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;"|

CAnom - Ao Var
I admit to venting my frustration with Cade. You have to understand, however, from my point of view. I nominate an article and am doing my best to satisfy a voter's objections, when he comes and interrupts the discussion I am having with the initial voter to explain details of a Tc discussion that took place. Additionally, he tells me that I am wrong and that MJ did not state what MJ obviously did state. Additionally, Cade went to another article that I presented to a GA review and started making changes to that article. There have been many times when I am writing to someone that Cade pops in uninvited and interjects his comments into my conversation, or has made changes to articles that I have placed Inuse templates in because I am working on them. I realize that I will have to deal with him in the nomination of articles, but I really would like him to quit harassing me. And telling me that an unreliable site says that my grammar is poor is ridiculous. I really did laugh because I thought it was a joke at first. Exiled has retracted his statement that I did not contest every objection. So, I don't know where you get that I am unwilling to accept objections. I will object to someone trying to insist that I use something that does not follow this wiki's policy or that lowers the quality of the wiki by doing something not in line with the policy. I would expect the same of you. I got irritated, however, at the comments from Cade that "I have a problem." That is personal attack. &mdash; Gethralkin  Hyperwave 21:02, August 31, 2013 (UTC)

WOTM nomination
Thank you for supporting my nomination of WOTM for September 2013 as result for recognizing my work and hopefully some improvement for our beloved wookieepedia. -- Jedi Marty (talk) 23:25, August 31, 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey not that is necessarily mean anything but I couldn't help but notice that according to Special:Statistics Marty's edit was the 4,600,000 thousandth edit. Fe Nite (talk) 00:01, September 1, 2013 (UTC)

The Electric Company Magazine
Why would the page for The Electric Company Magazine become nonsense? -- LegalizeAnythingMuppets (talk) 03:48, September 4, 2013 (UTC)

Elder Tail-heads
Yo Jang...Sorry to bother. But be discreet still. I understand where you sit as far as recent tremors in the Force and canon. Also, in the Togruta talk pages I saw that you took a whack at some ideas. That is why I came here instead of starting a debate again. I'm looking for source confirmation that the Togruta do not wear shoes normally on their planet according to the old canon, along with the rest of that big block of text on the article between the last source marker and the ankal-tooth necklace information which is sourced. Can you please help me here? I suspect the source used to justify the ankal-tooth necklaces inclusion is the same used to verify the Togruta do not usually wear shoes on their homeworld, along with some other statements after that data. If you can interpret the article better, than please assist. If some info is unfounded, then please help me out. Thanks Jang. And good luck with the cause. May the Force be with you.99.188.36.80 05:24, September 5, 2013 (UTC)

New Galactic Empire
So... how about we move Galactic Empire (The Star Wars) to New Galactic Empire but give that page a Template:youmay to Darth Krayt's Galactic Empire? After all, Darth Krayt's Galactic Empire comes directly from Legacy Era Campaign Guide, while "New Galactic Empire" always was a conjectural fan name as far as I can tell. We don't want people to confuse this new non-canonical Empire with neither Krayt's nor Galactic Empire. LOST-Malachi (talk) 21:13, September 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm simply unable to check all 56 issues of Legacy + the Campaign Guide now, but the history of the page clearly shows it was a conjectural title when created. The page was bounced around various conjectural title for years until the campaign guide firmly established it as Darth Krayt's Galactic Empire - that's why so many alternate titles in the intro. Of them all only Empire, Sith Empire and New Order I remember seeing in text, other come from a source that it is being called "Galactic Empire" while not being the Galactic Empire - so a prefix was needed. Note also how very few Legacy pages link to it - all of those links predate Campaign Guide. LOST-Malachi (talk) 21:24, September 6, 2013 (UTC)

Droopy McCool
Thanks Jang for deleting Droopy McCool. However, User:JMM has undone what you started by simply recreating the page and once again redirecting it to Snit instead of moving the page from Snit to Droopy McCool. Could you please sort this out. Bo Shuda (talk) 23:31, September 7, 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, it's all sorted. The problem was that it wouldn't let me move the page over the redirect. I would've if I could've. Bo Shuda (talk) 01:52, September 8, 2013 (UTC)

Inq Meeting 59
Hey Jang. Meeting 59 of the High Council of Inqusitors is scheduled for next week Saturday, September 21. Please make sure to leave notes if you cannot attend. Otherwise, see you there!  CC7567  (talk) 01:41, September 9, 2013 (UTC)
 * The meeting has been rescheduled for the following Saturday, the 28th, due to a conflict with the next EduCorps meeting. Apologies for any confusion.  CC7567  (talk) 20:14, September 9, 2013 (UTC)

votestruck a comment?
Hey Jang. I'm curious why you applied Votestruck to Malachi's comment in the Discussion section of the CT. Was it for an intentional purpose or an oversight? It just seemed odd because it wasn't really a vote that was being struck there. Thanks! - Esjs (Talk) 17:06, September 10, 2013 (UTC)

Wohe Omosp
Ah yes, good catch. No problem I'll just go ahead and do a proper consensus submission. StarsiderSWG (talk) 22:07, September 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks :P I think I fixed it now StarsiderSWG (talk) 22:30, September 10, 2013 (UTC)

EduCorps Meeting 2
You are invited to participate in EduCorps meeting 2, which is scheduled for 7 PM ET on Saturday, September 21st.-- Exiled Jedi   (Greetings)  14:13, September 12, 2013 (UTC)

Is this okay?
Will my edits to List of Books be reverted. The section entitled Essays and commentary?Darth Pickle 2 (talk) 21:30, September 13, 2013 (UTC)

AC Meeting 61
You have received a ticket for a front row on the future AC concert starting September 28th. Bring your guitar. If you can't make it to the karaoke session, please leave notes. - Winterz (talk) 00:15, September 14, 2013 (UTC)

WP:VG
Hello there, this is your local tyrannical dictator project team lead. Now that things have settled down a bit I wanted to bring this to your attention. Anyway, check it out when you get a chance and leave a comment, and keep on trekkin'. Corellian Premier The Force will be with you always 16:33, September 15, 2013 (UTC)

Sorry
Thank you for your advice. I will make sure to follow it in the future. --LazyStormTrooper (talk) 23:44, September 24, 2013 (UTC)

The Empire strikes back
The vote in the TC thread was unanimous in saying that the title should be a redirect to the film. It just disagrees on whether the page should be deleted first (and that's my fault). I believe that the correct closure here would be something along the lines of "consensus to redirect page to the film, no consensus to delete the history first". If you check with other, longer-tenure admins, I believe that's the way votes like this have been interpreted in the past where the options are not completely mutually exclusive. I therefore ask you, under WP:AA, to change the closure of the TC accordingly. And I apologize for creating this mess in the first place. :P &mdash;MJ&mdash; Jedi Council Chambers 23:56, September 24, 2013 (UTC)

Otto FAN
Hello! Thanks to recent research by StarsiderSWG, one of the last persons here who still owns a Galaxies game, there have been significant additions to the "Put on the sidelines" section of Otto's article. Since you've already voted for its FA nomination, I send you this message so you can have a look at the recent additions and, if the need arises, remove your support vote. I don't want people who voted to feel cheated because they supported the nom before the article was complete&mdash;without my knowledge. Have a good day! --LelalMekha (talk) 13:15, September 25, 2013 (UTC)

Meeting reminder
A reminder that Inq Meeting 59 will be in two days (if you go by ET, that's Saturday the 28th at 8 PM ET). If you can't make it, please remember to leave notes. Thanks.  CC7567  (talk) 02:33, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

EGW Author's Cut
Hey Jang! I'm just being curious there; why do you think that the EGW Author's Cut blog series doesn't deserve its own article? After all, that series will serve as a complement to the printed version of the Essential Guide to Warfare, and we do have separate articles for the Essential Atlas and its online companion. If we don't have an article for the blog series, won't it be unpractical to indicate where a given information comes from&mdash;book or blog? --LelalMekha (talk) 14:37, September 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually, there's also Barely Tolerable: Alien Henchmen of the Empire and Viva Space Vegas! The History of the Marvelous Wheel. A lot of retcons have been introduced in those articles, and the blog articles themselves are the only sources to which those retcons can be linked to. As regards the EGW Author's Cut, Jason Fry has commented that "Leland Chee reviewed this for canon/continuity, and is reviewing future installments as well." In other words, the content of that series is and will be canonical. --LelalMekha (talk) 15:26, September 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * Now, it's clear we should have guidelines as to when we should create an article for an official blog post or not. The answer's quite obvious to me, though: an article should be created only when the post reveals new canon elements that are only available there. However, no need to make an article for that kind of post. --LelalMekha (talk) 15:37, September 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * There are borderline cases, though. What do you think of this? (That one has already its article here, by the way. And I must admit I was the one who created it in the first place.) --LelalMekha (talk) 15:44, September 28, 2013 (UTC)

Blog Confusion
Hey Jang, I was just confused on why you deleted my page for the Essential Guide to Warfare Author's Cut blog. It was, as reported on Jason Fry's dorkery, reviewed by Leeland Chee for cross-examination, and contains a load of new canon. Pages like Arhul Kurumenga will now have a redlink or nothing for their source, and 11 more blog posts will soon follow, most likely brimming with new information. What's the story?74.72.159.170 15:48, September 28, 2013 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks, JangFett, for replying on my forum question. You saved me a lot of time.

JediMaster22 (talk) 20:34, September 30, 2013 (UTC)

Re: Whoa...
Did you happen to look to see what the whole conversation was about? In case you missed it, I told DP2 that he could find the policies (that he wasn't following) in the links of the Welcome Box (where it's easy to get to them), and he practically answered back that he glanced at it and decided to, instead, just "assume based on past evidence to create certain articles." So, I can interpret that one of two ways: either he will create articles the way others in the past have created theirs, or he will keep creating articles the way he's has up to now and go with whatever he's been getting away with. In fact this latter possibility coincides with his comment of "They correct me when I'm wrong, but for the most part leave me to my own devices." So, unless someone points out that he's wrong, he continues on. This actually answers your message to me, regarding telling someone what they are doing is wrong (which specifically is not PA, by the way, as outlined in the NPA policy), not telling them will never let them know what they need to change. As for DP2 "trying," I don't know if you read his comments to me or not, but if he can't be bothered to go read something to learn how to do it, then that doesn't sound like "trying" to me. So, I am not assuming anything, I just happened to get upset about it. I suspect it may be because he doesn't want to read through it all. Many people don't like to read much anymore these days&mdash;even writers, sometimes I don't. However, many editors come here and edit existing articles while they learn what the policy requires, without creating new articles and causing a sloppy mess. DP2 doesn't want to do that because, as he expressed it on my page, "I DO take pride in creating pages first." So, you will never get him to quit creating articles long enough to learn how to edit existing articles because it looks like he sees that as beneath him. If he would simply read the MoS, there would be no issue. I am not the only one who has repeatedly told him that he is ignoring instructions, counsel, and advice, whether posted on template and article pages or in messages from other editors. In fact, you yourself told him to quit creating Star Trek articles, admonishing him that he had been told before not to do it (why did he not listen the first time? maybe he didn't want to). However, I will dial back the vitriol a bit. Additionally, I would like you to review my comments to DP2, because you improperly accused me of violating WP:Civil by calling for a ban. On the contrary, I was letting DP2 know that admins have blocked/banned editors before who were refusing to adhere to article creation policy and who were told too many times not to do things their own way. I have seen it before. So if you carefully read my comments, you will be happy to learn that I was not calling for him to be banned. &mdash; Gethralkin  Hyperwave 06:42, October 13, 2013 (UTC)
 * While that may be, and I have said that I would bring it down a notch, it is more appropriate for you to address the tone of my comments for correction (which I do agree were more acerbic than needed to be). However, unfounded accusations are uncalled for. I never called for DP2 to be banned. If I did think that was necessary, you would have been one of the first I would have messaged. I also would not have called for a ban on the users page but only on the page of the admin authorized to do so. Please don't read more into my comments than is actually there. And, while it has been a couple of weeks, I have hardly been able to get online due to personal schedule issues, so I will drop it, but I am answering the messages left for me in my extended absence. &mdash; Gethralkin  Hyperwave 16:21, October 13, 2013 (UTC)

Star Wars Rebels Template
So how does this look? Byzantinefire 17:23, October 19, 2013 (UTC)

{| class="noprint nb2 hidable" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" style="" ! class="nb2-firstheading" style="background:#D8E9FC; padding-top:0;" | Star Wars Rebels Books


 * Then what should i make for Wookieepedia? Byzantinefire 23:49, October 19, 2013 (UTC)

Cassio Tagge
Hi Jang,

Menk's just brought it to my attention that you had been working on Cassio Tagge -- I had started my own version in recent days and had absolutely no idea that you were doing likewise, I promise.

Personally I'm prioitizing Tagge and was planning to get through it within the next week or so&mdash;do you mind awfully if I forge ahead? It's only that I see you've been working on it sporadically for over a year now. Thefourdotelipsis (talk) 11:11, October 24, 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for accommodating - If you don't mind me pilfering the appearances and sources that'd be grand. Thefourdotelipsis (talk) 12:27, October 24, 2013 (UTC)
 * I probably don't truth be told. Any assistance will be gladly appreciated. Thefourdotelipsis (talk) 21:41, October 24, 2013 (UTC)
 * It proved invaluable Jang&mdash;I've ported what I've done so far to the article proper. I've still got stuff here that I'm yet to check - I'm going through the radio drama now so no dramas there, just wondering if some of that stuff was in the pack but marked differently (I'm guessing the Guide to the Star Wars Universe stuff is the transcript notepad you have?) Thefourdotelipsis (talk) 01:25, October 29, 2013 (UTC)

Re: Trech Molock
Actually, I don't think it was intended to be political. "Molock was more given to risk-taking than his conservative boss, and in private the two debated matters of military doctrine with a level of heat that would have surprised their fellow officers." IMHO, there's nothing political about that, it simply means that Tagge was attached to more traditional military tactics. --LelalMekha (talk) 13:14, November 2, 2013 (UTC)
 * I found the edit in question relating to Conservatism on Cosinga Palpatine and Vidar Kim: "http://starwars.wikia.com/index.php?title=Palpatine&diff=3857990&oldid=3857853" The editor responsible is JRT2010. You are free to ask him. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 13:43, November 2, 2013 (UTC)

Interplanetary travel response
I paraphrased for sure. I remember reading into the void, that it took 300 days to get to furies gate, and it took 17 days I think from shikaawa to tython.Darth Pickle 2 (talk) 01:54, November 3, 2013 (UTC)