User talk:Demos Traxen

Demos Traxen, welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wookieepedia. I hope you like the place and choose to join our work. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
 * Internal pages:
 * Community Portal
 * Manual of Style
 * Online sources
 * Wookification
 * Things to do
 * Jundland Wastes Sandbox
 * External Wikipedia pages:
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wookieepedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~. Four tildes produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the Community Portal talk page or ask me on my Talk page. May the Force be with you! - MyNz 07:43, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, this is the first page I've actually created, I don't know all the ins and outs about Wiki yet...I'm better at editing, really.

My apologies for accidentally editing your user page. I mistook it for the article of a Star Wars character. MyNz 07:43, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
 * As did I! Sorry about that....I'll just leave it like this, and let you decide how to set up your user page...&mdash; Silly Dan 03:16, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Tollivar
Hello,

I appreciate your attempts to make Wookieepedia better and more comprehensive. I noticed that you keep changing information in this article. If you have a link to the website where John Jackson Miller states that Force lightning was used, please post it on my talkpage so that I can make the appropriate corrections to the article. Otherwise, it will continually be reverted to the way it was when it passed Featured Article Nominations. Thanks, —Tommy  ( Nine two eight one ) 01:51, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Tommy's request was perfectly reasonable—your uncivil response was unwarranted. Please try to not resort to such a tone with editors in the future over such a simple request. Thanks. -- Ozzel 21:06, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Removing messages

 * Please don't remove messages from your talk page; you may archive them on a subpage, but they should not be removed. Thank you. Atarumaster88  Jedi_Order.svg ( Talk page ) 17:31, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The irony is now I want to remove this message as well...--Demos Traxen 19:01, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Image request

 * Here is the image you requested. Xicer9 Atgar.svg( Combadge) 17:26, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Very quick of you - wonderful.--Demos Traxen 01:34, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: Chopper
Quite simply, it's because it's the nominator's decision. Moreover, I see absolutely none of your reasoning as to how you distinguish Chopper as the one who "decided they needed to help them". Chopper is clearly acting contemptuously toward the crippled refugee, and also, there's zero evidence that says it was the son who helped him. Your wording is biased, as we don't know if the clones "were forced to kill the droids", and you're putting their feelings into it when there's absolutely no evidence to suggest them. If you can provide accurate, clear reasoning, I'll change it back, but until then, I would like to ask you to cease your actions.  CC7567  (talk) 22:06, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd just like to clarify that while I've accepted that Chopper handed the crippled refugee the droid leg, nothing else has enough evidence to be confirmed. Thank you for your time.  CC7567  (talk) 23:03, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't want to ever see this again or you'll be blocked. You're bordering close to WP:NPA there, and I don't like your tone. Don't give CC a hard time; he knows what he's doing.  Chack Jadson  (Talk) 01:24, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm so glad that Wookieepedia has become an oligarchy, rather than the democracy it's supposed to be. His condescending sarcastic response on my page is completely ignored, but mine is cause for threats of blocking.--Demos Traxen 01:31, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Look, I obviously don't want to get blocked, and I'm sorry if I lost my temper. But I think I've done a good bit of work here myself, without searching for any recognition. So if trying my best to correct articles I know are incorrect, and defending myself after being provoked, get me blocked, then so be it.--Demos Traxen 02:07, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I appreciate what you're trying to do, but there is simply no evidence and no way of identifying Chopper in those first two images. He could have switched with the other trooper. Unless you can directly prove to me with names or a much more reliable source that it is Chopper speaking in that second frame, there still isn't evidence. As for your suggested implications: yes, they are implications, but nothing more.  CC7567  (talk) 19:06, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Please just stop editing Chopper in protest. You're being disrespectful by continuing to do so even after I've asked you to stop editing it to "fit your own needs". I'll admit that the fact that the refugees pointed out that the clones were there, but if you're going to keep assuming things with no evidence, kindly stop adding unsourced information to the wiki. There's no way to tell that Chopper himself was contemptuous for the Christophsians alone rather than it being an effect of his hate for the droids. If it's not attributable to the comic, and unless you can still provide me with solid reasoning, it's not true.  CC7567  (talk) 00:30, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * It's not so much in protest, nor to fit my own needs. I have no needs here beyond making the article the best it can be. I wouldn't consider anything I've written to be unsourced, as the images are right in front of you. I would say you were disrespectful for editing it to begin with, when it turned out I was right all along. I'm done playing this game, hopefully you'll wise up and not use the rational that "the clones might have switched positions, therefore all of this user's arguments are false".--Demos Traxen 00:39, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * To be clear, there is nothing to indicate that there was a father and son there, nor who the first speaker was. Everything else is attributable to the comic, and hopefully this matter is now resolved. I'm sorry for pulling you into this.  CC7567  (talk) 00:59, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Since you appear to have objected to Chopper on the GAN page to simply reaffirm what you already changed in the article, please strike your objection. It's invalid and unnecessary.  CC7567  (talk) 20:55, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Did that before your previous comment... sorry! Thanks for keeping my last edit in, even after someone else changed it.--Demos Traxen 01:52, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Warning
Please do not remove sourced content from Wookieepedia's articles, much less the site's Featured and Good articles. I refer to your unwarranted removal of information from the Nevar article, which, as you can see, has been promptly reverted by an administrator. If you continue to remove sourced content from articles following this warning, your actions will be construed as being in violation of our Vandalism policy, and you will be blocked from editing. Thank you for your cooperation. Toprawa and Ralltiir 16:52, September 8, 2009 (UTC)
 * I was only removing information that - within the span of a three paragraph article - had been repeated three times in almost identical phrasing.--Demos Traxen 20:31, September 8, 2009 (UTC)
 * Your edit here, at its center, is still little more than removal of sourced information. But nonetheless, your noble intentions are duly noted, which is why this is only a warning and nothing more extreme. More to the point, the content of the Nevar article has been reviewed and agreed upon by a fairly good cross-section of Wookieepedia's foremost article-writing experts, comprising the bulk of the AgriCorps review panel, which is why it is currently one of the site's Good articles. In other words, it's not the best idea to take it upon yourself to decide what and what should not be in there. Additionally, when you remove information as you have, you leave an entire section of unsourced information in your wake, which drastically diminishes the quality of the article in question. If you have suggestions for the article, please use the talk page or get in contact with either one of the reviewers or the user who wrote the article, which, in this case, happens to be myself, rather than shooting first and asking questions later. And while we're on the topic, if you have a vested interest in helping edit Wookieepedia, it would greatly behoove you to familiarize yourself with which of the site's articles in particular are Featured or Good articles, all of which can be found in the links I have previously provided you, as well as the guidelines for what constitutes a status article. Toprawa and Ralltiir 22:17, September 8, 2009 (UTC)

Waxer
Please let handle the update for "Landing at Point Rain," as he's the one who's currently nominating the article for Featured status. This isn't the first time you've been asked to do this. While your efforts are appreciated, it is best to let the nominator handle all updates for an article either currently undergoing the nomination process for or already possessing higher status, as all other edits will most likely detract from the article's quality. Thank you.  CC7567  (talk) 04:46, November 5, 2009 (UTC)
 * It's just hard to have to look at things like this. What you're essentially saying is that one person's contributions are more important and better than another's - that my contributions will "detract from the article's quality". It's rude and disingenuous. If QuiGonJinn is working on the article, so be it, but the episode aired tonight, and there were no edits. Therefore, instead of "detracting" from the quality of the article, perhaps my edit should be seen as an effort to keep it updated, or even to get the work started for a "better" contributor.--Demos Traxen 06:56, November 5, 2009 (UTC)
 * You're very much welcome to edit the article if you really want to, but my point that it will still most likely be rewritten by QuiGonJinn in the end still stands. Please note, however, that the unofficial clause about a nominator solely handling an article was not invented to be a personal insult to you but was adopted because in general, ninety percent of the time other editors took away from the article's quality with less well-written additions.  CC7567  (talk) 07:03, November 5, 2009 (UTC)
 * Being spiteful isn't going to solve much, and we both know what you're trying to say and who that's directed at. Regardless if we are having disagreements, your negative attitude isn't productive or helpful to anyone here or the wiki itself. I apologize if my wording has been coming off as harsh, but that is simply the way that things are done here.  CC7567  (talk) 16:38, November 5, 2009 (UTC)

Re:Gira
No problem, Demos.--Jedi Kasra (comlink) 13:05, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

Florn
Hey, Demos Traxen, nice to see another alien lover on the Wook! I think you are misreading the map on p. 17 of Star Wars: The Essential Atlas. The legend says that "Population is measured by average per inhabited planet per sector, with actual populations for key systems." The fact that Florn appears on the map makes it one of these "key systems," and, thus, the green dot represents the system, not the sector (it's unfortunate that the legend uses "planet" in one instance and "system' in another, but c'est la vie). Also, I'm sorry you found my sentence "poorly worded," but it's probably best to try not to insult other users' writing abilities in edit summaries. I'm not trying to be confrontational, but it seemed like you made it personal for some reason in that summary. Other than that, take a look at WookieeProject Aliens and join up if you'd like. If you're taking a crack at Alien Encounters, we could definitely use your help! ~ SavageBob 01:20, December 13, 2009 (UTC)
 * No worries; everything comes off a couple of shades more negatively in plain text. As for humanocentricism (anthropocentrism?), it's kind of part and parcel of Star Wars. Star Wars is rooted in old film serials from the '30s and '40s, what with their depictions of "primitive heathens" trying to eat the Great White Hunter, the Yellow Peril trying to kidnap the blonde damsel-in-distress, and on. It's understandable, then, that that pulp view of the "civilized West" (Core?) vs. the rest of the world rears up in the Galaxy Far, Far Away. I try to avoid this mindset in my own articles (by trying to avoid describing species as "primitive" and not describing certain species as having "been discovered" at such and such a time), but it's sometimes difficult to do given that the source material so often takes that tact. I guess this is a long way around to saying that, yeah, it's there, but since this isn't the real world, and we ain't really xenoanthropologists, there's only so much we can do to avoid it. :) ~ SavageBob 05:03, December 13, 2009 (UTC)

Re: Layout Help
The intro should only contain what the writer deems aboslutely necessary to give the reader the most basic understanding of the article's subject. The length is up to whoever writes it. Overall, intros should not be excessively long but at the same time not a couple of sentences mashed together with random bits of information, depending on the amount of information available.  CC7567  (talk) 23:50, January 4, 2010 (UTC)

Block
You have been blocked for two hours due to personal attacks. Work on your communication skills. --Imperialles 23:13, April 11, 2010 (UTC)

Sourcing
Hey, DT. Good work on expanding Kobok, an article that's been on my own back burner for a while. I'm guessing most of that info comes from Geonosis and the Outer Rim Worlds, but don't neglect to add sources as you work. If you need some pointers on how to do sourcing, I'd be happy to oblige. Trunsk is an example of what I'm talking about, all the footnotes and whatnot. Keep up the good work on the articles. ~ SavageBob 04:12, April 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I've been interested in the species for awhile, so I went ahead and...ahem... procured Geonosis and the Outer Rim Worlds. I'd love some help with sourcing. I haven't quite been able to get the hang of it since joining the site, so even when I write an article as large (or larger) than Kobok, I've left the sourcing for others to do later. I hope that doesn't come off as lazy - I'd just rather someone with more experience do it right than end up screwing it up myself. That said, I'd love to learn more about it.--Demos Traxen 16:22, April 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * No worries; glad to have your contributions either way. But it's a good habit to get into to source anything you add to an article. It's pretty simple in principle: If you add something to the article, just type after the information (usually after the punctuation). Then, near the end of the article, make sure there is a code that looks like this: . Wherever you type that code, the references you've been putting throughout the article will show up when in normal article viewing mode. It can get more complicated, but that's the gist of the basic way to source information. When I have a bit more time, I'll explain a few more advanced concepts. ~ SavageBob 22:05, April 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks!--Demos Traxen 22:57, April 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey, DT. Not sure you noticed, but I replied to your Kobok request on my talk page: User talk:SavageBob. Hope it helps! ~ SavageBob 06:06, June 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh thanks! I must have missed it on my watchlist awhile back. I got wrapped up in the Act on Instinct edit explosion, I probably missed a lot of things. I'll try to get started on that this week!--Demos Traxen 17:08, June 7, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!
Hey, thanks for fixing a few of my more egregious boo-boos on the Act on Instinct articles. I noticed that you had done quite a fair amount of work on some of beforehand&mdash;I apologize if it looks as though I just callously ran roughshod over your work, it's just that I was trying to get those articles up to an FA standard, and it's my usual practice to write absolutely everything on a topic that I tackle from scratch. However, a lot of the existing levels of detail were really good, although some of the content was a bit too broad for the character articles, but I was just wondering if you would at all entertain the idea of writing up something else and taking one of these articles through the featured article process by yourself? Since I covered a lot of the AOI content simultaneously (again, I apologize, it was part of a small experiment I was conducting,) I was thinking that you might like to have a go at the Battle of Ukio (Clone Wars) article? Forgive me if this sounds a little presumptuous, but I noted that you seem to have an interest in the material, and since we're always looking for new FA writers, I thought I might as well ask. If you decide that you would like to do that, but you feel a bit daunted by the overall process, I would be more than willing to lend a hand. Thefourdotelipsis 07:49, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd love to take a look at it. I'll admit that I was bewildered at first by the explosion of edits to the AOI articles on my watchlist, but I had to remind myself that we're working together, not trying to one-up anyone. So I appreciate your work on the articles as well, and I hope I had laid good groundwork for you. I definitely had been too broad with Keelyvine and Doctor. As I said, I'd love to take a stab at the Battle of Ukio article. Obviously it needs expanding, but is there anything in particular you've noticed that needs work?--Demos Traxen 01:01, June 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, someone's started a prelude section, and provided the heading battle section, which is a good start, but it will also need an aftermath section as well, ultimately. This article provides a pretty good idea of what the basic layout should be. See, with a battle article, you have to be broad, and you can have detail (although avoid play-by-play things like "And then he threw his saber at one droid and then he kicked another one in the head, before turning and deflecting blaster fire from a third" - You just say "He overcame the guard droids" or whatever, if you know what I mean. Let me know if you need further clarification on that, although I think the level of detail you exhibited on the character articles was really good anyway, so it shouldn't be a concern). The other thing you have to do is make sure you retain a totally omniscient view of the battle, ergo, you can't just reveal things the way the comic reveals them, you have to progress sequentially. So, in this case, the Doctor's basic plan should be laid out first, in the prelude section, before you go into its actual implementation. The current version of the Doctor article reflects that. Basically, you've just got to make sure that nothing is revealed to a character, and then you go into an explanation of what was revealed to them, if that makes any sense. Also, you will have to source everything, since the TCW novel provides the date for these events, and you might also want to provide details of Ukio's secession, which was detailed in . Anyway, take a whack at it, and if you need any help, just let me know. I'm more than willing to give read throughs or a polish or help you with the references or structure or anything that comes to mind, really. Thefourdotelipsis 06:21, June 4, 2010 (UTC)

Kobok again
Hey, DT. I noticed you recently expanded Kobok quite a bit. Is that the rest of the information from my notes page? It looks like with a lead expansion and some cleanup, the article is pretty much done, so nice work. ~ SavageBob 23:02, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * It is indeed! And thanks! I had been putting it off for too long - I had written the entire thing, and really only needed to iron out the sourcing. I agree that the lead-in needs expanding, and I'll totally take that on if you don't mind. I'd love any additional sourcing or clean up that you have in mind, so please go ahead with that.--Demos Traxen 01:55, September 1, 2010 (UTC)

Valsedian Operation articles
While your Valsedian Operation updates to articles like Ganch, Keelyvine Reus, and Sanya are appreciated, please note that all three of them are either current FAs or current FA nominations, which means that they must adhere to all of Wookieepedia's policies&mdash;namely, the sourcing policy and the unofficial but widespread linking clause, the latter of which means that all articles must be linked only once in the infobox, intro, and body of an article. Regardless of the editor, all edits to promoted articles that do not adhere to Wookieepedia policy run the risk of being reverted, as the quality of the articles&mdash;even without immediate updates&mdash;must be maintained. Therefore, please take the time to go back through your edits and fix these issues to ensure that the FAs and FANs maintain their level of quality and do not have to undergo any sort of probation. By saying this, I'm not trying to discourage you from editing promoted articles, but to help you be as meticulous as you can when making additions to them. Thank you.  CC7567  (talk) 07:32, September 15, 2010 (UTC)

Problem reports
Hey Demos, I noticed you reported a problem on an offensive page that was just created; in such an instance as that particular one, it is actually more helpful to add the Delete template to the article, so that administrators are notified right away to delete the article. Thanks! Jonjedigrandmaster ( Talk ) 18:00, October 23, 2010 (UTC)