragraphs later, and so on. reading this article is like being stuck behind a schoolbus in a no-passing zone.Darth Ceratis 20:51, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Well are you just complaining or what?--Herbsewell 23:02, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * No, I'm not "just" complaining. like I said from the top, I think the non-canon stuff should be pushed to the end of the article to make it flow more smoothly.Darth Ceratis 00:14, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry&mdash;but it's this way everywhere. Policy, it seems, is policy. Cutch 00:35, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * It is, in fact, not everywhere. Take a look at Darth Vader, Boba Fett, Luke Skywalker, and Han Solo, just to name a few. You will find positively no non-canon information in said articles, despite the fact that they are all in several non-canon stories. Han's article in particular contains all the non-canon information at the very end, like I proposed here.Darth Ceratis 06:08, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * You may be interested in this Consensus Track thread. jSarek 06:12, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I've seen it, and I've cast my vote, and right now the majority is supporting the type of policies I'm suggesting for this article.Darth Ceratis 20:41, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, i beleive that at the moment the vote is "no consensus", and so it would be left as it is. [[Image:DarthAbeonisSig2.gif|Jasca Ducato]] Sith Council Sith Campaign 21:07, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * There's no consensus, but the policy I support is ahead by about five.Darth Ceratis 20:52, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * There's three seperate choices, so you can't just do a simple "A or B". [[Image:DarthAbeonisSig2.gif|Jasca Ducato]] Sith Council Sith Campaign 20:57, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * As of this point, choice A is at 16 votes, B is at 15, and C is at 21. Unless there's an unprecidented upset, It's pretty easy to see that choice C will win. I can't see why jumping the gun and getting a head start on fixing this could be a bad thing. I could be wrong, but I don't think any of the three options are being enforced right now anyway.Darth Ceratis 01:53, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
 * If you make any changes before the vote ends, i'll revert them. [[Image:DarthAbeonisSig2.gif|Jasca Ducato]] Sith Council Sith Campaign 12:29, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
 * If I was the kind of person who made changes in articles without support on the talk page, I wouldn't have said anything on the talk page to start with. Chill out. I'm not changing anything.Darth Ceratis 17:36, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
 * We should get rid of all the non-canon. It sickens me to see that we can just fling any piece of Star Wars material into an article and nothing is done about it.--The All-knowing Sith&#39;ari 21:16, 12 February 2007 (UTC)


 * No, this is an encyclopedia, so we have to include all the information. I'm just saying we need to trim some out and re-order it.Darth Ceratis 19:57, 21 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Are we ever going to reach a consensus on that thread?Darth Ceratis 05:59, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
 * The thread has been closed with a "no consensus reached, keep as is" result. This means that all of the noncanonstart/end sections are kept in their respective articles. &mdash;Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 07:41, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Grr. That doesn't make anybody happy.Darth Ceratis 23:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm happy. [[Image:DarthAb.gif|Jasca Ducato]] Sith Council Sith Campaign 20:51, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry guys, but I agree with Darth Ceratis, Darth Maul's article just looks messy, this is an encyclopedia, not an uncyclopedia, that's what the Star Wars fanon wikia is for right? By the way, rhetorical question, please nobody pull a Ric Olie and explain to me that it is for users to contribute their own work. From my point of view, non-canon sections of articles like the ones featured in this article are not any more canon than articles on the fanon Star Wars wikia, despite being created by a branch of LucasArts. An excess of non-canon just makes this article look sloppy, and you can't persuade me otherwise. - TheLostJedi  00:28, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I can't agree with Darth Ceratis or TheLostJedi: Any information from an official source should be included, or Wookieepedia would loose its encyclopedic value. Articles about Infinities characters, Tag or Sergio Aragonés's works require this kind of information. However, non-canonical or ambiguously-canonical information about clearly-canonical entries like this one, could be included in a separate article, say Ambiguously-canonical appearances of Darth Maul (which should be clearly linked from Darth Maul). I would only support this initiative in articles with a great amount of ambiguously-canonical appearances. This would leave a "less sloppy-looking" article for Darth Maul, and at the same time keep the rest of the information for those of us (including me) who love complete information about any canon. Anyhow, if this "moderate" alternative is not supported, I vote keep. - Skippy Farlstendoiro 07:46, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Hate Leads to Lollipops?!?
I noticed a part of this article that talks about Darth Maul as a child, breaking out of a "House for Wayward Boys". I've read the comic and it totally makes fun of Darth Maul, so why is it in this article? It is also totally non-canon and has no point to it. A Dark Lord of the Sith chasing after some stupid candy? Some TopAce guy got POed at me for removing it. I would just like to know other people's opinions on it, to see if I'm wrong here. So the question is, should it be on this page?
 * Yup, it should; even ridiculous Infinities stories get mentioned. Cutch 02:12, 31 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Alrighty then. Exar.Maul

Hope you guys dont minde i dealeted it.user:ivel
 * And I put it back. Did you not read the previous comment? Cull Tremayne 03:17, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Left Handed
I would like to state that darth Maul is Left handed, since his actor is Left Handed and has given all the characters he plays as that trait. Also, it states on wikipedia (list of fictional left-handed people) that he and Darth Vader are Left handed. While Vader is disputable, Mual is not. What does everyone think of me writing that? RC 2413 05:48, 12 February 2007 (UTC)


 * this is frustating, someone deleted my writings about maul being left handed even though I asked (see above) and i waited about four days before adding that info. Muals actor is left handed and wikipedia states that he always passes that trait onto whoever he portrays. The least that person could have done was talk to me about it, making sure whether I was wrong or right. RC 2413 01:57, 11 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I haven't checked if it's written in the current article right now, but, if it isn't it seems like it should be anyway. Anyone disagree? - TheLostJedi  01:34, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Too much fanon
I think we should delete some of these fanon articles, they ruin the article. Derek Yoda&#39;s friend 21:15, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Um, what? --  I need a name  ( Complain here ) 21:16, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I think he meant that he thinks we should delete the non-canon parts of the article. [[Image:DarthAbeonisSig2.gif|Jasca Ducato]] Sith Council Sith Campaign

It should most definitlie be dealeted!user:ivel march 19 2007

deletion
I think the non cannon iformation about Darth Maul when he was a kid should be deleted.
 * Read the above discussion, and sign your posts. Cutch 17:07, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Darth Maul and his position as Dark Lord
Darth Maul was not a Dark Lord. For the source and proof you people so badly need...

Source for the knowledge that there is only one Dark Lord and then a Sith Lord to serve and learn under him.

Excerpts from Darth Bane: Path of Destruction Page 240.

''"If all are equal, then none is strong..." '' Translation: There cannot be more than one Dark Lord at a time, there must be one to hold the title of true Sith Master, and the other (A regular Sith Lord) to crave it.

''"If the leader grows weak, another must rise to seize the mantle." '' . I.E. The mantle of Dark Lord.

"...In the end however, there could only be one true Sith Master(Dark Lord). And to serve this Master, there could only be one true appentice." (Of conventional Sith Lord status).

And now, the final and most compelling source for reason there is only ONE Dark Lord. From the pages of Darth Bane: Path of Destruction. Page 236

"There is also the reason there can be only one Dark Lord. The Sith must be ruled by a single leader: the very embodiment of the strength and power of the Dark side. If the leader grows weak, another must rise to seize the mantle. The strong rule; the weak are meant to serve. This is the way it must be."

Revelation? That was the Rule of Two.

If POD was good for anything, It was to help cement that concept, so there could be no misunderstanding or denying the fact that has been presented before you.

Accordingly, Darth Sidious was the Dark Lord of the Sith and his apprentice Darth Maul was a mere Sith Lord.

If you want, you can research POD for yourself and look the facts straight in the eye. Or you can just go on pretending that a canon source is wrong, and keep the errors on this page.
 * Dark Side Sourcebook, page 86: "Now he was a Sith Lord - Darth Maul, Dark Lord of the Sith." - Lord Hydronium 00:16, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
 * You're forgetting that eventually Bane decides that there shouldn't be just one Dark Lord, but two. From Jedi vs. Sith:

Your source for that exerpt?

You seem to be selectively grabbing quotes anyhow. So let's complete your first quote from page 240. "If all are equal, then none is strong. Yet whoever rose from the swollen and bloated ranks of the Sith to claim the mantle of Dark Lord would never be able to hold it. In time the apprentices will unite their strength and overthrow the Master. It is inevitable. Together the weak would overwhelm the strong in a gross perversion of the natural order. But there was another solution. A way to break the endless cycle dragging the Sith down. Bane understood that now. At first he had thought the answer might be to replace the order of the Sith with a single, all-powerful Dark Lord. No other Masters. No apprentices. Just one vessel to contain all the knowledge and power of the dark side. But he had quickly dismissed the idea."

- Darth Bane

From that right there, you can see that Bane dismisses the idea of one vessel containing all the knowledge. The idea of only one Dark Lord of the Sith. "Eventually even a Dark Lord would wither and die; all the knowledge of the Sith would be lost. If the leader grows weak, another must rise to seize the mantle. One alone would never work. But if the Sith numbered exactly two…"

- Darth Bane

Seriously, right there is the proof that Bane at first decided that there should only be only one Dark Lord, but then switched to decide that there should be two. Your final and most compelling source is from an earlier page before he had made this revelation. He changed his mind, as can be seen perfectly in the source that you cite. Maybe it is you that should try to research a little bit. Cull Tremayne 00:30, 4 April 2007

But if the Sith numbered exactly two…

Notice it dosen't say, If the Dark Lord's numbered exactly two...

Bane at first thinks that all the power of the Dark side should be concentrated in a single Sith, a single Dark Lord. But after studying the holocron created by Revan, he sees that a single Sith would of course perish after a time. After being with Kaan and seeing how easily he hands out the titles of Dark Lord to Sith that aren't even legitamately strong enough to hold it, he realizes the meaning in another one of the Sith proverbs, If all are equal, then none is strong. Dark Lord of the Sith is a title held by the strongest Sith, this fact is ridiculously obvious. If there are two Dark Lords, two Masters, then the Sith would be weak because both would hold the highest position in the Order. Also, they would both accordingly hold the title of Master and their would be no need for one to overthrow the other. That of course had been the goal of Kaan's Brotherhood. Also, as a reminder, before the fall of the Sith Empire, there had never been one Dark Lord, as I remember there had always been a Council of Dark Lords - which only a dozen or so would attain at any one time, out of thousands of other Sith. Bane understands that there must be only one Dark Lord and his student, accordingly not his peer would hold the title of Sith Lord.

"Eventually even a Dark Lord would wither and die; all the knowledge of the Sith would be lost. If the leader grows weak, another must rise to seize the mantle. One alone would never work. But if the Sith numbered exactly two…"

- Darth Bane

Seriously, right there is the proof that Bane at first decided that there should only be only one Dark Lord, but then switched to decide that there should be two.

Two Sith. Not two Dark Lords. Duh.

No, idiot. Making two Dark Lords makes no sense, see how it says, "another must rise to seize the Mantle"? If Maul or Dooku had been Dark Lords they would have had no reason to kill Sidious to seize the Mantle, because they would already have had it. If the leader grows weak, another must rise to seize the mantle. See? At first bane knew there couldn't just be a single Sith to have all the knowledge of the Darkside, then he understood from Revan that a student would also be needed, someone to become the Dark Lord when the Master was either usurped for the title (Ala Malak to Revan) or If the Master was killed some other way. Also, look at this: If all are equal, then none is strong. See that? Bane was disgusted at the idea of Kaan giving all the Sith the title of Dark Lord; He knew that If both Sith were Dark Lords than neither would have an advantage over the other since both shared the title. Remember, Sith do not share anything, including power. So then we refer to my original quote: "There is also the reason there can be only one Dark Lord. The Sith must be ruled by a single leader: the very embodiment of the strength and power of the Dark side. If the leader grows weak, another must rise to seize the mantle. The strong rule; the weak are meant to serve. This is the way it must be."

The Sith even numbering two, are lead by the Dark Lord, and the apprentice, a Sith Lord follows him until he can usurp his position as Dark Lord. After turning on and supposedly "killing" his former master Revan and usurping Revan's mantle in 3,957 BBY, Malak ruled the Sith unchallenged, brutally conquering territory after territory and taking on an apprentice of his own, Darth Bandon. See? Malak was just a Sith Lord first, he had to kill Revan to gain the title. Alright, now, After Malak "Killed" Revan, did Darth Bandon become a Dark Lord too? Darth Bandon was a male Human Sith Lord No... Even in the rule of two, Sith wouldn't turn on each other to usurp a title they each already possessed. I also get the feeling that however expanded on the concept of Darth Maul gave him the title of Dark Lord to sound cool. It dosen't sound like they actually knew the difference between a Dark Lord and a Sith Lord.

(UTC)
 * As should probably be pointed out, your final and most compelling source quote seems to be from Revan's holocron. That's not proof at all. Bane takes Revan's lesson and modifies it to his own needs. So unlike Revan (who decreed that there should only be one Dark Lord) Bane decided there should be two as witnessed in the quotes I brought up in the previous post. Cull Tremayne 00:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Bane takes Revan's lesson and modifies it to his own needs.

No, he didn't, he completely agreed with Revan's take on the idea of one Dark Lord leading the Sith and having an apprentice to eventually usurp his title. Bane agreed with Revan that there should be two Sith and no more, but one to lead the Order itself. As you can see, he followed Revan's teachings faithfully. Nice try at spinning the words around in the quotes and giving your own feeble-minded interpretations. Until you can eventually understand what Ive told you, your the one who needs to re-learn all you think you know.
 * Maybe you should try to understand the word interpreation first. The quotes you have brought up do not confirm that there is only one Dark Lord. The only OOU quote we can take seriously is the one already brought up: The Dark Side Sourcebook that says quite definitively that Maul was a Dark Lord of the Sith.

Maybe you should learn how to spell the word interpretation first. The quotes I've brought up and their simple explainations do confirm there is one Dark Lord. And no Dark Lord could be beaten by a simple Padawan. That, of course, is no knock on Maul but it gives salt to the fact he was only a Sith Lord. Not, a Dark Lord.

'''No, idiot. Making two Dark Lords makes no sense, see how it says, "another must rise to seize the Mantle"? If Maul or Dooku had been Dark Lords they would have had no reason to kill Sidious to seize the Mantle, because they would already have had it.'''

Wow, I don't know how you can misconstrue this. That wording only means that one of the Dark Lords of the Sith is greater than the other, the leader as you put it. It does not mean that Maul, Tyranus, and Vader are not Dark Lords of the Sith. It's great that you understand what "rise to seize the Mantle" means, but it does not confirm that there is only one Dark Lord of the Sith.

No one Dark Lord is greater than the other. Dark Lord is a pinnacle title, there is no equal to it, neither is there one higher than it. What I wrote above details this hilariously obvious fact. If both Sith Lords were Dark Lords, like Tyranus for example, he would have no need to kill Sidious to usurp the Mantle of Dark Lord of the Sith because he would already be one. That concept seemed funnily hard for you to grasp. You see what I mean though? Sith kill each other for that title. You obviously don't understand what "Usurping the mantle means" or I wouldn't have to re-explain this to you. If there were two Dark Lords, there would be no attempt to usurp the mantle, because (Now, here's the most important part for you to understand) they would both already possess the mantle.

At first bane knew there couldn't just be a single Sith to have all the knowledge of the Darkside, then he understood from Revan that a student would also be needed, someone to become the Dark Lord when the Master was either usurped for the title (Ala Malak to Revan) or If the Master was killed some other way.

No, no, no. As I already pointed out. Revan says that there should only be one Dark Lord. You pointed that out yourself. "This is also the reason there can be only one Dark Lord." Bane came up with the two Dark Lords thing all by himself. Even Bane confirms that in Jedi vs. Sith which I already quoted.

Bane understood from Revan that there must be only one Dark Lord, and then accordingly a student of lesser rank. A Sith Lord. If Jedi VS Sith says otherwise, then it only adds to the inconsistancy.

'Also, look at this: If all are equal, then none is strong.'' See that? Bane was disgusted at the idea of Kaan giving all the Sith the title of Dark Lord; He knew that If both Sith were Dark Lords than neither would have an advantage over the other since both shared the title. Remember, Sith do not share anything, including power.'''

What exactly is your point about that quote? Have you read Jedi vs. Sith, and the entire quote which I already mentioned? "Just one vessel to contain all the knowledge and power of the dark side. But he had quickly dismissed the idea." How can you not understand what he had dismissed the idea means? I won't mention the JvS quote again, but if you read that again, you can see that yes, Bane is disgusted with the way that Kaan makes everyone a Dark Lord, and yes, Bane believes that there should only be one Dark Lord however, he changes his mind as can be seen perfectly in the quotes I already mentioned.

He dismissed the idea of one Sith to exist, not one Dark Lord (Who is accordingly the leader). And your missing something VERY important, If all are equal, then none is strong. Even a complete imbecile can tell that means If there were two Dark Lords that they would both be weak because they both shared the same position. Dark Lord. Bane hated that idea and learned from Revan there had to be One Dark Lord. He already knew that one Sith couldn't make it, but knew there had to be only one Master (Dark Lord) and one apprentice (Sith Lord, lesser rank? Duh?) for the Sith Order to make it. My point with that quote was that in the rule of two, both Sith could not be equal, and If they both shared the highest rank in the Sith Order, guess what? That would make them both equal!

'''"There is also the reason there can be only one Dark Lord. The Sith must be ruled by a single leader: the very embodiment of the strength and power of the Dark side. If the leader grows weak, another must rise to seize the mantle. The strong rule; the weak are meant to serve. This is the way it must be." The Sith even numbering two, are lead by the Dark Lord, and the apprentice, a Sith Lord follows him until he can usurp his position as Dark Lord. After turning on and supposedly "killing" his former master Revan and usurping Revan's mantle in 3,957 BBY, Malak ruled the Sith unchallenged, brutally conquering territory after territory and taking on an apprentice of his own, Darth Bandon. See? Malak was just a Sith Lord first, he had to kill Revan to gain the title. Alright, now, After Malak "Killed" Revan, did Darth Bandon become a Dark Lord too? Darth Bandon was a male Human Sith Lord'' No... Even in the rule of two, Sith wouldn't turn on each other to usurp a title they each already possessed. I also get the feeling that however expanded on the concept of Darth Maul gave him the title of Dark Lord to sound cool. It dosen't sound like they actually knew the difference between a Dark Lord and a Sith Lord.'''

Look, I totally agree that Malak wasn't a concurrent Dark Lord of the Sith with Darth Revan. The quotes from POD confirm it. No one is debating that. However, under Darth Bane's rule of two, there are two concurrent Dark Lords of the Sith. The quotes prove it, and quoting Revan's interpretation doesn't confirm anything at all but the way Revan worked with the Sith Lords. In fact, Revan is more like Kaan than Bane. There are multiple Sith Lords ready to snatch the title from Revan. Under Bane, there are no other Sith but the two Dark Lords of the Sith. One to obtain the leadership, and one to be the teacher.

One to obtain the leadership, and one to be the teacher. That makes absolutely no sense. The teacher would be the leader, not the student.

And Revan had many Sith Lords under him, not multiple Dark Lords like Kaan.

No, he didn't, he completely agreed with Revan's take on the idea of one Dark Lord leading the Sith and having an apprentice to eventually usurp his title.

That's one interpreation, and since other sources (NEC DSSB) say that he was the one to come up with the rules of two and two Dark Lords of the Sith, we have to go with the interpretation that he took Revan's idea of "This is also the reason there can be only one Dark Lord." and "dismissed the idea" so that there could be two Dark Lords of the Sith. As mentioned above, two Dark Lords makes no sense. Perhaps the person who wrote the DSSB took Bane's quotes out of context.

'Bane agreed with Revan that there should be two Sith and no more, but one'' to lead the Order itself. As you can see, he followed Revan's teachings faithfully.'''

He did? He dismissed the idea. Do you not understand what that means?

He dismissed the idea of a single Sith, not a single Dark Lord. Revan gave him the idea of Rule of Two, which he carried out.

'''Nice try at spinning the words around in the quotes and giving your own feeble-minded interpretations. Until you can eventually understand what Ive told you, your the one who needs to re-learn all you think you know.'''

You're accusing me of spinning the words? You're trying to take quotes by Revan and apply them to Bane's philosophy. Do you not see that it is you that needs to re-learn whatever this odd vendetta against Maul being a Dark Lord of the Sith? Cull Tremayne 02:27, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Can you learn a little format before your next posts? It's a little difficult navigating what you're saying when you're bolding random stuff and separating sentences with line breaks that don't seem to line up. Cull Tremayne 02:34, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * If you're going to call someone "wrong", it always helps to have more than a flawed interpretation of a single source at hand. In addition to what you've already been shown, the Expanded Universe repeatedly and unambigiously refers to Maul as "Dark Lord of the Sith". Even the official site does, as seen here.
 * A fittingly fearsome vessel for its deadly pilot, the Sith Infiltrator is the personal starship of Darth Maul, Dark Lord of the Sith .
 * Because I'm a nice guy, here's some background. For George Lucas, "Dark Lord of the Sith", "Sith Lord" and "Sith" are synonymous. They're not "titles" merely different terms for the members of the Sith Order. The Expanded Universe, possibly confused because Vader was originally the sole Sith in the EU, misinterpreted "Dark Lord" as a unique title. After the prequels, this was seen to be incorrect, so the Kaan/Bane transition from unique title to common title was introduced to reconcile this.
 * Thus endeth the lesson. -- QuentinGeorge 03:43, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
 * And as mentioned above, the Databanks undeniably name Darth Maul as a Dark Lord. So he is, end of. [[Image:DarthAb.gif|Jasca Ducato]] Sith Council Sith Campaign 11:04, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

You're trying to take quotes by Revan and apply them to Bane's philosophy.

Bane's philoshphy on the Rule of Two stems from Revan's teachings, remember?

Do you not see that it is you that needs to re-learn whatever this odd vendetta against Maul being a Dark Lord of the Sith?

I don't have a vendetta against Maul, I think he's one of the coolest Sith Lord's ever. But I know a Dark Lord would never get diced up by a Padawan. Dark Lord is as much a rank of skill and power as it is of leadership. Maul is truly not a Dark Lord.

Lastly, your interpretation of Bane's quotes is what is flawed. It proved an obvious fact that has yet to be completely rectified in Star Wars.
 * Look anon. You need to realise, that you are the one who is wrong. Darth Maul is' a Dark Lord, and nothing you say will change that. Under Darth Bane's teaching, the Rule of Two says that there are always two Dark Lords. "No more, no less." Darth Maul = Dark Lord. End of. This discussion is now moot. [[Image:DarthAb.gif|Jasca Ducato]] Sith Council Sith Campaign 08:00, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

"a Dark Lord would never get diced up by a Padawan."...hahahaha, this is really funny. What makes you think that is impossible? I know of a Dark Lord who suffered worse defeat than this. That Dark Lord got thrown down a reactor shaft by a half human, half machine being with one amputated hand. Not hard to figure who rite? N i agree, the use of the word Sith Lord and Dark Lord is interchangable. Anakin described Palpatine as a Sith Lord. And Obi-Wan later called Palpatine a Dark Lord. N Vader was described to be a Dark Lord, despite having Palpatine around. -Naz-

Jedi Maul
Shouldn't the jedi have found Maul? Maxi6
 * Not always the case. Anakin lived on Tatooine, and it was pure chance that they found him. Maul might've been born in the Republic, but the Jedi don't have little trackers following every new born, they're bound to miss a few, one of which, Sidious picked up. [[Image:DarthAb.gif|Jasca Ducato]] Sith Council Sith Campaign 08:28, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Pity for him.
Am I the only person who feels kinda sorry for him. Sidious basically screwed him. He kidnapped him and made him the way he was. I'd like to know if anybody else thinks so to.
 * I never really thought it that way...
 * You have a point. Darth Vatrir
 * I have always felt sorry for Maul... :(
 * Why are there suddenly tens of completely pointless topics infecting the talk pages?--Herbsewell 23:10, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Skin Color
Why is his skin red and black and not human colored like a normal zabrak? -Gimodon
 * Who said normal Zabrak are human colored? Zabrak can be red, orange, yellow, and different shades of brown. He's non-human so it shouldn't match User:Darth Matas
 * It's tattoos.

s
you say Darth Maul's "overconfidence was his downfall" when he died witch is very touchy I wouldn't call it overconfidences its not really a fact I'd say it was move careless not to remember the light saber still on the ground
 * Erm, that's what being overconfident is.  Jasca Ducato Sith Council 13:38, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, not exactly. I mean, it's not as if he thought, "Oh yeah, there's still that lightsaber on the ground, but I don't need to worry about that because I'm certain to win anyway." He just overlooked it. --76.5.175.84 04:23, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

New Pic
Good morning! I hope no one minds, but I added the picture of Darth Maul & Darth Sidious from Jedi vs. Sith: The Essential Guide to the Force under the section where it discusses his Sith training. I also added links to the Second Battle of Theed, Sai tok, and the aforementioned essential guide. --Tommy 07:22, 21 December 2007 (UTC)User:Tommy9281, 12/21/2007 2:17am

Profile Image
I say that we remove the image around the bottom of the page that is the same as the profile image. Why do we have two of the same images in this article?CC 0019 21:37, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Because someone screwed up somewhere. It happens. -- Redemption [[Image:Redemptionusersymbol.png|25px]] (Talk) 21:39, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Sithspawn
Why is Darth Maul categorised as SithSpawn. According to the Sithspawn article - "Sithspawn were creatures altered by Sith Alchemy for use by the Sith Order. " Maul was hardly altered, he had some tatoos done but that was it. -Kalak Ragnose

Personality?
Is it just me, or shouldn't Darth Maul have a personality section?
 * Sure, go ahead and make it yourself if you want to. And you know enough about him. I'm afraid I haven't read any books with him in so I don't know much about him. One of the reason's he doesn't already have one may be that he doesn't have enough personality? not sure about that. and don't forget to sign your posts. - Kingpin13Cantina Battle Ground 10:40, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't know much about him, and I don't have a user name, so if there are any darth maul experts, there gidance could make this article great. - unsigned comment by 125.239.125.179 09:19, 12 May 200