User talk:Gethralkin

 Find archived discussions here: 1

Talk archive
Please provide a link to your talk archive on your talk page. Graestan ( Talk ) 01:36, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Citation
Would you be so kind as to leave citations with your additions to articles? On Kento Marek it is clear you know the source; would it be unreasonable to provide it, maintaining our high standard of article quality and attribution on the site? Graestan ( Talk ) 01:43, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Working on it. A little patience please. ;) Gethralkin 01:55, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Comments
I realize you reverted it afterward, but please refrain from making this kind of comment on talk pages for articles. The talk pages exist for constructive discussions of the articles, not little remarks. If you see something wrong, just fix it&mdash;no need to indirectly insult anyone by commenting on it. Graestan ( Talk ) 00:38, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

GA
I Noticed there a gillion articles that you have created, and I was just wondering how you got your information? Some of these article names, I've never heard of them. Since the info isn't on Wookieepedia, where is the information? Please help me out. Thanx!!! Gmalek 15:55, 29 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Good Articles. Your page says you created a lot of pages, and I was just wondering where you got the information for them. 16:03, August 29, 2009 (UTC)

Planets Characters Magazines 16:32, August 29, 2009 (UTC)
 * I need information sites for these types:

Re: Denal
Thanks for your advice; I'll try to keep that in mind. However, the paragraphs in the Denal article seem to follow these guidelines IMO. Are there any particular problems you could point out to me? QuiGonJinn (Talk) 14:44, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
 * I've adjusted the article slightly, though I decided not to start a new paragraph after Skywalker's departure to seek Artoo. Doing as you suggested would have left two very short paragraphs, which, compared to the rest of the article, looked unsightly. As for the missing words, I'm not sure if they are the appropriate ones. You see, Denal did not figure out how to use the boots&mdash;he obviously knew that before&mdash;he just figured out that the clones needed to use them at that particular moment. Also, "to send for reinforcements" means "to request reinforcements", does it not? Then this was not the case with Cad Bane, who was asked to send reinforcements himself, but refused. Then again, as a non-native English speaker, I might be mistaken. And regarding your comment on Denal's death. First, it was not confirmed in "Cargo of Doom." Yes, we all know what really happened, but until Denal's death is explicitly confirmed on screen, we can not put this information in the article. Second, we do not have any authority to declare things apocryphal, Lucas Licensing does that. Besides, all we have to do is move the cellphone section before the Devaron part and there will be no conflict (well, apart from the rank discrepancy). Again, such move and other appropriate changes will be done when Denal is confirmed dead. QuiGonJinn  Senate seal.svg(Talk) 17:10, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that works just fine. Thanks. QuiGonJinn  Senate seal.svg(Talk) 17:33, October 7, 2009 (UTC)

Goji
Could you please point me to where Goji's rank and allegiance to Red Squadron is coming from? I absolutely can't find it on the PocketModel card. Thanks.  CC7567  (talk) 04:34, April 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * If that PocketModel source doesn't even mention Goji, his affiliation isn't confirmed&mdash;just because he flew a red Y-wing doesn't automatically mean that he was in Red Squadron. It must be directly confirmed for it to be canon; otherwise, it's OR.  CC7567  (talk) 19:21, April 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your desire to make Wookieepedia more comprehensive, but that word choice isn't the basis for a connection of that sort to be made. He could have simply meant the red Y-wing design, which doesn't confirm that there is only one red Y-wing in existence and therefore still doesn't confirm Goji's affiliation.  CC7567  (talk) 00:45, April 14, 2010 (UTC)

Death Trap
I don't want to sound like I'm trying to come down on you, as that is not my intention, but none of the Bts notes about Death Trap's continuity are verified, not even by official sources. First off, we do not know exactly what TCW is going to do with the 20 BBY introduction date of the ARC-170s&mdash;with so little information on their original introduction, taking older canon and applying it to newer canon simply isn't going to work in this instance. Secondly, Skywalker's Delta-7B is destroyed in both "R2 Come Home" (which I'm assuming you haven't seen yet, but nevertheless, it is) and "The Zillo Beast." As either story arc can come first thanks to the same confusing and redundant scenario presented in both ones, we don't know what the actual order is. Yes, we do know that Season Two hasn't been aired chronologically&mdash;that's been confirmed for a while now in the guide for "The Hidden Enemy", in addition to "Cat and Mouse" itself&mdash;but we don't know the exact order of the episodes, so outlining one in an article and presenting it as official isn't the most appropriate thing to do right now. It's best to wait for Leland Chee or some other Lucasfilm official to publish a canon timeline instead of making these sort of assumptions ourselves. If there are any issues with this or if there is something that I'm overlooking somehow, don't hesitate to bring them up with me on my talk page, as I don't want to try to be imposing.  CC7567  (talk) 07:22, April 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * Gethralkin, please read this message before simply reverting the faulty Death Trap Bts continuity notes back. While I do not have a problem with you disagreeing with me, I find that there has to be a reason for it, and I have yet to hear one from you.  CC7567  (talk) 07:30, April 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * That would be fine if the Battle of Malastare had a confirmed date, which to my knowledge it doesn't. If you have an accessible source that explicitly states so, I'd love to see it.  CC7567  (talk) 07:34, April 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * The Clone Wars novel makes absolutely no mention of the Battle of Malastare and therefore isn't a source for this 20 BBY date. The novel only provides an approximate date for the entire TCW series, which the Battle of Malastare article currently makes use of. Also, regardless of how "final" the dialogue seems, I still fail to see how we can simply know whether "The Zillo Beast" or "Death Trap/R2 Come Home" comes first when the ship is destroyed in both story arcs, as I've already mentioned before. If I'm somehow misinterpreting what you're saying, please tell me, but I still don't see how any of the sources apply to this claimed 20 BBY date for Malastare.  CC7567  (talk) 07:55, April 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * I am well aware that the episodes are not produced chronologically, and I have yet to see something state that their production order is an actual indication to their canonical chronology. Just because the episodes were produced in a certain order does not automatically mean that they were meant to be aired that way or canonically placed in chronological order. Dave Filoni has said himself in The Official Episode Guide: Season 1 that we cannot assume chronology within TCW beyond story arcs unless explicitly confirmed. As of right now, I still cannot say that I see any reason for Death Trap's Bts notes to be kept in the article when the majority of it has proved to be common and non-noteworthy knowledge&mdash;all the article cites for its claim on the episode chronology is production order, which is simply not enough.  CC7567  (talk) 08:27, April 28, 2010 (UTC)

Re:Block
You have not been blocked on Wookieepedia. You'll have to be more specific about what issue it is you're having exactly. Toprawa and Ralltiir 22:23, May 16, 2010 (UTC)

Ship
Please stop italicizing Ship's name in articles. In the many novels in which Ship appears the name remains consistantly non-italicized&mdash;something I believe is due mostly to the fact that Ship is treated more like a sentient being than a vessel&mdash;thus the name should not be italicized in our articles. Thank you. Jonjedigrandmaster ( Talk ) 03:48, October 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * (1) The CSWE is not the most recent publication; all 4 Fotj novels that Ship has been in have been released since then, and (2) even if it was the most recent, that doesn't mean that one instance of italicization instantly outweighs 8 instances of non-italicazation. This was actually brought up a long time ago when the CSWE first came out, but we decided to go with what the majority of the sources said. Jonjedigrandmaster  ( Talk ) 04:11, October 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * Already got it. :P And there's already a note in the article's BTS&hellip; Jonjedigrandmaster  ( Talk ) 04:17, October 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem. :) Jonjedigrandmaster  ( Talk ) 04:29, October 16, 2010 (UTC)

The 221st
Please don't change articles that have been nominated for status so drastically, especially without talking to the nominatior. Thanks. NaruHina Talk  17:18, May 2, 2011 (UTC)

ARC-170 BTS
We cannot have speculation here, even in BTS. See this discussion. Unless you have a canon source that states the design of the ARC-170 was based on a real-life aircraft, it needs to be removed. <- Omicron (Leave a message at the BEEP! ) 14:07, May 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * Do you have a link to the conversation or CT about the BTS speculation? I am interested in what it says, so I don't delete valid information from a BTS section. Personally, I think things like the your statement in the ARC-170 are speculation, just because it looks like a P-61 to you doesn't make it so or particularly noteworthy. The problem with adding the tag is how do you confirm it looks like whatever you're speculating on? Again, I just would like to know the formal policy so I can understand the correct things that can be in a BTS.  Thanks. <-  Omicron (Leave a message at the BEEP! ) 20:11, May 3, 2011 (UTC)

T81 Division
I brought up my objections on the CAN page, but I was told to make them myself.&mdash; TK-999  ( Rise of the Empire ) 13:10, May 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * Adding links doesn't classify as a major edit. 1358  (Talk)  13:15, May 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * You might be experiencing a bug, as I added my sig.&mdash; TK-999  Era-imp.png( Rise of the Empire ) 13:21, May 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, so its the CAN page! There, I made a bulleted list, but others arriving later built their ones into it, causing it to look like as if they were different. However, I had seen this practice previously on nomination pages.&mdash; TK-999  Era-imp.png( Rise of the Empire ) 13:32, May 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * What I am doing is acceptable. I have seen it in practice several times. For example, Xd1358 lists his objections below the heading Ecks Dee, QuiGonnJinn below QGJ etc. Xd is an Inq and an AC, so he surely knows what he is doing. CC7567&mdash;another Inq/AC&mdash;also leaves his sig at the end of the bulleted objection lists he creates. Therefore, it is an acceptable method.&mdash; TK-999  Era-imp.png( Rise of the Empire ) 13:02, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay. I will end this debate.&mdash; TK-999  Era-imp.png( Rise of the Empire ) 13:07, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * Should I add three tildes and the copied timestamp then?&mdash; TK-999  Era-imp.png( Rise of the Empire ) 13:19, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * Just jumping in here, but it is perfectly permissible to leave your sig at the end of a bulleted list. It also is permissible to be creative with objection headers. I, for one, use "Fred strikes." When one objects, it is seen as one comment, so only one sig is needed. If discussion continues, I prefer to sig further comments, but I don't believe it is necessary. Many people do not sign comments in their objection section. It's kinda understood that they're the one commenting since it is their section. MasterFred Commerce Guild.svg(Whatever) 18:16, May 10, 2011 (UTC)