Talk:Tusken Raider/Legends

Databank
The original content moved from Wikipedia contains copyvio from the Databank entry. I'm going to try and clear that out now. --SparqMan 13:33, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

Sandpeople vs. Tusken Raiders
Tusken Raiders seems to be what outsiders call them, but Sandpeople may be as well. Clearly they have been around longer than the Tusken name from their raid on Fort Tusken. --SparqMan 13:45, 26 May 2005 (UTC) Insert non-formatted text here


 * Well, what they were called originally is unknown. So we use the most common term instead. --Imperialles 13:46, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Which I believe is Sand People, it is heard in two G-level sources, ANH and AOTC.--Eion 15:38, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Sand people also sounds more 'politically correct', too (Incidentally, it's also heard in ROTS). I mean, calling them Tusken Raiders is like calling Afghanis 'America Bombers' --Fade 15:43, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
 * I wasn't defending it. Shall we move it then? --Imperialles 15:47, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
 * I wasn't trying to imply you were defending it, rather just making a general arguement. I say move it. --Fade 15:50, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Should we hold a vote, or just go ahead? Also, it should be noted that the correct spelling is 'Sandpeople' (source: The Encyclopedia on Theforce.net) --Imperialles 15:56, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Handy, i was just wondering about spelling. I say go ahead, as it's pretty much official and just as correct, if not moreso, for the reasons I gave. Tusken Raider sounds a little biased for an encyclopedia. --Fade 16:04, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Be sure to go through and shift the content to reflect the name change as well. --SparqMan 16:12, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Done. --Imperialles 16:26, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
 * I checked that Encyclopedia on TheForce.net, but the fact remains that that is the only place I have EVER seen the name spelled as one word rather than two. (Additionally, it did not make special mention of the fact that it should be one word in the encyclopedia article, and there were a couple spelling errors within the article.) I stand by my decision to edit this article to reflect my understanding of the spelling, and recommend that the name of the article be changed as well, but if you are so inclined to undo my edit, I will not retaliate by changing it back to my way, even though I sincerely believe it is the proper way.
 * I'm thinking this should be two words as well; the Databank at least writes it as two and as one word it looks quite peculiar to me, indicating that I haven't seen it written that way in other sources. Since they probably appear in some official encyclopedia thingies, could someone look up how they're listed there? --Fade 08:25, 14 Nov 2005 (UTC)


 * They are called tusken raiders in the official star fighting game, know as "Star Wars Battlefront II" and surely thats sure as to what they should be called


 * Going by the databank its 2 words, and the databank is the official source. No matter what your prima(etc..) guide says they are. There are also several references in Episode IV and Episode I Tyg13 01:19, 9 March 2007 (UTC)Tyg13

Grave Tuskens
Shouldn't there be a reference to the Grave Tuskens in the artcile itself (I know there's a reference to them in Behind the Scenes)? Given their appearance in Dark Forces II: Jedi Knight and Dietz' novellas, they must be canonical - wouldn't a reference to them and to the Grave Tusken article in the in-universe-part of this article be in its place? KEJ 11:51, 6 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Random
Hey, does anyone know what a Tusken or Jawa looks like with their masks off? Lol Θ 20:57, 2 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * Ugly. -- Riffsyphon1024 21:18, 2 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * I think on TheForce.net they were saying that you can see them in Anakin's thoughts in Star Wars Republic 50: The Battle of Kamino. Either that or Star Wars Republic 59: Enemy Lines. -LtNOWIS 12:32, 6 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, neither. Both memories are of masked Tuskens - and only A'Sharad Hett removes his mask in Enemy Lines, and he is, of course, a Human, not a true Tusken - Kwenn 11:22, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
 * The only time a Jawa/Tusken removes his mask is when he is undertaking the mating ritual during which the two tuskens go into a hut and reveal their true face to each other (Source:Databank) Tyg13 00:14, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Ghorfa
What's the source for this? if it turns out to be canonical, we should move this article to Ghorfa. --Imp 22:23, 14 Dec 2005 (UTC) done.Darth Fernos 15:49, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Seems like it is canonical. So shall we move it? --Imp 10:27, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
 * The Ghorfas information comes from an obscure magazine article written by David West Reynolds and illustrated by Chris Trevas. Learn more here, which includes confirmation of the Tusken/Ghorfa link, and Trevas's images - Kwenn 11:18, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Sounds like I need to contact Leland Chee on this issue... --Imp 11:25, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Curiously, the Ghorfa tale of an alien spaceship destroying their civilization does match with the oral history you hear in KOTOR. QuentinGeorge 11:38, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Why do you need to contact Chee? The information is canon - Kwenn 11:53, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Are you sure it isn't unlicensed like Polyhedron? --Imp 15:51, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Why should we move it, even if it turns out to be canon? Just because that's their native name doesn't mean it's the name we should use, any more than Wikipedia should use "Moskva" for "Moscow."  We should use the most complete Galactic Basic Standard name. jSarek 13:26, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Calling Sandpeople Sandpeople when they refer to themselves as Ghorfa would be ignoring their culture. --Imp 15:51, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
 * No more than calling the Greeks "Greeks" instead of "Hellenes," or calling the Germans "Germans" instead of "die Deutsch." jSarek 01:54, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * It's also established as canon in the Databank. -- SFH 05:50, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Based on that mention, Ghorfa could be a separate article (much like Zhell and Human, or Eellayin and Polis Massan.) &mdash; Silly Dan 06:00, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * My opinion is if "Ghorfa" is the canonical real name for their species, then the article title should be Ghorfa, and Tusken Raider, Sandpeople, Sand People etc. should be redirected to it. Hmm... still calling them Tuskens when it is known they are Ghorfas would be like calling bursas "Otoh Sancture Raiders". Aiddat 20:58, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
 * And undone. Leave it at Tusken Raider. Ghorfa refers to an earlier sedentary phase of their culture, as stated in the article, and thus does not reflect their later name - \\Captain Kwenn// &mdash; Ahoy! 15:51, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * That's fine. But why name this article with a nickname for the species, and then put up the nickname tag, which is for things that we do not have a real canon name for? Lonnyd 10:40, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

What in the Twin Suns Happened?!
Why was the name Changed? if your going to change itt o Tusien Raider use a Nickname Templet! or change it back to Ghorfa Valin &quot;Tnu&quot; &quot;Shido&quot; Suul 16:40, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
 * If you check the EU section of the databank, Ghorfa apparently refers to the purported ancestors of the Sandpeople, and not necessarily to the sandpeople themselves. I suppose the nickname template would be appropriate, since we actually don't know their real name. &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 16:44, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Done. -- Redemption Talk Uglykotoricon.svg 16:45, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
 * What was wrong with "Sandperson"? QuentinGeorge 10:43, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Calling them Tusken Raiders is just wrong... let's move it back to Sandperson. --Imp 14:14, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Sandperson? I've only seen that reference once.... in KOTOR. I think "Tusken Raider"'s fine. Otherwise, we'd have to change "Grave Tusken" to "Grave Ghorfa" or "Graveperson" or something. KEJ 14:21, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Humans?
What's this stuff about Sandpeople being humans? This is an interesting idea, but then how can they be related to the Jawas, as the article also says. Also, they make noises that are inhuman. What is the "Human" thing from? --66.177.72.167 03:32, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
 * It's referring to the Hett family&mdash;Sharad Hett and his son. Cutch 21:52, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Might also come from KOTOR I, during a possible conversation where the PC is talking to the Sandpeople about their history. They mention something which leads the PC to ask "So, you're saying you used to be human?", which causes the Sandpeople to get violent.  So it's not clear from that conversation if they were human or not. &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 21:59, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
 * There's clearly a human component in the Tusken population: Sharad Hett joined by adoption, and had a son by a "Tusken" woman called K'Sheek, who was in fact human, apparently adopted as a child after a raid, as later on was Tahiri; we thus know two mechanisms by which humans become "Tusken", childhood kidnapping and adult adoption, and we also know that the mating of these members of the society means that part of the "native-born" Tusken community is also human, as with A'Sharad Hett. True, the handful of instances we know of don't give us any sense of how prevalent these practices are, but the number of Tuskens who we know for sure aren't human behind the masks is precisely... zilch.
 * It's also possible that entire human communities adopted Tusken lifestyle, especially after the failure of the original Czerka colony, and it's even possible that the Tusken and Jawa peoples are both descended from humans in the first place.... --McEwok 15:22, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
 * In Republic 59, Anakin recognises that A'Sharad Hett isn't human, and Hett tells him that humans and Tusken's aren't even genetically compatible. Therefore, other that a few exceptions, they're a different species.
 * Uhh, not quite. Anakin recognizes that Hett IS human, and Hett tells him that he was taught after joining the Jedi that the two species were incompatible. The page is very misleading when it cites Hett's opinion as "compelling", as Hett's opinion was based on an acceptance of Republic scholarship. I suggest rewriting the opening as follows:


 * Tusken Raiders were generally regarded by outsiders as a distinct non-Human species, biologically incompatible with Humans. This was the view of both colonists on Tatooine and orthodox off-world scholarship. However, the evidence that informed this opinion was inconclusive. The Tuskens did not reveal their physical appearance except to their mates, and due to the hostility of the Tatooine climate, and the hostility of the Tusken Raiders themselves, only a very few dessicated corpses had ever been examined. In general, outsiders' opinions about the Sand People were very often based on uncertain and inferential evidence.'


 * One thing that is clear is that the Sand People did include a human contingent. The Jedi Master Sharad Hett won a place among them through his great combat prowess, and they were known to adopt settler orphans, such as Tahiri Veila, after raids on Human settlements and convoys. While this evidence is isolated and limited in quantity, it comprises the only truly reliable evidence for the biological identity of the Tusken Raiders. As a young adult, Sharad Hett's son A'Sharad would accept the standard claim of Tusken-Human incompatibility, and assumed that his mother K'Sheek must have been adopted into the tribe, but it is significant that these ideas did not occur to him before he was exposed to Republic scholarship: he was entirely human by ancestry, and entirely Tusken by birth and upbringing, and even with his Force-sensitivity, had no perception that this combination was unusual.


 * Similarly, when Anakin Skywalker saw that A'Sharad Hett was a human, he was surprised, but this may reflect merely the widespread assumption that typical Tuskens were not human. Later, Skywalker had a nightmare in which a Tusken appeared partially unmasked, but it is not known whether this appearance represented their true form or was simply a "bogeyman", derived from Anakin's imagination.


 * It was also widely held that Tuskens and Jawas shared common ancestry in the Kumumgah, an early Tatooine civilization subjugated by the Infinite Empire, although it is unlikely that the evolutionary differences between the two species could have developed naturally in the few tens of thousands of years between then and the first recorded evidence of them. However, it is believed that some Kumumgah were taken off world by the Infinite Empire to work as slaves on other planets, and there were suspicions around 5,000 BBY that the Kumumgah were a possible origin species for Humanity.


 * Any suggestions?! --McEwok 11:08, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Move to Sand People
As discussed in the top section on this page, "Tusken Raider" is a biased name, a lot more of a nickname than "Sand People", and a name they've been known as for much less time. I recommend a move to Sand People or Sand Person (kind of clunky, but if we're going to use the singular form). - Lord Hydronium 22:04, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Support moving to Sand People. - Sikon 06:28, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Will it be the last time if we move it? It seems this comes up every fortnight&hellip;Cutch 06:48, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm sure "Kowakian monkey-lizard" is kinda biased too. No, Tusken Raider's fine. KEJ 16:10, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
 * How is that biased? And furthermore, it's the only name we have for the Kowakians.  "Tusken Raiders" isn't a name, it's an epithet assigned due to one action a group of them took.  Like someone mentioned above, it would be like calling an entire nation "America bombers" if some of them were terrorists.  Furthermore, "Tusken Raiders" is a name that doesn't even apply to them for most of recorded Star Wars history.  And their very first appearance, out of universe, referred to them as Sand People.  Incidentally, from some spoilers in the New Essential Guide to Aliens, it seems their entry will be titled "Sand Person", so there's precedent if we go with the customary singular title. - Lord Hydronium 06:26, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, Lars calls them "Tuskens," so maybe that's good enough. True enough, I mean, the women, the children, the elderly and the infirm do very little raiding at all. "Sandpeople" is more of an appellation. Maybe just rename the article "Tusken"? Enochf 06:29, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
 * "Tusken Raider" refers to a raid on Fort Tusken in 95 BBY by members of their species. So the only Tusken Raiders who have ever existed were in one tribe about a hundred years before the movies.  "Sand Person" (if we do move it, the proper spelling is two words) is the closest thing to a proper name we have; "Tusken Raider" is the nickname, and not a particularly accurate one. - Lord Hydronium 07:05, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I said it once, I'll say it again. This should be at Sandperson. QuentinGeorge 07:43, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Two words, though. - Lord Hydronium 08:19, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I doubt this will last.-- Lord Oblivion Sith holocronSith_Emblem.svg 23:42, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
 * In Star Wars: Galaxies, it's mentioned several times that the original name for the species is Tusken Raiders, originating from the fact that their first major encounter with the outside world occurred with the raid of Fort Tusken, one of the first outside settlements. Despite the fact that our article says the fort was founded 100 BBY, both the ample talk of Tusken Raiders in KOTOR and the reference to it being among the first of Tatooine's mining settlements necessitates the fact that the 100 BBY 'founding' was not the first time it had been settled.  Sure, it may not be PC, but Tusken Raider was the original nickname, based on actual events.  Sand People grew up over time because, well, they were people... who lived in the sand.  Combined with the inconsistencies in the way Sand People is spelled and formatted (sand people, Sandpeople, sandpeople), it seems clear that Tusken Raiders (only formatted one way) is the older, more 'official', and less casual title.  Besides, the fact that 'Sand People' is predominant in the movies proves nothing, in fact, it weakens the case.  The movies much more commonly use informal language.  How many times are the actual classes of ships ever named?  Even the central protagonist organization of the entire original trilogy is referred to by a nickname every single time it's referenced, by its highest commanders, no less!--Thetoastman 00:17, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Can anyone give me a link to the KotOR quotes? And is it relevant that Republic #11 opens with an extended quote from a report on the Tuskens, filed to a Tatooine mining colony's Bureau of Ethnology and Socialization by Alkhara before he became a bandit? From memory&mdash;I'll try to check&mdash;this uses "Sand People" and "Sandpeople", both spellings, and I think it may also say "Tuskens", though it's dated by other evidence to some time around 550 BBY or earlier. This is pretty clearly an "official" document, even if only in terms of a non-executive arm of a local mining operation. --McEwok 09:40, 15 October 2006 (UTC)


 * The word "Tusken" is never used in dialogue in KOTOR. - Lord Hydronium 05:22, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * It's also never used in... the original trilogy. Not once. The first time you hear the word "Tusken" in the Star Wars movies is when that podracing announcer says it. But I know it's not the first occurrence; when IS the first time in the Star Wars universe that "Tusken" is used? -BaronGrackle 21:09, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
 * That would be the novelization of A New Hope, the first piece of Star Wars material ever released. They're also referred to as "sandpeople" and "raiders" here, but when we're first introduced to them, they're specifically called "Tusken Raiders" or "Tuskens" multiple times. Also, note that the novel states they are "known less formally to the margin farmers of Tatooine simply as the sandpeople"; so "Tusken Raider" is their formal name - \\Captain Kwenn// &mdash; Ahoy! 19:11, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * So...I think this should be at Tusken Raider - \\Captain Kwenn// &mdash; Ahoy! 18:52, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Is anyone bothered? - \\Captain Kwenn// &mdash; Ahoy! 13:13, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't care, as longs as it's not gonna be moved to "Ghorfa" again. KEJ 13:16, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Definately not. Though that's at least three sources (including the first ever source, and the most recent alien source) that use Tusken Raider as the definitive name, with "sandpeople" as a nickname - \\Captain Kwenn// &mdash; Ahoy! 13:17, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Move to Tusken Raider

 * Just kiddin' Enochf 23:51, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Change back to Tusken Raider!
The New Essentail Guide to Alian Species has them as Tusken Raiders first and then in (Sandpeople) so shouldn't we follow the an officail sources Example? Valin &quot;Tnu&quot; &quot;Shido&quot; Suul 02:08, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * It notes they are Tuskens "also referred to as Sand People" and later mentions that Tusken Raider is a Galaxy-recognised name - \\Captain Kwenn// &mdash; Ahoy! 16:20, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree! -Milo fett 00:55, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Are you people stupid?!?! Sand People is G-Level. Tusken is a nickname.Lowbacca5 05:43, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, aren't both names G-level?Tocneppil 07:40, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Yup. Though it's not used in the OT, the name was picked up for use in TPM and AotC, making it as much G-canon as, say, Coruscant is - \\Captain Kwenn// &mdash; Ahoy! 08:17, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * What's entertaining is that "Tusken Raider" is a G-canon nickname, and "Sand People" is a G-canon non-so-nickname, but "Tusken Raider" has gained wider acceptance in the Star Wars universe. And yes, "Sand People" really is more than a nickname: the Sand People Storyteller in KOTOR begins with something along the lines of "In the beginning there were no Sand People, as there was no sand." The wording means it is an idiom in their language as well, and this is the reason I will always vote "Sand Person" over "Tusken Raider". But then we have folk like A'Sharad Hett who consider themselves raised by Tuskens. You know, like Sam Houston lived with and was adopted into a tribe of "Indians". I guess a more modern example would be the "Central Country" or "Middle Kingdom"... which we in English call "China", though the long-dead "Ch'ing" Dynasty was just one aspect of the country's history. Ah well. -BaronGrackle 10:59, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh and about the language thing (see above), sand people, in their language, is urrrrrghhhhurrrrrghhhuuuuuuuuuuurghhhh, or something like that.69.139.52.73 13:09, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

And Essintial guide to Alien Species is not official I believe it is C-cannon at best (same person as above just forgot to sign in).Lowbacca5 13:13, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * It's definitely official. And C-canon is just fine here. -LtNOWIS 13:41, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Infobox image

 * I have changed the NEGAS image to a full body "live-action" image. The NEGAS image is still in the article. -- Volemlock 22:08, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm curious as to what the policy is for species now with pictures provided in the NEGAS. It would be more uniform if those pictures be used as the ones in the infobox. But then, obviously, there are many G-cannon level images of many species. -- Kyp Fisto 02:47, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * As I am aware there is no specific policy regarding species images in the infobox neither would I support such a strict policy. I believe that it should be dealt with on a case by case basis. In principle though I believe (and it is only my opinion) that images should be G-cannon if they are clear and full length. For me it is most critical for a species image in the infobox to include the clean whole body image that is more than often a more complete representation of a species attributes. In some cases, for example where only a poor quality headshot from the movies are available, images from other sources such as NEGAS are more appropriate. I had this discussion and a vote for the Gamorrean article (see Talk:Gamorrean). Perhaps we should have a discussion and vote in this article if there is a difference of opinion. Just my opinions. -- Volemlock 17:52, 2 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Can we come to a consensus on the infobox image. I prefer this image of a single Tusken over the group image for the infobox. -- Volemlock 18:55, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I prefer the group image personally, seeing as it portrays a male, female, and child...rather than just a male. I always prefer male/female pictures in species infobox. &mdash;Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 19:26, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Ditto. Since this is the article about the species, then having an image that portrays male and female is the way to go. If it portrays both AND a youth as well, so much the better. - JMAS 19:37, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Human Relations To Tusken Raiders
I thought about adding this to the biology section...

"The RPG Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic puts forth the theory that perhaps the Tusken Raiders are, in fact, human; or at least are related to them. During dialogue with the tribe's storyteller in the sand peoples' village, If the main character (Revan) asks whether the similarities between those taken by the Rakata and the human colonists is physical or societal, HK47 will remark "Cautionary: Master, if you mean to suggest that humanity is ancestrally linked to ancient Tatooine, you will strain his belief system to its pitiful meatbag maximum."

Indeed, there has not been a single canonical depiction of a Tusken Raider without there face covered. It is possible that humans, as well as humanoid aliens, evolved from Kumumgah who were taken off world by the Infinite Empire to work as slaves on other planets, were they adapted and continued to live on after the fall of the Rakata Empire."

What do you think? 69.250.130.215 23:42, 24 January 2007 (UTC)


 * First, it would have to be in the "Behind the Scenes" section in its current form. To be in the "Biology" section, we would need to remove references to "RPG", "Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic", and other out-of-universe giveaways. Second, and I'm not positive, but this may already be mentioned in the article somewhere. Other than that, your information is perfectly factual. -BaronGrackle 23:46, 24 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Ill try an fix it up. Ill probably stick most of the upper paragraph in the "Behind The Sceans" and work the lower half in to the "Biology". Thanks for you commernts.

"I thought my mother was a Tusken, but I learned on Coruscant that Tuskens and Humans are not genetically compatable." - A'sharad Hett, Clone Wars TPB Volume 3  If the 'Tuskens' are not compatable with the humans, then there are some who are certainly not human. --Muz

Tusken Raider or Sand People?
There was a "sign" that said the title was a nickname. The Title of the article was tusken raider. Is sand person the real name?--Windu223 17:22, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

About the "never removing clothing except in few occasions
I could've sworn I remembered an Original Trilogy-era source that I read in the 90s, some EU or other, that suggested that in fact, it was impossible for outsiders to distinguish male and female tusken raiders since they dressed alike. Obviously this was ignored in the prequel films, but does anybody else remember this? KeirTheWikiGod 09:11, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Continuity Error
"The Tuskens are. That, they say, is all anyone needs to know." - Alkhara (Born <550 BBY, Died >516 BBY)

However... "The term Sand People was given to them due to their existence in the desert, and was in use from at least around 4,000 BBY; but the more formal name of Tusken Raiders was acquired much later, due to a period of concerted attacks on the settlement at Fort Tusken in 98-95 BBY." - The Sand People Article here on Wookiepedia

So... What?

I think either it was a simple continuity error or that the term "Tusken" was in practice earlier than stated. Perhaps it was Fort Tusken that was named after the Sand People and not vice versa? -Darth Micius 16:47, 13 July 2007 (EST)

Is RMQ considered canon?
The image on the main article done by Ralph McQuarrie (and featured in the Illustrated Star Wars Universe) clearly shows two unmasked sandpeople. I'm sure I'm not the only one who's seen this, so I'm wondering why hasn't that ended debate about sandpeoples' appearance beneath the mask? Is the Illustrated Star Wars Universe not canonical? I thought it was at least EU canon.

"He says that the robes are sacred, master, and you would not understand. Sand People are never uncovered outside of the most private moments"
 * I assume the answer to your question lies elsewhere, since there might be a canon-conflict:

- HK-47 translating the Tusken storyteller

I understand that this specific tribe of sandpeople prohibits removal of the robes/masks (If we treat them as the same), the problem is that we don't know if all Tusken tribes shared the same laws, and if time had no effect on the traditions (probably not on Tatooine).Nanook 00:18, 30 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Please post the images if you can!--Darth Shohet June 6, 2008 17:46

Move to Tusken?
I always thought that the name of the actual species was Tusken, but they were commonly referred to as Tusken Raiders for their raidings. Cyfiero II ( Comlink ) 00:18, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

That's Strange
Have you noticed that in the Jedi Civil War most things are more technological looking. Like the Tusken Raiders

Odd Resemblence?
This is really odd, and tell me if you agree. Tusken Raider masks look like Ualaq faces! Here are the two best pics on the site that work well as proof.



This is also on Aqualish discussion. Darth Shohet June 6, 2008 17:43

Hasn't anyone noticed how sand people are controversially similiar to muslims? The woman covered in a garb similiar to a hiqab, the geographical presence of the desert and the hostility to foreign beings.

gender roles
in AOTC and as mentioned in this article, tuskens are said to have strict gender roles, however other sources indicate that there is no distinction between genders in their culture. was the aotc tuskens just one specific tribe that had those customs, and not universal among tuskens? some mention should be made of the non-gender-divided tuskens 24.183.192.28 10:04, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Tuskens, taken from Tatooine
In KOTOR the tusken historian says that one group of tuskens remained on Tatooine, that they hid themselves from the Builders (enemies - Rakata), others - "the worst of their kind" were taken away by the Rakatans. If I'm not mistaken. That's what HK said, I think.

I presume, that in KOTOR it could be a reference to Dark Forces II, where we could see the grave tuskens in Kyle Katarn's house. Why? Well, these grave guys should be considered as the worst in their kind, because they didn't wear masks like Tatooine tuskens. Perhaps they stopped wearing them even at the times of Rakata invaders, that brought them to other planets, including Sulon.

That's only a speculation however. But I had such an idea the very first time I played KOTOR. Neterwan 21:08, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Contradiction?
This article says that Tusken Raiders/"Sand People" don't have the mental capacity to be Jedi. What about A'Sharrad Hett? 76.71.90.189 08:04, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * He's a human. --  I need a name  ( Complain here ) 11:40, 19 April 2009 (UTC)