User talk:JangFett

{| id="w" width="100%" style="background: transparent;" {| id="w" width="100%" style="background: transparent;"
 * valign="top" width="71%" style="background: #FFFFFF; border: 0px solid #bdbdbd; padding: .5em 1em;"|


 * valign="top" width="71%" style="background: #FFFFFF; border: 0px solid #000000; padding: .5em 1em;"|

Meeting 55
Jangeth pls, Meeting 55 has been scheduled for February 23 at 4PM ET (9PM UTC). Please make an effort to show up. 1358 (Talk)  16:21, February 6, 2013 (UTC)

Re:3RR
Jang, I did. I reverted him once and left a message, and was in the process of rewriting the Dark Acolyte table into a list when he edit-conflicted me. That's when I left him alone and sought out an admin. Cade  Calrayn   20:51, February 8, 2013 (UTC)

Re:Zabrak
In the Encyclopedia it states that Maul's, as well as Opress', species are Dathomirian, not Zabrak. Also, in the BTS section of the Maul article states that his species was changed from a Zabrak to a Dathomirian.  Darth Pythonis  (Talk) 15:15, February 9, 2013 (UTC)

FAN page reviewing
Hey, Jang,

Per the discussion at the recent INQ meeting 55, I've just now gone and left personalized talk page messages to a whole whack of users, asking them to review more on the FAN page. I went for people who review a lot on the GAN page, people who nominate FANs but never review others' work, and more --- hopefully we'll be able to kick-start a reviewing revolution.

With that said, I believe I'd be remiss if I didn't extend the appeal to the Inquisitorius, as well. I'm not trying to single any one person out, and to emphasize that point, I'm leaving the exact same message on every INQ member's talk page rather than personalizing them like I did with the non-INQ mesages. Every INQ member save five, that is, and those five members have been reviewing FANs frequently enough that they don't need any sort of push like this. Everyone other than those five INQs, yourself included, has reviewed less than twelve FANs since the beginning of July (addendum specifically for Jang: I counted INQvotes, so your count only begins in September, after you became an INQ). A few meetings ago, we agreed on eight FAN reviews per month as a good number for which to strive. I've now encouraged a large number of non-INQs to review more frequently, and the Inquisitorius as a whole should be actively participating in that revolution if not leading it. So, as an INQ, please review FANs more often. Cheers, and have a great day! Menkooroo (talk) 08:11, February 11, 2013 (UTC)

IPs
Hey Jang. I disagree on that. We should try to get the vandals to do productive work, instead of shunning them. Many of them might be just testing, or even contributing in a wrong way, but in good-faith. I seriously believe the first message any user should get is a welcome, not a big, red, threatening warning sign. That's just counterproductive and scares away potential new users.  Stake black   msg 15:39, February 14, 2013 (UTC)

Intro
Hi Jang, can you please point me to the policy that states no references in the intro? Rokkur Shen (talk) 14:39, February 18, 2013 (UTC)

Queequeg
I've also reverted your edits to Queequeg as it is only a nickname as many of the action figure archive names are. No official name has been given to this character. Unless you can provide one. Leland Chee specifically refers to this character as "Weequay hunter" in his blog hence the addition of the CCG card "Weequay Hunter" of which the images are identical and of the same character. Thanks. Rokkur Shen (talk) 14:46, February 18, 2013 (UTC)

Trivia?
Sure, it makes sense. However, adding information related to the episode, which is not included anywhere else in the article, and is confirmed by Lucasfilm makes sense too. I'm still on the side of expanding the Wook, not reducing it. Hope it makes sense too. :) Cheers, -- XXLVenom998 ''' (Surprise me!) 08:35, February 22, 2013 (UTC)