Talk:Palpatine/Legends

Archived talk: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4

Question
In an interview with Film Review magazine in April of last year (which can be viewed here), Ian McDiarmid explains to the interviewer that, regarding Palpatine: "I am categorically assured by George Lucas, and he’s the one who knows, that he’s dead." Would this then negate all of the stories of Palpatine surviving, since Lucas' word is G-canon? Adamwankenobi 21:55, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
 * Lucas himself was actually praised Dark Empire, so I doubt it. -- SFH 21:57, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
 * Maybe the guy who plays Palpatine thinks he died at Endor, but in-universe, he survived alright. Admiral J. Nebulax 22:55, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, Palpatine is dead... He was killed by Empatojayos Brand on Onderon. So what he told you was true...from a certain point of view - Kwenn 23:00, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
 * It depends on what death. Admiral J. Nebulax 23:04, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
 * No, he isn't dead. He's just trapped. When you estabilish a character to be immortal, trapping him is the only way to go. --Master Starkeiller 21:49, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, as far as the Galaxy at large knows, he's dead. Admiral J. Nebulax 21:50, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * &mdash;"There are things that go beyond the understanding of a space pirate."
 * &mdash;Luke Skywalker http://forums.starwars.com/share/img/emoticons/wink.gif http://forums.starwars.com/share/img/emoticons/wink.gif http://forums.starwars.com/share/img/emoticons/wink.gif http://forums.starwars.com/share/img/emoticons/wink.gif --Master Starkeiller 22:24, 25 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, still, those who don't understand this probably believe he's dead. Admiral J. Nebulax 01:04, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
 * He's currently trapped in the eternal madness of the dark side, according to the Essential Guide to Characters. Not the kind of immortality he was hoping for - Kwenn 18:10, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Hey, maybe whoever locked him in left the key inside the cell. ;) Admiral J. Nebulax 21:06, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Order 66
Did he give it once, like the book says, or did he really give it to all the commanders, individually? The book was better than the movie - Yoda1300 17:22, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
 * My guess: Palpatine issued the command to Commander Cody personally because he wanted to make sure Obi-Wan was dead and buried. Then he just sent it out to various corps commanders and let it trickle down to the troopers at the front. It would've taken him days to personally give out the order to every single clone commander in the galaxy. --AdmThrawn 17:27, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
 * That's true. Admiral J. Nebulax 20:20, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I wrote that part of the article, and I can only tell you that the ROTS young adult novelization (p. 122) says he contacted each commander individually. I totally agree, that's a whole lot of work to do, but if the book says it happened, shouldn't we consider it canon until another book says otherwise? Erik Pflueger 03:47, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
 * How many commanders are there? Do we know?--DannyBoy7783 06:55, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, I'd say a lot. Admiral J. Nebulax 20:33, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I believe Dark Lord: The Rise of Darth Vader mentions Olee Starstone finds evidence that at least 200 Jedi were killed during Order 66, so that would imply a similar number of commanders - though there may have been multiple Jedi on some worlds, a la Yoda, Quin and Luminara with Gree on Kashyyyk, or Barriss and Aayla with Bly on Felucia - Kwenn 20:36, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, how many divisions were there that are commanded by commanders? Admiral J. Nebulax 20:37, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
 * The book Yoda1300 refers to is the adult novelization. It does seem that it's the exact same message, and that Palps doesn't wait for individual confirmation. But it hasn't been established as a part of cannon yet. Hard to call, this debate is--Erl 22:25, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Perhaps he sent it out to all the commanders at once, except for Kenobi and Yoda, because they were the largest threats to him. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 22:36, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Article size
For those of us on dial-up, this page is entirely too large (140 KB takes over a minute and a half for me to load). I was wondering if we could break it up wikipedia-style -- i.e. under one or two of the larger sections have a summary and link to a new page. This failing, could we at least trim some of the pictures (such as the two images of Palpatine with basically the same pose -- look under "abilities and traits")? Thanks. RMF 04:30, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
 * This has been discussed before, and it has been decided numerous times not to do so. Admiral J. Nebulax 20:31, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Numerous? I thought it was only decided once.  I still think that splitting the bio off to another article wouldn't hurt, but I think RMF and I are the only ones who like the idea. &mdash; Silly Dan 22:44, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
 * It was definitely more than once. More are in favor of keeping it as is. Admiral J. Nebulax 00:18, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I could only find one discussion on archive 4 of the talk page. (I'm not counting the discussion on Talk: Darth Sidious where we decided not to have separate articles on Palpatine and Sidious.) &mdash; Silly Dan 13:20, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, before the latest one, there was another one a while back... Perhaps someone deleted it. Admiral J. Nebulax 20:30, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * One vote was actually on Erik Pflueger's article prose, but it was essential a vote on the article's length...Good thing it was a vote, because most of the admins wanted to change it. Palpatine's article was saved by democracy. Ironic. -- SFH 20:39, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Wow. I'll say. Admiral J. Nebulax 20:41, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Once again, I'm in favor of shortening this article. Length, writing, images, everything. At this point adding or removing images is a chore because you have to switch every image after it. Many of them are very similar as well and could be removed. It's just too long.--DannyBoy7783 20:46, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Not another damn vote... Admiral J. Nebulax 20:47, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I didn't ask for a vote. I noticed the topic came up again so I'm responding. A number of people think this article needs to change. I'm simply voicing that opinion.--DannyBoy7783 20:50, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * It wasn't in response to you, DannyBoy. Admiral J. Nebulax 20:51, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok--DannyBoy7783 20:52, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm just saying that votes appear to be the only way to solve a problem on this page now. Admiral J. Nebulax 20:54, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * For good or bad, they tend to get more users involved.--DannyBoy7783 20:58, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * That's not the point of a vote, though. Admiral J. Nebulax 21:10, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I assumed the point of a vote was to get users to give their opinions on an issue that was no longer progressing via discussion.--DannyBoy7783 21:17, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, it doesn't seem like that anymore. Admiral J. Nebulax 21:22, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes a number of people have stated that there article should be shortened. A larger number has said the article is just fine on two separate occasions. And the second vote, mind you, was, as of the 27th, three weeks ago, so lets cool your ion engines, okay? -- SFH 21:26, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * A larger number. See? If there was to be a vote, the outcome would remain the same&mdash;keeping it as is. Admiral J. Nebulax 21:28, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Making it larger: It's fine as it is. --Master Starkeiller 22:48, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * See? This article won't be split. Admiral J. Nebulax 23:34, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

"Triad Of Evil"
Palpatine knew that the end was near, and gave the majority of the galactic capital defense fleet to take down a "triad of evil".

Um, maybe I haven't gotten enough sleep, but that sentence makes no sense to me. Thanos6 20:54, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it does. He knew that the CIS would strike at Coruscant, and he sent a lot of the Coruscant defense fleet to attack three CIS-held planets, planets Palpatine called the "triad of evil". Admiral J. Nebulax 21:07, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Then we need to say so, because that was incomprehensible to me. Thanos6 22:20, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, then. Admiral J. Nebulax 00:45, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Alderaan WMDs
Er... where does this information come from regarding Palpatine's irrefutable evidence that Alderaan is developing weapons of mass destruction (line 418, or 416, or something like that)? Is this really something that was written, or is someone just trying to create more George W. Bush parallels?Cutch 17:59, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
 * It wasn't WMDs, just weapons, I believe. Admiral J. Nebulax 21:04, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, it definitely says "weapons of mass destruction"... and, as we all know, some people get very up in arms about the definition of WMDs. Should we change it to read weapons? Also, again - where does this come from? Cutch 22:05, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Change it to weapons. Admiral J. Nebulax 00:51, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I read about it in The Essential Guide to Planets and Moons. The term they used was "Bail Organa's biowar virus". That fits the WMD definition in my book. -- SFH 00:56, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, then, no change. Admiral J. Nebulax 01:06, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, folks, I was the one who put that bit in, and it was based off of material from the Galaxywide NewsNets articles from the Star Wars Adventure Journals of the 1990s. All subsequent references to this were based off of these articles. As for the Bush parallels, I'm a Republican, always have been, and I voted for Bush twice. As such, I'm hesitant to make such parallels unless the material clearly says it does, just as I'm hesitant to put any of my own junk in unless the material says so. That certain writers (Luceno comes foremost to mind) have made such parallels in the GFFA is clear (Department of Homeworld Security as a stand-in for guess-what?), and cannot be dismissed, but even that doesn't mean they think Bush is no better than Palpatine; they may have been using the language of our time to make their stories more comprehensible to the reading audience, just as I did when I used the phrase "weapons of mass destruction" (and who can deny that's what bioweapons are?). No such parallel, either direct or indirect, is present in the films themselves, and in any case, the broad outlines for the prequels were laid out in the 1970s. For this reason, a superb case can be made for Lucas basing the story of Palpatine in part on Richard Nixon (Lucas has repeatedly said as much), but far less so on Bush (he's not said this, and, according to some, has even denied it). Erik Pflueger 08:25, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Does it really matter? :P -Danik Kreldin 08:31, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, I don't like the idea of having something saying that Bush was similar to Palpatine. I still think that it should be removed if Lucas never said anything about it. Admiral J. Nebulax 12:35, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I sympathize with you, believe me. I remember moving the "political inspiration" section around just so I wouldn't have to see Bush's name sitting right next to Hitler's. So I changed the phrase to just "bioweapons" and reworked the grammar accordingly. It's actually more precise that way, anyway. If anyone wants to make a Bush parallel, let them, but I won't make it easy for them. ;) Erik Pflueger 21:23, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
 * It looks better now anyway. Admiral J. Nebulax 21:43, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, Bush's name seems very appropriate next to Hitler's to me. As long as it is mentioned, it's fine. 'Cause to some people, including me, the parallels are crystal clear. --Master Starkeiller 15:29, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, 'Keiller, that's just going to have to be one of the rare occasions where we disagree. Strongly. As always, you're free to have your opinion. When I get some energy (I'm recovering from a stomach virus... Ugh!), I'll be happy to discuss the matter, but on your personal page. We're so immature if we bog down this discussion page with this done-to-death topic. Be good out there! ;) Erik Pflueger 19:16, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Stop by my page any time. It's always a pleasure to call Bush names (I will present my reasons for doing so of course). --Master Starkeiller 12:58, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Sigh... I'll just keep taking the high road here... ;) Erik Pflueger 15:17, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Come on, no political debates here. Admiral J. Nebulax 20:24, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Jack. Erik Pflueger 21:36, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Damn you, Bush! Quit ruining the universe! --Imp 21:50, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Wow... I really threw a turd in the punch bowl, didn't I? Cutch 21:51, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I didn't want to say this earlier to avoid a political debate, but, since one is occuring... I'm not for Bush either. Admiral J. Nebulax 23:16, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I haven't really been following this discussion until now nor am I too familiar with this extremely long Palpatine article but I noticed that Erik said the following: "I remember moving the "political inspiration" section around just so I wouldn't have to see Bush's name sitting right next to Hitler's." I don't know how much of a tie there was between Bush and Hitler in the article before you moved it (in other words, an anti-Bush comparison) but I would strongly urge all wookieepedians to not rearrange material in favor of one side or the other. Like I said, I don't know what the article was like before so I'm not accusing Erik of wrong doing here. I'm simply saying that if the article was shuffled to avoid that connection and it was legitimate then that's no longer a NPOV. This is more a non-specific public service announcement more than anything. Oh, and boo on Bush! ;)--DannyBoy7783 23:38, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
 * We have really shifted the topic of discussion from "Bail Organa's biowar virus" here...But in this topic; my only comment is this: While I have a low opinion of President Bush, I feel that the politics of the real world (particularly those of the United States) are too divise for this Wiki to handle. We get into enough spats over what to put into articles (especially on this page), so why bring in more? My advice for this is to look to the example of Odan-Urr: “The galaxy will live in tranquility if certain matters are a bit overlooked or left unheard”. What I'm saying is, let's just ignore it. -- SFH 23:47, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Admiral J. Nebulax 00:02, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I second that motion...Cutch 00:19, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay. Let's stop it here. Admiral J. Nebulax 00:20, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
 * All right, I'd just like to clarify that by saying what I said I didn't want to ignite a political discussion. If anyone wants to talk about Bush, he's free to visit my user page or invite me to his. I also agree that this has no place here. Ummm... Move along, move along... http://media.ign.com/boardfaces/4.gif --Master Starkeiller 18:53, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Good. Admiral J. Nebulax 20:11, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

THE MOST POWERFULL FORCE USER OF ALL TIME
..."As Anakin, he had the greatest known midi-chlorian count (a measure of Force-aptitude) in the Galaxy, surpassing both Yoda and the Emperor's count. However, after all of his limbs were severed and he was severely burned on Mustafar he lost much of his Force potential. As Darth Vader, Anakin was believed to have had roughly 80% of the strength of the Emperor. Had he sustained none of his injuries on Mustafar he would have been twice as powerful". George lucas said so himself....Anakin was the strongest force user of all time but he never got the chance to tap into his full powers...if he ever reaced close to his maximum potentail...god help us...he would have destroyed both the emperor and yoda together

Retrieved from "http://starwars.wikicities.com/wiki/Talk:Yoda"
 * Yeah... but he didn't. I think you need to stop worrying about how big people's "force power percentage" was. --Imp 14:22, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah. Admiral J. Nebulax 21:19, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * You also have to take into account training and wisdom. A simple force power percentage doesn't necessarily make someone better or stronger than someone else.--DannyBoy7783 21:32, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Exactly. A youngling could end up to be a very powerful Jedi, but only with the proper training. Admiral J. Nebulax 21:33, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

OH MY GOD!!!

 * I made a terrible mistake and the page was ruined! Someone with the power to revert please do it! I'm terribly sorry... --Master Starkeiller 15:16, 5 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Don't worry, someone's undone it already. If something like that ever happens again, all you need to do is go to the history and find the page before your edit, then you click edit and save :) YIIMM 15:25, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I tried it, doesn't work. It only allows me to edit the current page. --Master Starkeiller 15:26, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you misunderstood Starkeiller. In the future should that happen, go to the history page, lick on the date for the previosu edit so it brings up the older page. Click edit, then select all the text and copy it. Then return to the article, select edit, erase what's there and paste in the text you copied. Then save.--DannyBoy7783 23:44, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

THE MOST POWERFUL SITH LORD OF ALL TIME
Obviously the candidates for this are Darth Sidious and Darth Revan
 * Okay, 1) completely uncalled for and unnecissary, and 2) this would be better on the Sith article if it was important and did not involve one person's opinion. Admiral J. Nebulax 20:13, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
 * And Jibers, please stop posting your "What if?"s now. Admiral J. Nebulax 21:46, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Just for the record, at least two official sources have stated that Sidious was "the most powerful Sith Lord in history": The Dark Side Sourcebook and the New Essential Guide to Chronology.--Exor 17:45, 27 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Most powerful, certainly in the sense that only he could achieve to (nearly) destroy the Jedi Order. - TopAce 18:08, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not suprised that Palpatine is considered to be the most powerful. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 20:10, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

So how's about a new character box?
I saw a new format for a ship box at the Executor-class Star Dreadnought page, and thought it might be a good idea to try a new, sleek, updated character box for our hero. Incorporating the picture we all like, and using the up-to-date information from our current box, I gave it a whirl.

Arguments in favor:

1.) Adding the birth and death dates in the box may make the opening text less cluttered (I wanted to put the HoloNet News date for his birth in, and here seemed good. Please let me know if you disagree).

2.) Doesn't the color just go perfectly with Sidious' saber blade?

Of course, I didn't put it into the article yet, and I won't if I don't get the sense that it would be welcomed. But I put the sample here for you all to judge. So, what'dya think, folks? Erik Pflueger 04:49, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Shiny. I say go ahead and put it in. Saves alot of time if someone is looking for a few basic specifics without having to read through it all. Redemption 04:58, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, it's nice. Two comments -- the main is one that we are trying to shy away from individual infoboxes on most articles for a variety of reasons. We have had a variety of discussions about this lately, most recently over at Consensus track/New ship and vehicle infobox templates. Still, it's a good design, and we could use it as a template for all character articles, given few modifications. With our new templates (see Template:Ship and Template:Planet) we can "auto-hide" fields that we do not know, making it possible for us to create an in-depth character template that could cover any number of possible options. I agree though, the pl/plfs have got to go ;-). My second (and really minor) comment is that I don't particularly care for the term "Usage" for the last section. I think we can do better than that. RMF 05:06, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Awesome. --Master Starkeiller 10:07, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Far more superior. Admiral J. Nebulax 12:20, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * My mention of color brings something else to mind: should we change the colors depending on affiliation (i.e. red for Imperials and/or Sith, blue for Rebels and/or Jedi, another color for Fringe characters like smugglers, bounty hunters and such?) Or, perhaps, should every box, character, ship, planet or other, have the same color scheme? I wouldn't really mind if the colors for the Palpatine box were the same as the new blue-gray ship templates going around, since it was that template that got me interested in this question in the first place. Can we have some admins speak to us on this? Erik Pflueger 18:08, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I like that idea, Erik. Red looks good for Imperials. Admiral J. Nebulax 18:11, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Made some changes to the eras spot. Admiral J. Nebulax 18:13, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Jack, shouldn't we just stick to the names of eras as officially established at Lucasfilm? I concede that the Clone Wars has since become its own sub-era, since it was marketed that way. But the Galactic Civil War was covered in the Rebellion Era. Not that you did anything wrong, because you didn't, but I'm just thinking in terms of establishing a unified standard, just as RMF was taling about. Erik Pflueger 18:17, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * How about this, then? I personally think all of the era section on infoboxes should be done like this. Admiral J. Nebulax 18:25, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * And Erik, it's only a suggestion. This probably won't be the final one anyway, because I'm sure other changes will be made. Admiral J. Nebulax 18:25, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * No doubt, Jack, no doubt. And changes can improve things to a huge degree. My only remaining quibble with the changes you made is this: is the Imperial Era technically a LFL-sanctioned era? If so, go with it. If not, we'll have to make a change.

My understanding of the eras is that these are the relevant era titles and dates as established:

Rise of the Empire era: 1000-0 BBY Clone Wars era: 22-19 BBY Rebellion: 0-5 ABY New Republic era:5-25 ABY

Palpatine's lifespan was spread over all four of these eras, so I figure those all belong in the list.

Thanks for your support of the new box! Erik Pflueger 18:43, 11 February 2006 (UTC) I just created a new Wookieeproject for characters: WookieeProject Characters. Right now I only have an infobox (pretty much a rip-off of this one, but with auto-hide) but we can add more later. RMF 02:21, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * The Clone Wars are under the Rise of the Empire era. Great box, although the word "Usage" should probably be replaced. --Imp 18:49, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, I guess Clone Wars Era could be removed. And I agree that "Usage" should be replaced. Admiral J. Nebulax 20:04, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * As for infobox colors, can't we just go for colors that match the infobox picture? That's certainly more aesthetically than a fixed system based on affiliation. --Imp 22:07, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, and we could probably turn this character infobox business into a great WookieeProject. --Imp 22:13, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Good idea. I'll see if I can't throw together an auto-hide character infobox and post it on a new 'project. RMF 01:53, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I did a compressing of the eras and affiliations lists, by using commas. Just tweaking. As Jack said, it probably won't be the last time. Erik Pflueger 22:37, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * It looks much better now. Admiral J. Nebulax 00:20, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I changed "Usage" to "Chronological and political information". --Imp 00:26, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Much better. Admiral J. Nebulax 00:27, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm with the group on that: it does look much better. Erik Pflueger 01:28, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I may get slapped for this, but is there a place I can go to get the codes to input any color I want? I may want to use light gray, for example, but I don't know if, to do that, I need to type in #f0f0f0f0 or something else. Where's the codes to the spectrum? Erik Pflueger 01:39, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * There's a color wheel here. RMF 01:53, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks, RMF. By the way, I changed "Basic information" to "Biographical information," to better match the "Production information" bar of technologically-based template boxes. Erik Pflueger 02:32, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I like it better than the old version, but do we still need the hair and eye color? - TopAce 10:26, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah. I think it should stay. Admiral J. Nebulax 12:48, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Further discussion
Okay, here's how the Palpatine 'box looks with the auto-hide template. Think it's ready? Any other fields that should be added? If you guys think it looks better, we change the field titles to bold, like Eriks' box. RMF 18:33, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

We have been having this same basic discussion regarding ship/vehicle infoboxes recently. Relevant discussions: I agree though, we should develop a standard format for all categories&mdash;ships, vehicles, characters, planets, etc. We have several options: This is by no means exhaustive. There are probably numerous other pros and cons that I've forgotten; feel free to add them. I think making a number of auto-hide templates (for each affiliation) is our best bet overall, though there may be something I'm missing. Thoughts, opinions? RMF 22:27, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * That looks excellent! Good work, RMF! --Imp 18:36, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Hmm, what about color customization? Will we have to create seperate templates for infoboxes (such as Template:Infobox/All Terrain Tactical Enforcer)? --Imp 18:39, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Only if you want different colors for every character. The individual template for every article was one possible implementation of the new infoboxes, but we decided against it (well, the discussion's still in progress, technically: Consensus track/New ship and vehicle infobox templates). This version uses one central template, but automatically hides fields that are blank (unknown). Regarding colors, one idea that I had was to make several different charcter infoboxes, one for each major affiliation&mdash;e.g. a blue-colored box for the Empire and red-colored box for the Rebels, etc. If we ever wanted to change the colors, we would only have to edit one centralized template. What do you think? RMF 18:53, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a plan. I'll make a proposal for which affilations warrant separate infoboxes on the Character Project page. --Imp 19:00, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I prefer each character having a different color to match his or her main pic. --Master Starkeiller 19:24, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * That would be nice (see my sandbox for examples). Infoboxes could be placed at Arthur Everyguy/Infobox or something. --Imp 19:30, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * The Durge one looks SO nice in this color... --Master Starkeiller 19:43, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I think this one is good enough to add into the article now. Should it be added now? Admiral J. Nebulax 20:31, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Of course it's good enough, but maybe we should discuss how we're going to organize these infoboxes first. Uniform infoboxes for affiliations, or individual infoboxes designed to match the infobox pictures? --Imp 20:36, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I'd go with uniform infoboxes for affiliations. It just seems a lot easier. Admiral J. Nebulax 20:50, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Consensus track/New ship and vehicle infobox templates
 * Wookieepedia talk:WookieeProject Vehicles
 * Individual infoboxes for every article, included on the article's page:
 * Advantages: Allows sweet color customization, nifty infobox tricks like alternating lines of color, high level of flexibility
 * Disadvantages: Messy code; esp. for newbies, no real infobox standard across articles of the same category, extremely difficult to modify if changes become necessary
 * Individual infoboxes for every article, created as template sub-pages
 * Advantages: Same as before, removes messy code from article
 * Disadvantages: Essentially the same as before, also hard to organize and could get out of control.
 * Broad templates with auto-hide capability
 * Advantages: One centrally located template allows for easy change, if necessary, more organized, doesn't require numerous sub-pages or messy code like the others
 * Disadvantags: More limited flexibility, no color tricks
 * I completely agree with you&mdash;uniform infoboxes for affiliations is our best bet. With individual infoboxes for each character we'd get one hell of an organizational job. --Imp 23:27, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree. This is the best way to have it. Admiral J. Nebulax 23:59, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, Imp, I so loved your example boxes for Durge and Grievous that I'm beginning to think tailoring the color to the picture might be a really good idea after all (go to Imp's sandbox - linked above - to see the examples). As for this one, it's clear from the examples above that either red or gray works as a color for Palpatine's picture, and either would make me happy. What other colors can we try? Erik Pflueger 06:52, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't like the idea of uniform infoboxes for affiliations. On the other hand, mesa mooie mooie liken individual infoboxes for every article. --Master Starkeiller 11:58, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I'd really like to address your concerns, but we've taken up enough space on the Palpatine talk page. Let's move here and we can try to settle this. RMF 00:02, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, this current color isn't good at all. Stick with the red; it's much better. Admiral J. Nebulax 20:51, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I know that the discussion is continued in another spot, but does anyone agree with me that red show be used instead of gray? Admiral J. Nebulax 23:32, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree that the red did look somwhat better. However, being the one who changed it, I thought it was necessary because the red seemed to be the perfect color for the Rebel Alliance (given their emblem, obviously). I thought the darkish-grays would be appropriate for the dark side. See here for a list of all the diff. character templates based on affiliation. I'd have no prob. switching it back, if we could find a good substitute for the rebels. RMF 23:48, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
 * It's just that, when you think of the Sith, most people would usually think of the red lightsaber blades. Admiral J. Nebulax 23:53, 13 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Discussion continued HERE.

Lincoln, Nixon, etc.
What are the sources telling us that Lucas based aspects of Palpatine on Lincoln, Nixon, or other political figures? Due to the possibly controversial nature of identifying Palpatine with practically any political figure, we should probably give sources (through external links and references to books.) I'm sure I've read references where Lucas compares Palpatine to Nixon, Hitler, and Julius Caesar, but I can't recall them specifically.

Additionally, a big chunk of the section discussing the real-world parallels seems to be less about Palpatine being similar to real figures and more about Abe Lincoln being a bad president. This should probably be heavily edited as well as being sourced &mdash; it's as out-of-place as a polemic against current political figures.

(Yes, I know this was briefly discussed before with respect to George W. Bush. I'm sorry to bring it up again, but upon reading the current state of it, I don't like it, and I think it needs attention.) &mdash; Silly Dan 00:06, 15 February 2006 (UTC) I have a list of sites mentioning these parallels... maybe we should just place those somewhere under this heading as links? I wouldn't object to the simplification of that part of the article. Cutch 01:51, 15 February 2006 (UTC) http://www.lewrockwell.com/dieteman/dieteman113.html http://lancemannion.typepad.com/lance_mannion/2005/07/only_the_sith_d.html http://publicola.mu.nu/archives/2004/10/10/star_wars_the_unreconstructed_strikes_back.html http://www.jdedman.com/sw-civilwar.htm
 * I agree. While Lucas has probably stated all of this, it should be in one simple sentence (one for each U.S. President). Admiral J. Nebulax 00:33, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I have to say that I've added to part of the Lincoln reference (specifically the bit about SC Justice Taney); I remember Lucas saying it somewhere, and the parallels seem even more blatant than other political references, what with the Grand Army of the Republic, the Confederacy, a Civil War, etc. That being said... I DO think that Lincoln was the inspiration for Palpatine, and was, in truth, the closest thing to a dictator that the United States of America has ever had (or, frankly, will ever have). Anyone who wants to discuss this can come over to my talk page, but I won't fill it up here.
 * Put the links up on the talk page -- if they have sourced quotes, we're better off referring to them directly (I suspect a lot of those sites would have a real-world axe to grind, and therefore not relevant or objective enough to be external links.) Mentioning the obvious significant story parallels, such as the use of "Homeworld Security Command" by Luceno and Stover or the "Grand Army vs. Confederacy" parallels don't need sourcing, but talking too much about it without Lucas quotes could be interpreted as ascribing political opinions (on the right or the left) to Lucas that he may not actually hold. &mdash; Silly Dan 02:06, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me. For the most part, they ARE editorials, but if you dig through them, you can find some the parallels they cite. Even more interesting is that the first two are left-wing and the last two are right, as near as I can tell. Granted, I'd have to assume the site with the picture of the gun on it has a politcal agenda, LOL:

The last one really seems to be the most fact-based and researched. Cutch 02:08, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

To be honest, folks, the one historical or political figure I've ever heard Lucas make any specific reference to when describing Palpatine's character or actions is Nixon; you have only to listen to the ROTS commentary, or read any number of official behind-the-scenes books. Ceasar and Hitler were mentioned once in the AOTC commentary, but only once. Other references to politicians, whether Lincoln, Bush, or anyone else, have not been said by Lucas specifically, to my knowledge (and that's pretty extensive knowledge). He may have said something I might have missed, but I agree that the only way to do this properly is to cite quotes by Lucas personally. Then, at least we have the creator's words to back up anything we write - as it should be. Erik Pflueger 02:57, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Here's an article in the Billings Gazette that comes up when googling "Palpatine Bush Lucas". I recall similar articles (probably from wire services) popping up when ROTS appeared at Cannes.  It mentions that:
 * Rick McCallum recognized Bush parallels but claimed they were unintentional
 * McDiarmid compared Anakin's "If you're not with me..." line to Slobodan Milosevic
 * Lucas was inspired in the early 70s by Nixon, but says that "No matter who you look at in history, the story is always the same."
 * Lincoln is not mentioned at all, although the current state of our Palpatine article talks more about him than any other politician.


 * It seems to me that the blog posts Cutch links to mostly show that since Palpatine took the usual steps dictators have historically used to take control of democracies and constitutional republics, those inclined to think of Lincoln, Bush, Nixon, or any other politician as a dictator in the making will be able to draw parallels between Palpatine and their least favourite politico. Without quotes from Lucas (or, for that matter, any EU authors who've written about the Emperor), I'm inclined to say the Lincoln paragraph should be reduced to "Some fans see parallels between Palpatine and American President Abraham Lincoln, who also centralized political power in response to a secessionist Confederacy."  &mdash; Silly Dan 03:50, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree. Admiral J. Nebulax 21:22, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

OK everyone: the Sandbox has my proposed rewrite of that section. I think that whatever we do, we should keep that section short, and only add external links and references to actual Lucas or EU author quotes, rather than third-party editorials or weblogs. What do people think? &mdash; Silly Dan 04:14, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Be-autiful! Cutch 04:19, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I can totally live with this. Erik Pflueger 04:22, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Done. &mdash; Silly Dan 04:28, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Star Wars Roleplaying Game
This is listed as one of the sources. It'd be nice if this was elaborated a bit... --Imp 21:28, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes. Alone, it's not much of a source. Admiral J. Nebulax 21:30, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Too many quotes
Seems like there's a quote every couple of paragraphs in this article. Do we really need them? --MarcK [talk] 14:11, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure we really do. Erik Pflueger 18:44, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree, there are too many. Perhaps some should be deleted or moved to Wikiquote:Palpatine if they aren't already there.--DannyBoy7783 19:06, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, the majority should stay. Admiral J. Nebulax 21:29, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Did you ever think you'd see the day when Danny and I agreed on something about this page concerning too many words?! ;) Nevertheless, the majority should stay, it's just that they can't be thrown in haphazardly, just under section heads. I imagine that, once this baby is really hammered into shape and, especially, stabilized (that is, when we've incorporated all the information we have, and updates are limited to just putting in the occasional fresh bit of info), this won't be a problem at all. Let's just let the article mature; it'll all work out right. :) Erik Pflueger 04:27, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * If a quote seems inappropriate, then we should move it or remove it. But removing quotes for the sake of removing them is stupid. Most quotes in the article serve a purpose and should stay where they are. --Master Starkeiller 12:56, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Worry not, 'Keiller. I'm not for removing any of them at this time. They are all appropriate for the sections they're at, it's just a question of formatting. That's all. So may I suggest, everyone, that we not go to a long and drawn-out discussion on this? As I said, once this page is as complete as possible, then we can get a better idea of what needs to stay in the quote department and what does not. We may yet decide that nothing should be removed. But let that decision wait for now. Erik Pflueger 13:08, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree. Admiral J. Nebulax 20:38, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me.--DannyBoy7783 21:43, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Personally, I think the more quotes, the better. Admiral J. Nebulax 01:49, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
 * And you may just be right. Like Starkeiller, I won't cut anything just for the sake of cutting. And if it does the article good to have more, then by all means, let there be more, as long as they're inserted according to the format rules. As I said, we won't really have an answer, or need one, until a lot of other work as been done. Let people add quotes, if that's what they wish. Erik Pflueger 02:17, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
 * If the quotes talk about the subject of the article, keep them in. Admiral J. Nebulax 12:47, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Force Abilities
I just noticed that in the section about Palpatine's abilities and traits there is no mention of his power in the Force. Everything else about Palpatine's potential (lightsaber duelest, strategist, politician,etc) but not his most powerful trait: the dark side. Am I mistaken and this is covered elsewhere in the article? It is a long and complete article. I just feel that if Palpatine's mastery of the Force isin't addressed it wouldn't do the character justice. Or is it too obvious to include? Maphisto86 15:49, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
 * His most powerful trait wasn't the dark side. Plus, he wasn't a master of the Force. No one could be a master of the Force. Admiral J. Nebulax 21:21, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
 * What the heck do you mean Nebulax? What was his most powerful trait then?, and of course he was a 'master of the force' as he was a 'Sith Master'. I know it is impossible to actually master all of the force but that is not the point--Darth Mantus 11:52, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
 * The dark side alone was not his most powerful trait, as the dark side is not a trait. Traits are characteristics of a person. The dark side really can't be a characteristic. Admiral J. Nebulax 12:44, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
 * You are being difficult and arguing semantics Jack. Maphisto is trying to raise an issue here. If Palpatine's use of the Force (his abilities/manipulation of it) isn't covered then it should be.--DannyBoy7783 15:50, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I know it should be. I'm just saying that saying "the dark side was Palpatine's greatest trait" is not exactly the way to say it. Admiral J. Nebulax 15:53, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
 * That's not the issue here so ragging on the guy for poor wording isn't productive.--DannyBoy7783 16:18, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Fine, DannyBoy, but his greatest traits were dark side powers he mastered, not the dark side as a whole. Just saying. Admiral J. Nebulax 17:09, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Alright. Is it covered in the article?--DannyBoy7783 19:07, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure. If it is, it's probably not a lot. Admiral J. Nebulax 21:06, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I'll put Erik to work then :) --DannyBoy7783 23:36, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Hey, we could all work on it. Admiral J. Nebulax 00:15, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Seriously Jack, are you a robot? I was kidding man. Lighten up a little bit.--DannyBoy7783 00:33, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, since my opinion's been requested, here's my take. That Palpatine's very strong in the Force, to me, goes without saying. Just how strong, we don't know; no one's bothered to tell us his midi-chlorian count. But it's a moot point, because it doesn't tell us what his strengths really were. A lot of characters in Star Wars are strong in the Force. To me, his strengths, the things he relied on to come to power to a very large degree, are twofold:

1.) He had the ability to mask his power, and his identity as a Sith, from the most powerful Jedi in the order, even when they were right next to him. If that ability's been named yet, I don't know, I'll have to look it up, and my Star Wars library is in another house than the one I'm living in with my fiancee. But as early as the publishing of Rogue Planet (which is, what, 2000?), that ability's been mentioned, and even then I knew it applied to Our Hero. In fact, it is implied in both Labyrinth of Evil and the ROTS Visual Dictionary that he was born with the power to walk among his enemies unseen.

2.) He had the ability to foresee events. More specifically, I believe, he had the ability to look at the various potentialities stemming forward from the present, and knew what actions to take so that the potentiality he liked the best was the one that came to pass. This is not just a Force power, it's a Force power he exploited by using his own natural ability to navigate through the shark-pool that is politics. If someone else had that Force power, he still might not have been able to act on it if he lacked that natural ability.

So those are the biggies to me. The rest, that he can shoot some mean-ass purple lightning and such, is really less important to how he rose to power than those two. And more than both of those, comes the fact that he was, well, EVIL. Without that, both of those biggie powers wouldn't have been exploited so. Erik Pflueger 02:54, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Great stuff Erik, though even if his actual force usage (such as the lightning, throwing senate pods, etc) wasn't imperative to his rise to power it is still important to Palpatine as an individual. The focus isn't just his rise to power but every aspect of him whether it be major or minor.--DannyBoy7783 04:13, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Aye, you're right, DannyBoy. I confess I forgot about the throwing Senate pods around bit. Shame on me. :) I'll work on the minor aspects when I can. Erik Pflueger 13:13, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
 * He may be a great politician and puppeteer but he still has some impressive force moves as we've seen and read. Thanks for the help Erik.--DannyBoy7783 18:04, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't know if I really helped in the way any of you wanted, but thanks back. You're absolutely right, Dan, the man's got moves. The one fancy move (though it's not really a Force move) I've just been unable to take seriously is the one where he and Mace Windu are fighting in his office, the posse's already dead, he's just bouncing and flipping and spinning all over the place, and Mace is just slowly advancing, barely moving his blade, as if to say "Listen, I'll be right here whenever you're ready to actually duel me." I know Ian had very little lead time in which to practice some moves, and they relied on stunt doubles and CGI for the bulk of it, but that was just ILM going overboard, if you ask me. The rest I was fine with, because Ian sells it as an actor. And let's face it, none of us would put so much effort into the character's page if Ian hadn't sold him to us. He can throw Senate pods all over the place, but we buy it because Ian's spent the last two and a half films getting us invested. That's how good he is; a lesser actor would have failed. Erik Pflueger 04:19, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm just glad they didn't spoil the whole thing in Episodes I or II. Admiral J. Nebulax 20:33, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I just saw this: Force Storm. Pretty impressive.--DannyBoy7783 23:49, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Perhaps this was Palpatine's strongest trait. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 23:51, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Saying that the Dark Side of the Force is Palpatine's strongest trait isn't too far-fetched. He himself has stated "I AM the Dark Side.", and in Empire's End said he gave his soul to the Dark Side itself on Korriban. As I see it, you can't really define Palpatine's most potent ability. Let's face it, he's too well rounded; the man's a genius, a patron of the arts, a master strategist, harbors a deep understanding of psychology, is an outstanding politician, has an unparalleled connection to the Dark Side of the Force, and has nearly matchless saber skills. Really, all of these strengths should be cited without favor to any individual trait.--Exor 01:05, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Again, saying "the dark side was Palpatine's strongest trait" is too vague. You need to get more in depth on the specific trait that was Palpatine's strongest. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 00:42, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I never said it wasn't, I merely stated that it wouldn't be too out there for a person to believe. I believe all of his strengths should be cited without any particular emphasis made on any one trait as his strongest. --Exor 01:05, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Palpatine's most powerful ability was the Force Storm - which, coincidentally, was the most powerful and most destructive Force ability known. I have a complete list of Palpatine's known powers taken from the Imperial Sourcebook and the Dark Side Sourcebook, plus his RPG stats. I could always list them here if you guys want. -Danik Kreldin 01:13, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * If you wouldn't mind, please do. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 01:53, 1 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Alright, this is the list of Palpatine's known powers - but he was considered to have more, especially archaic ones. This based on the D6 sourcebooks, and are canonical; the three main stats for Force powers are Control, Sense and Alter. Palpatine's Control was 15D+2, his Sense was 17D, and his Alter was 15D+1, pretty much making him the most powerful Force user in the galaxy. For a comparison, Luke Skywalker, at the time of Dark Empire, only had 13D+1 control, 11D+1 Sense, and 10D+2 Alter.

Control: Absorb/dissipate energy, Accelerate healing, Concentrate, Control Pain, Detoxify poison, Enhance Attribute, Hibernation trance, Rage, Target, Reduce injury, Remain conscious, Reist stun, Short-Term Memory Enhancement

Sense: Combat sense, Danger sense, Instinctive astrogation, Life detection, Life sense, Magnify senses, Recepective telepathy, Sense Force, sense path

Alter: Injure/kill, telekinesis

Control and Sense: Farseeing, lightsaber combat, projective telepathy

Control and Alter: Accelerate another's healing, control another's pain, feed on dark side, Force lightning, inflict pain, return another to consciousness, transfer Force, battle meditation

Control, Sense and Alter: Affect mind, control mind, doppelganger, drain life essence, enhanced coordination, telekinetic kill, transfer life, Force storms

Sense and Alter: Dim other's senses
 * Thank you. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 20:46, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Age
Where did it come from?
 * If you check the archives, there's a source for it. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 23:43, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, archives? What archives? It's not that I don't believe you, someone from another site doesn't believe me about his age, so I have to fund the source. Don't you hate it when that happens?
 * It's here: Talk:Palpatine/Archive1. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 23:54, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I have to admit I was scared for a moment when I saw Age in Contents... --Master Starkeiller 20:46, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Why, exactly? Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 20:50, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
 * That was one of the biggest edit wars in Wookiepedia history...wouldn't want it to start again.&mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 22:31, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
 * That's why I call it the Great Edit War. If you're wondering why, it's name is based off the Great Sith War. -- SFH 22:51, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh. I believe that was shortly before I became a Wookieepedian. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 00:07, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, I was referring to something that happened when you were just starting out here (though you were only a commander in those days. 8) &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 00:14, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh. I really don't remember the days I was a commander... ;) Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 00:17, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Vader on the temple
I doubt this: Consider how many troopers the youngling that got killed in front of Bail Organa killed before getting hit and multiply that up by a decent number and I would have serious doubts that the 501st could handle the temple alone. -- TheDarkArchon 21:54, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, this shouldn't be in here. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 22:49, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I put this in there based on material from Dark Lord: The Rise of Darth Vader. I'll find the page numbers and quotes if necessary. By the way, regardless of how well Zett Jukassa acquitted himself, that doesn't mean that a detachment of battle-hardened clones whose maximum numbers were over 9000 couldn't take care of a largely empty structure whose complement, largely untrained, is quite significantly below that. In any case, the line is in there because the book said it. If an official source says it, it should be in here. Erik Pflueger 01:59, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. I didn't think there were that many clones in the temple and taking that into account would make a proper eradication by the 501st feasible but not without heavy losses (Though this shouldn't be mentioned in the main article as this is just speculation) -- TheDarkArchon 09:44, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, then. And if it's from a book, it probably should be in there. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 22:51, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Woah!
Hang on, hang on, hang on! Where do we get irrefutable proof that Anakin is indeed the creation of Darth Plagueis? I thought this was merely fanboy speculation...


 * Not only is it glaringly obvious in the movie, and not only is it more or less stated in the novelization, but it's pretty much confirmed in The New Essential Chronology. Whether it was Plagueis who was responsible, or Sidious after his master's death, is unknown, however. -Danik Kreldin 17:33, 8 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Err, I wouldn't consider the mention it has in the movie to be 'glaringly obvious', and I must admit I have read neither the novelization or the Chronology. Is there some way you could relate to me how the Chronology confirms this? I don't wish to start an argument but I would like some confirmation on this one way or the other, since the official databank implies that the circumstances surrounding Anakin's 'creation', whether through 'immaculate conception' or 'sith experiment' have not been fully revealed...


 * If you take everything said in the movie out of context, then I think it is obvious.. but, anyway, as for the Chronology...

from page 32... "Palpatine - under the Sith name Darth Sidious - learned dark traditions from Plagueis, but grew concerned over his Master's stated intentions to create life from nothing. The child that resulted from this Force miracle, Plagueis insisted, would be the living embodiment of the Force itself - and at that moment, Sidious knew that his Master was discussing Sidious's replacement. Soon after, Sidious killed Darth Plagueis in his sleep. The work necessary to create a Force-conceived child continued, however. It is unclear whether Plagueis had initiated the process b efore his death, or whether Sidious instead implemented his former Master's scheme for his own dark purposes.

On Tatooine, the slave Shmi Skywalker had given birth to a child more powerful in the FOrce than any other in history - the apparent product of forbidden research initiated by Darth Plagueis and taken up by Darth Sidious. This boy, Anakin Skywalker, had seemingly not been conceived by a human father, but by midi-chlorians themselves. Palpatine kept a close watch on Anakin as the boy grew. If trained as a Sith apprentice, such a child could be vastly more powerful than Maul."

from page 40... "Anakin's mother, Shami, confirmed in her own words what Qui-Gon had already suspected - the boy was immeasurably strong in the Force. Neither knew of Darth Plagueis's suspected involvement in inducing midi-chlorians to create life, though Shmi informed Qui-Gon that Anakin had no natural father."

from page 41... "Darth Sidious learned of his enemies' arrival on Tatooine. He dispatched his apprentice Darth Maul in order to prevent the Jedi from meddling with Anakin Skywalker's fate."

from page 82... "Palpatine had carefully cultivated Anakin's hopes for preventing this dire premonition, and had revealed everything to Anakin: Palpatine's secret identity as Darth Sidious. His murder of his own Master, Darth Plagueis. The role that the Sith had played in creating Anakin by manipulating the midi-chlorians. And the hint that by studing the ways of the Sith, Anakin could learn to conquer death."

Not to mention it was George Lucas's intention, and the whole revelation was included in one of the earlier drafts, but was taken out with just a few hints left in, which we see in the movie. -Danik Kreldin 19:26, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Ahhhh, now I see! Well, thanks for clearing that up for me :)
 * So, it's a self-fullfilling prophesy. The Sith create the very being that will destroy them. Ironic. Cutch 21:32, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Very ironic. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 22:21, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

82 BBY?
First of all, which source either states or hints that this was the year of his birth? Looking at past discussions, people note 84 BBY, not 82.

And I don't see any reference to this date being a possible cover either, just a plain, bombastic statement that he was born that year, which isn't even agreed upon. I also dislike this whole tone of the biography, being so far removed from the neutral tone of most articles here. This is an encyclopedia, not an exercise in prose. VT-16 16:53, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The 82 BBY date comes from the Episode I Insider's Guide, and is backed up by a statement from Leland Chee about what he has in the Holocron. Check archives 2 and 3 of this talk page for links and quotes. It might be a bit too speculative to say he fudged his birthdate, but I think his early life is canonically said to be obscure (mostly in sourcebooks which predate the prequels, and therefore were written by authors who weren't allowed to make up details yet.) &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 17:14, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * You're getting in on this discussion a little late. No, a LOT late. Both of your points have been argued in depth in the four pages of talk archives going back to the second month of Wookieepedia's existence. &mdash;Darth Culator   (talk)  17:28, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, arguements (often heated) about the age and the prose are all over the Palpatine talk pages. We have discussed these matters A LOT. Like Culator said, four pages of talk archives. --Master Starkeiller 19:01, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * OH GOD. FOUR of them? No wonder I couldn't find anything in the ONE that I looked in. Sorry about that! ^__^;;; VT-16 17:52, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Lucas Audio Commentary
I was listening to the audio commentary on the Revenge of the Sith DVD, and during the Mace-Palpatine duel, Lucas comments on how Palpatine was pretending to be weak - now I'm not trying to start a debate here, I have my own personal feelings regarding the matter, but what do you guys think? -Danik Kreldin 17:41, 8 March 2006 (UTC) I don't understand why some are reverting the article - George Lucas himself clearly states Palpatine was pretending. It's not a contested issue - give it up. --Danik Kreldin 20:33, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, the fact that he was able to hurl lightning at Windu after his hand was cut off is pretty telling in of itself. -- SFH 20:06, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * So many people are dead-set convinced that Palpatine was genuinely begging for his life, though, and really was weak - so I'm seeing how they would respond to this. -Danik Kreldin 20:15, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * He plants the seeds of distrust of the Jedi in Anakin's mind and appears weak before him. It's all a part of Palpatine's plan. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 20:17, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, I fully agree. I knew from the start Palpatine was just playing Mace - but my point is, even today, there are still people who refuse to accept the truth, in face of volumes of evidence, and it pisses me off to no end. -Danik Kreldin 20:25, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Hey, it's their problem, not yours. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 20:27, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Plus, we know it's true. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 20:43, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, Palpatine wasn't weak, he was playing on Anakin's conflicted mind. The lightsaber energy mixing with the lightning may have screwed up his face, but he sure wasn't weak.
 * OMG ... u must listen correctly. Lucas said: "This scene always started out with Mace overpowering Palpatine". And, it is also said that the scene where palp pretends to lose his power was added later. The Producer on disk 2 said "They want to see who is stronger of them" (or something like that). Besides, u can read the following thread: http://forums.starwars.com/thread.jspa?threadID=207450&start=0 . There are also the facts. And there is no quote of any important star wars person who said palpatine faked the duel. instead, he lost the lightsaber duel. it's never ever being sad he faked the duel ... cause he lost.
 * I've seen a lot of quotes thrown around on this from Lucas and other people on both sides. None of them convince me absolutely one way or another. I think the article as it stands reflects that ambiguity and is NPOV. Yrfeloran 20:46, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The point is, he wasn't overpowered. He wanted Anakin to think that he was weak, which he wasn't. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 20:51, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
 * For the anonymous user above: Lucas: This sequence was uh always started out with Mace overpowering Palpatine, and then Palpatine using his powers trying to destroy Mace, and Mace deflecting his rays with his lightsaber. And it was awlays was that Anakin cut the lightsaber out of his hand. But this part where he pretends to lose hisp ower and be weak was something that I added later.. Lucas's exact words. Anyone with the DVD can listen to it. --Danik Kreldin 20:53, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
 * There. Debate over. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 20:55, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Also, just a few minutes after that scene, Lucas states this in the commentary: The killing of Mace... He was trying to stop him from killing Palpatine.. which in essence was the right thing to do.. he didn't realize Palpatine was going to kill him.. Wow, Palpatine was going to kill Mace. --Danik Kreldin 20:56, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Why wouldn't he. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 20:58, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Eh, Debate is not over. There's nothing to say that Palpatine threw the lightsaber duel, only that he was pretending to be weaker than he was once he was disarmed and throwing lightning around. As opposed to the changes I was objecting to, where you say that Palpatine getting disarmed was part of his plot, and Palpatine was pretending the whole battle, which is not supported. (Lucas does say that Mace overpowers Palpatine in the same quote). The second quote is obviously saying that Anakin didn't realize that Palpatine was going to kill Mace after Anakin intervened on Palpatine's behalf. It's not saying that Palpatine was going to kill Mace anyway, only that Palpatine killed Mace once Anakin intervened and disarmed him. Yrfeloran 21:11, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The way I see it, this debate is over. Lucas said it himself that he made Palpatine act and look weak. This was all a plot to make Anakin his apprentice. Maybe the fact that his lightsaber was thrown out of the window wasn't in his plot, or maybe it was. Palpatine was disarmed, which meant Anakin probably saw Windu trying to assassinate a disarmed enemy, which would not be right by any means. Then, the obviously not weak Palpatine shoots Force lightning at Windu. There's no way he was weak throughout all of that. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 22:41, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Wanna ignore George Lucas, heh? Well - fine. The debates not over. The quotes are stating this. And when u're not sure, read the thread I wrote above. (but - caution! there are more than 400 pages ... ). And, come on, even Palps cannot "forsee" that somebody would kick him in his face in the right moment. This is ridiculous! And the Producer said in a special disk 2 scene, both of them wanted to see who is stronger. And Mace won the lightsaber duel because of his incredible fighting skills. And, plz, no "palpatine plans this and that..." bla bla. Nobody can forsee everything. Example: He doesn't forsee Anakin to be in a machine, does he? After the duel with yoda, he only forsees that he's in danger. thats it.
 * Maybe so, but this was a ruse to draw Anakin over to the dark side. You have to admit that you know that. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 22:56, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
 * That's irrelevant. We're talking about the lightsaber duel. And u should know, that Palps lost it. And it makes sense. Everything makes sense; George also said: "Only Yoda and Mace can compete with the Emperor." So, what's ur problem? That he lost a lightsaber duel? Oh, come on, don't think Palps is a Darkside-God or something. He lost, but here is the clue: even if he lost, he could manage it that anakin turns to the dark side.
 * And he needed the Jedi to attack him in order to issue Order 66. He wants to be Emperor! This is his first goal; to turn anakin is second.

Palpatine is addicted to the Dark Side, not self-centred
I believe that Palpatine embodies much of the Dark Side itself. I also agree that the Dark Side is almost the ultimate narcotic for the users. If you look at it, Palpatine is self-centred, but he is controlled in a way by something, e.g., his voice changes drastically when Anakin joins the Dark Side, almost as if something else is speaking through him, much like the girl in the Exorcist movie.

He is so addicted to the dark side, that he is willing to sacrfice himself for its existance, like when he says to Luke "Strike me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the Dark Side will be complete!" That sounds a lot like a heroin addict saying "Give me one more shot and I'll never do it again". He also shows a sacrificial position when he admits to Yoda, that Vader may become the dominant Sith, saying "You will not stop me, Darth Vader will become more powerful than either of us." This is not the speeking of a completely self-centred man, but of an addict.
 * Not really. Palpatine was a master of the dark side; he wasn't addicted to it. He had been taught the full power of the dark side, and he used it for his own will. Plus, if Luke would have struck him down, his body would have traveled to Byss and enter a clone body. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 20:46, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Or he probably would have just jumped into Luke. In the sense he needed it to survive death, he may have been an addict, but never forget what Obi-Wan said: "Palpatine is evil". -- SFH 00:07, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Maybe. But I don't think he could have done it easily; after all, Palpatine's spirit could have jumped into Luke's body at any one of his other deaths. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 03:02, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Palpatine is a master manipulator. Everything he does he does it to achieve a certain goal. He appears ready to put the revival of the Sith above his personal gain at times but he isn't addicted. --Master Starkeiller 20:02, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Exactly. Not addicted, but self-centered. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 20:03, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Palpatine's Artwork
I recently got Star Wars Chronicles: The Prequels and there are some good pictures of the artwork he kept such as the wall frieze and his various statues. Perhaps we could on this page or somewhere else have a gallery of the art he owned?--DannyBoy7783 14:41, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Perhaps a subsection in the gallery of Palpatine images? Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 20:25, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I've had the book myself since Christmas, Dan, and since I put in a section about his redecorating the Chancellor's office, why not have an image in there from the book? Every section ought to have at least one image. If a given section is big enough, it can have room for more than one. Whatever doesn't go in there should go into a gallery, as you and Jack suggested, or in individual articles in the 'Pedia devoted to each object.

As to which images? You should all state your preferences before anyone proceeds. But I have my suggestions from the Chronicles (p. 287). The image of the Sistros statue in the corner is clear (and the section goes into detail about the little goodie he's hidden inside), and so is that of the Sith chalice. I'm less sanguine about using the big frieze images, since they're not shot on the set, but in the workshop in which they were made (they were never on set, but added digitally by ILM after the shoot). But they may still work. In any case, someone else will have to put them in, I don't have the tech. But I like the idea. Erik Pflueger 23:25, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
 * "Whatever doesn't go in there should go into a gallery...". Even if the image is in the article, it could still be in the gallery. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 23:27, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
 * You're absolutely right, Jack. I once stopped by the Palpatine gallery and saw that, as a rule, all the images in our article also go there. My apologies; I should have spoken more clearly. Erik Pflueger 23:48, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Don't worry about it. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 00:04, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, what do you know! There is a palpatine image gallery. I didn't even know. I'll get to work sometime soon and upload the images to the gallery page and when I'm done I'll put a notice here and you guys can decide which ones to stick in the article. Sound good?--DannyBoy7783 18:18, 14 March 2006 (UTC)