User talk:Hk 47

{| id="w" width="100%" style="background: transparent; "
 * valign="top" width="50%" style="background: silver; border: 2px solid #000000; padding: .5em 1em; -moz-border-radius: 1em"|

Welcome, Hk 47!
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:

Wookieepedia aspires to be a reliable source for all Star Wars fans to read and draw information from, and as such, fan-created continuity and fan fiction are not allowed within our articles. All in-universe material must be attributable to a reliable, published source.

Please do not remove talk page and forum comments, as they are part of the public record. Remember that you should always sign your comments on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wookieepedian! If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the Senate Hall, visit our official IRC channel, or ask one of our administrators. May the Force be with you!
 * }

Archive
User talk:Hk 47/Archive

Removing content
Please do not remove content from Wookieepedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Jonjedigrandmaster ( Talk ) 18:23, January 5, 2011 (UTC) I have corrected the page of kalast. There was a mistake in the class of the isd. Hk 47 19:33, January 5, 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok but I have explicated my modifications in talk page. I'm sure for taris but perhaps I made a mistake for the kalast page. Hk 47 19:29, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

Image caching issues
Tag the image with WISS if it doesn't appear to update properly. -- Darth Culator  (Talk) 21:18, May 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks for the deletion. Hk 47 21:20, May 24, 2011 (UTC)

Invasion of Kashyyyk (Galactic Civil War)
As decided on the GAN page, the invasion and the battle are to be considered two separate events as the the battle took place well after the invasion. The Imperials had already built a base and enslaved most of the local Wookiees before the Rebels even found out. MasterFred (Whatever) 14:10, May 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes but the invasion took place just after the clone wars. The wookies are already enslaved in all sources of the galactic civil war. And they were freed in galactic battleground.Hk 47 14:54, May 25, 2011 (UTC)

Yavin 4 battles
Hello there,

I was just checking in to see why you had removed the "merge" template from Second Battle of Yavin 4 and Fourth Battle of Yavin 4. Corellian PremierAll along the watchtower 16:07, December 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * Hello. Yes I know there is too much battles of Yavin 4 there is not link between these two. The second (I have found a picture !) is a small mission to recover the survivors of the death star and the fourth is a large assault with Vader and the 501st.Hk 47 16:13, December 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, the link is the timing (immediately after the destruction of the Death Star). Is it okay if I place the merge templates back on the articles, and we can continue this discussion on the article talk pages? Corellian PremierRobotech.jpg along the watchtower 16:26, December 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes if you want.Hk 47 18:47, December 3, 2011 (UTC)

Inexorable
Hey, Hk. I archived Inexorable (Imperial II-class), so whenever you feel its ready to be nominated for Good status, feel free to nominate it. Also, for future reference, please do not remove the CAnom template from an article unless you are going to archive it. Removing it before it is archived makes the archiving process more complicated. Thank you.&mdash; Cal Jedi (Personal Comm Channel) 21:17, January 6, 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks it's done. Hk 47 21:41, January 6, 2012 (UTC)

Congratulations!
Hk 47! Congratulations on being elected February's Wookieepedian of the Month. Your hard work here hasn't gone unnoticed, and you definitely deserve the honour! :)

On the front page of Wookieepedia, you've probably seen the Wookieepedia newsnet over on the right side. There's currently an attempt to revive it, and in the past, the Wookieepedian of the Month was always interviewed. If you're up for it, I was hoping I could interview you! The questions would be pretty basic ones; you can see some past interviews here. I could ask you the questions here on your talk page, or if you prefer e-mail, shoot me one at gradualferguson@hotmail.com. Let me know. A link to the interview would appear in the newsnet feed, and consequently on Wookieepedia's main page. Congratulations again! Menkooroo 06:37, February 6, 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks Menkooroo. For this interview, we can do it if you want, although I'm not sure people could be very interested for my answers! You can ask me the questions on this talk page. I'm french so excuse me if my english is not perfect. Hk 47 12:25, February 6, 2012 (UTC)

Second Battle of Mon Calamari
Not really sure why you reverted my edits since I sourced them and have the books directly in front of me and can see they're accurate, and you didn't give any justification for the edits...174.78.141.147 17:08, April 4, 2012 (UTC)
 * I think you confound with this : Mission to Dac. Hk 47 18:25, April 4, 2012 (UTC)

Warfare
Hey, Hk 47, I noticed you've been doing a lot of work with articles from The Essential Guide to Warfare recently. Would you like to join WookieeProject Warfare?

Just add your name to the Participants section of the project page with #. Thanks! — Cade  Calrayn   18:13, April 8, 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok, it's done. Hk 47 18:37, April 8, 2012 (UTC)

Comic images
Your comic images are good, but please be advised that according to the image policy, text should only be removed from speech bubbles if the bubble is cut off by cropping. If the bubble is intact, the text should remain. Thanks! -- Darth Culator  (Talk) 00:46, June 3, 2012 (UTC) Oh, I didn't knwow, sorry for those ones. Hk 47 00:54, June 3, 2012 (UTC)

Mon Cal
Unfortunately, the Ambush at Mon Calamari precedes the Defense of Mon Calamari, and the Ambush has to follow the Liberation because two Mon Cal cruisers were present. The Ambush occurs in the Imperial storyline, before the cross-campaign mission Liberation of Kashyyyk, and the Defense occurs post-Kashyyyk. I don't know where you're getting that the Defense occurred right after the Liberation, but it's fairly unlikely. Cade  Calrayn   16:37, July 16, 2012 (UTC)
 * Hello, I agree with you about the ambush, it's clearly a diffrent battle. But in the rebel campaign, there is a galactic interlude that makes the transition between the missions "smuggler's raid" and "defense of mon calamari". During this transition, the Empire loses the control of the planet and Mon calamari joins the alliance. Mon Mothma says : "The Mon Calamari have thrown off Imperial control..." The liberation of the planet is the reason why the Imperial fleet attacks the planet in the following mission "defense of mon calamari".Hk 47 (talk) 16:51, July 16, 2012 (UTC)
 * That is most likely the Mon Calamari "throwing off" the Imperial control that results from the Ambush. The reason the Imps attack in the Ambush is because they suspect Dac is seceding, and they're right. They reconquer the planet, destroying some Mon Cal cruisers in the process, and then the Mon Calamari must overthrow them again between the Ambush and the Defense. As the Second Battle on Mon Calamari's BTS states, the game contrasts with several other sourcebooks. Ackbar's entry in the New Essential Guide to Characters confirms that the Second Battle of Mon Calamari - the first time Ackbar frees his planet after being rescued - happens before the Battle of Turkana, which precedes the Star Wars: X-wing series of missions, and the X-wing battle series precedes the Corellia, Vergesso, and Corulag missions in Empire at War (and therefore the Carida raid and the Defense of Mon Calamari). Oh, and that brings up another point&mdash;the Ambush at Mon Calamari has to follow the Second Battle of Mon Calamari. X-wings are present at the Ambush, which means that the ambush follows the Fresian campaign (a Rebel series of missions early in the Rebel campaign in Empire at War), since that's how the Rebels got ahold of the X-wings in the first place. And the Battle of Turkana is the first time the X-wings are used, so it has to precede the Ambush, and also Mon Cal cruisers are present at the battle. Basically, I'm saying that the Mon Cal must have freed their planet a second time sometime between the Ambush and the Defense, because every other source points to the Second Battle of Mon Calamari being before the Empire at War campaigns. Cade   Calrayn  StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit.svg 17:22, July 16, 2012 (UTC)
 * Il's very difficult to compare the timelines of Eaw and the x-wng game. In fact, both begin approximately with the appearance of the x-wing and end with the battle of Yavin. In empire at war, the liberation of dac mentionned in the rebel campaign follows directly the liberation of ackbar. More important, we learn that this liberation led for the first time mon cal cruisers to join the rebellion. I think the liberation mentionned in EaW is The liberation and the battle of Turkana and the Defense of Mon Calamari are soon after (I think the defense is before turkana). The x-wing game follows those events. Hk 47 (talk) 18:58, July 16, 2012 (UTC)
 * For one thing, I'd invite you to look at my work with the Timeline of the Galactic Civil War. I used every source available to complete and untangle it.

But here's a better explanation for why the Liberation preceded the Ambush, and how Turkana can't be before the Defense:
 * The Second Battle of Mon Calamari is Ackbar's first liberation of the planet, resulting in the contribution of several Mon Cal cruisers to the Rebels. Then we have the start of the Rebel campaign in EaW with the First Battle of Kashyyyk, which is followed by the Fresian campaign. The placement of the Empire campaign is iffy until the Subjugation of Geonosis, which includes X-wings.  Therefore, it must follow the Battle of Turkana, which is the first time that the X-wings are used, and the Battle of Turkana follows the Fresian campaign because that's how the Rebels get the X-wings.
 * Then, X-wing and the two Empire at War campaigns run their paths until the Liberation of Kashyyyk, which is concurrent for both sides in Empire at War. And Kashyyyk is preceded by the Ambush at Mon Calamari, which places Dac back under Imperial control.
 * The Rebel campaign and the X-wing battles converge at the Battle of the Circarpous system and the Subjugation of Ralltiir. Ralltiir has to come before the Raid above Corellia, the Scanning in the Vergesso Asteroids, and the Raid over Corulag because Raymus Antilles has not yet been assigned to the Tantive IV at Ralltiir. At Corellia, Vergesso, and Corulag, he commands the Sundered Heart, and after Corulag he is assigned by Mon Mothma to the Tantive on Leia's mission to mission to Kattada. As for the Circarpous system, the Intrepid was the first Star Destroyer to be destroyed by the Rebellion (it's not a game mechanics thing). Since Han Solo is rescued from a Star Destroyer (which is destroyed) at Corellia, it has to follow the Circarpous system conflict.
 * From there, it's a straight line in terms of Empire at War to the Defense of Mon Calamari. Therefore, the Imperials had to be forced of off Mon Calamari sometime between the Ambush at Mon Calamari (where they recapture the planet after it is freed in the Second Battle of Mon Calamari) and the Defense of Mon Calamari (where Ackbar is defending the Rebel-controlled planet from Imperial aggressors.
 * The Liberation/Second Battle also had to precede the Imperial Ambush in Empire at War, because the Battle of Turkana has Mon Cal cruisers (which the Rebels only got after the Liberation) and is the first time X-wings are used after the Fresian campaign.

The Liberation might have happened during the Fresian campaign (There isn't any more info on that), but it had to precede the Ambush. Sorry if that's rather complicated. Cade  Calrayn   19:28, July 16, 2012 (UTC)
 * There is too much contradictions. I was even completly agreeing with you at a moment but with more thinking it's impossible. I think we have to forget the fact X-wing were first used in the battle of turkana. It's a massive change but it is the most logical. Like the first destroyer destroyed at Circarpous, these informations were made completly obsolete by all the more recent sources (see all the ISDs destroyed at Kamino in TFU 2). The liberation in the rebel campaign is clearly the first liberation. It was clearly explained in the story that Ackbar and the Mon Calamari has not joined the rebellion until the liberation mentionned in the Rebel campaign and this liberation of dac directly follows the liberation of ackbar. The story also explains that this was the smuggler's mission that allowed the mon calamari to arm their ship for the first time and liberate their world. It doesn't conflict with previous sources excepted the Xwings use at turkana. There is of course a problem with this ambush but this battle seems ambiguously canon. I think the correct timeline is: battle of kamino, fresian campaign, beginning of EaW, liberation of Dac, defense of Dac, battle of turkana and all the X-wing game. In fact, all this discussion raises the issue of the inconsistencies between the too many sources. Hk 47 (talk) 21:05, July 16, 2012 (UTC)
 * We cannot throw out sources just because you think they don't match up with your own views. The X-wing was first used at Turkana, a point that is sourced to Empire at War, and you can't call the Imperial campaign ambiguously canon and the Rebel campaign canon&mdash;they're both canon, though they didn't occur exactly concurrently. I'm sorry, but you're really not arguing your point well. I noticed while creating my sourced timeline that you have attempted to linearize the course of the Galactic Civil War by connecting random events into some sort of a straight timeline without any sources to back you up, so you're really on shaky ground when it comes to claiming that the Liberation happened between Carida and the Defense. Multiple sources back me up and disprove your claims, and it's perfectly reasonable that the Mon Calamari or the Rebels would defeat the Imperial forces that recaptured the planet during the Ambush. Cade   Calrayn  StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit.svg 21:33, July 16, 2012 (UTC)
 * While you did bring up a valid point about the Star Destroyer thing being rendered moot, my point still stands. Circarpous is directly followed by a mission where Keyan Farlander delivers the information on the Death Star that was recovered in the Cron Drift to Princess Leia aboard the Tantive, and Mon Mothma sends Raymus Antilles to rescue Han in the Raid above Corellia because she needs Han's help in investigating the rumors that Leia has gathered. . Turkana precedes the Ambush and Defense of Mon Calamari (because it's the first time X-wings are used), so the Ambush and Defense have to follow the Liberation/Second Battle of Mon Calamari.  Cade   Calrayn  StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit.svg 21:10, July 16, 2012 (UTC)
 * I think we must take other people opinion about Dac. Anyway I just noticed a mistake about another point. You say, Han was rescued (Raid above Corellia) to investigate about Leia's information. In EaW, this was the pirates from Atzerri's informations (First Battle of Atzerri) that led to the Raid over Corulag, Leia was not involved at this point. After Corulag, Antilles was transfered to the Tantive IV for Leia's final mission. This indicate that the Battle of Kattada took place after those events. The Essential Atlas recently better clarified the last events of operation Skyhook. It stated that Leia's missions to Ralltiir and Kattada is more or less concurent with the theft of the plans at danuta (Kyle katarn's mission) and that Leia directly flew from Kattada to recover the plans at Toprawa. Hk 47 (talk) 22:05, July 16, 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, I might have confused the reasoning behind the Corulag mission, but my point is still perfectly valid. If you had bothered to look at the timeline, you would have seen that Kattada is accurately placed post-Corulag, for the reasons I stated above and you restated.  The Atzerri pirates/Kalast, the Cron Drift mission, and Leia's conversation with Lord Tion between the Subjugation of Ralltiir and the Battle of Kattada are all reasons that Mon Mothma recruits Han.  The three different sources of info directly contributed to her decision, as Leia's conversation with Tion brought up the words Death Star, and Mothma (secretly) knew what that was. But my point about Dac still stands, and is backed up by multiple sources.  Cade   Calrayn  StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit.svg 22:40, July 16, 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually, looking though the Atzerri info, it appears that Atzerri had nothing to do with the Death Star. A pirate tried to sell info on the Alliance, not the Death Star.   Cade   Calrayn  StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit.svg 22:43, July 16, 2012 (UTC)
 * I have updated the First Battle of Atzerri page with the quotes and the missing informations. Hk 47 (talk) 00:13, July 17, 2012 (UTC)

Biggs
As stated on Biggs' own page, in the Behind the Scenes: "Years later, in a retcon that helped explain these inconsistencies, the comic story Star Wars: Empire: Darklighter revealed through Biggs' narration that he had already joined the Rebellion, and kept the whole truth from Luke in that deleted scene to protect him."



Also, another section from that article, sourced to that comic arc, states that Darklighter came and visited his father on Tatooine before Episode IV, after he joined the Rebellion. Don't try to change the chronology unless you can actually prove that there is a flaw. Where does it say in Darklighter that it happened after Tatooine? Don't re-add the info until you can prove it, please. Cade  Calrayn   16:07, July 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * In Empire: Darklighter, the mutiny on the Rand Ecliptic takes place after Biggs return from Tatooine. The battle of tatooine is featured during this trip on tatooine. Which source change the chronology ? Hk 47 (talk) 16:16, July 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * The Complete Star Wars Encyclopedia comfirms the mutiny took place after his trip on Yavin (Biggs entry). Hk 47 (talk) 16:26, July 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * What are you talking about? What trip to Yavin? No other source even remotely suggests what you're saying, so I suggest you upload images of the comic in question you say this info comes from.  Cade   Calrayn  StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit.svg 16:28, July 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * Besides the fact that the image is improperly sourced and will be deleted, that doesn't prove anything. What is the context for that? The preceding or following pages, maybe? Cade   Calrayn  StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit.svg 16:36, July 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * To resume Datlighter... After being promoted at the academyn, Biggs returns to Tattoine where he says to Luke he will join the Rebellion. Luke has just seen the battle in space earlier with his binoculars (see picture). Biggs later leaves Tatooine and go to the rand ecliptic for the first time. The mutiny takes place later. The second picture is from the complete encyclopedia.Hk 47 (talk) 16:56, July 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * And as the BTS quote I gave you above states, Darklighter was already a member of the Alliance at that point. I can see how you got confused - Empire 9 is a flashback to events that happened before his visit to Tatooine in Empire 8. The Rand Ecliptic, Incom, and convoy missions can't happen after the Battle of Tatooine, since Darklighter participates in the Ambush in the Cron Drift during Operation Skyhook, before the movie starts. Despite any inconsistencies, we have to go with that, because we can't through out X-wing as a source. Also, in Empire 8, Darklighter narrates that "several eventful months have passed" between when he left Tatooine and when he returned at the beginning of ANH.  Cade   Calrayn  StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit.svg 17:03, July 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, and sorry, but that Encyclopedia entry must be flawed, because ANH happened over the course of one or two weeks (Alderaan was between 35:3:5 and 35:3:12). It couldn't have been "within weeks" that he accomplished all of that. Plus the reasons I stated above about Biggs' mission in the Cron Drift. Cade   Calrayn  StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit.svg 17:12, July 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey you are right about the flashback I have downlodad the different issues of the comics because I have the tpb version. And it was more clear like this. The tpb is quite different in the organisation. Sorry!! Anyway, it seems the encyclopedia made the same mistake! Hk 47 (talk) 18:52, July 18, 2012 (UTC)

Copy-and-paste warning
This is a general warning to you regarding the way in which you attempt to "write" articles. One does not write an article on Wookieepedia by directly copy-and-pasting enormous amounts of text from another article, as you have attempted to do with the Infiltration of the Tarkin article. I have removed these additions from that article. You are welcome to try and repopulate the article again with writing in your own words, but if I see you try to do this again, I will once more remove it, and you may be issued a block from editing. Thank you. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 18:39, September 28, 2012 (UTC)
 * Tope, there has been no policy resolution about this, so a warning is inappropriate. If he was copying someone else's words, that would be a problem, but otherwise, it's fine. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 18:45, September 28, 2012 (UTC)
 * First of all, NaruHina, you can mind your own business. I'm not debating the legitimacy of an administrative warning with you, of all people, on this talk page. If you have a question of administrative procedure, you can bring it up on the noticeboard or seek me out on IRC. Moreover, this warning stands. I suggest neither of you try and push the matter further. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 18:49, September 28, 2012 (UTC)
 * I have every right to point out something is mistaken in any conversation on the Wook, like anyone else. It's not an administrative warning if you're not enforcing policy, of which there is precisely nothing on this matter; it's you pushing your opinion on the matter off onto someone else. That's all I'm saying on the matter, and it's the truth. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 18:54, September 28, 2012 (UTC)
 * If I may interject, but Toprawa's right about this. Not that he needs any support from me on the matter, but you may want to review this policy which directly states that the creative expression of other authors' material not formulated in your own words is plagiarism... and not tolerated. This is why he is an admin&mdash;he can quickly act on content that threatens the legal standing and legitimacy of the wiki. &mdash; Gethralkin  Hyperwave 20:49, September 28, 2012 (UTC)
 * I appreciate the effort to clarify the matter, Gethralkin. However, I would like to reiterate the point, as I expressed to Naru, that I feel any further discussion on this talk page is inappropriate, and worse, extremely annoying at this point to Hk 47. While I am under no certain obligation to explain my administrative decisions to anyone outside of the administration, I am prepared to give an explanation confidentially to both Naru and Hk 47 if they so request it. Rest assured, that it is not simply me "pushing my opinion." Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 21:06, September 28, 2012 (UTC)

Dubrillion
No, without direct confirmation, we can't assume affiliations through the maps&mdash;in this case Dubrillion and this is what CC7567 told me.--Darth Pythonis (talk) 15:33, October 28, 2012 (UTC)
 * This discussion had already taken place. It's is accepted that planets specificaly mentioned on the maps can have their affiliations assumed and planets located in a faction area but not mentioned not. Hk 47 (talk) 15:46, October 28, 2012 (UTC)
 * Look at Taral's comments at these forums; you can't base a world's affiliation through the maps alone, like Dubrillion and a few others, without verification from a source stating that it "was aligned" with that group.--71.80.172.90 22:49, October 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * So he is wrong, please stop trying modify this article. Hk 47 (talk) 22:56, October 29, 2012 (UTC)

Delete
hey why do you want to remove that page hk47
 * There is a forum for discussions (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Forums). Hk 47 (talk) 20:17, November 1, 2012 (UTC)

but where do i put my thing for discussion

Cracken's Rebel Operatives/Small Favors/Executor
I finally got a copy of The Essential Reader's Companion and found the discrepancy regarding Small Favors' timeline placement. I noticed you haven't made any edits to the Executor article reflecting this information. How do you propose to reconcile the conflicting information on the events surrounding the Executor?--Matthias777 (talk) 16:39, November 8, 2012 (UTC)
 * Hello. In fact there is not any problen. It's known from years that the executor was officialy commissioned in 2 ABY despite it was finished in 0 ABY. Hk 47 (talk) 17:36, November 8, 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, that's just the problem; The Essential Reader's Companion now states that it was officially commissioned at Kuat in 0 ABY, not 2 ABY. Personally I feel that the authors just didn't do extensive enough research (understandable, considering the scope of the book), but I don't think that I get to make that call...--Matthias777 (talk) 17:42, November 8, 2012 (UTC)
 * The Essential Reader's Companion don't contradict the old timeline. It just confirms the first use in 0 ABY. Hk 47 (talk) 17:55, November 8, 2012 (UTC)
 * The Essential Reader's Companion states that the events of Small Favors occurred in 0 ABY, when the Adventure Journal itself depicts the events at the beginning of Small Favors (specifically, the Executor's commissioning ceremony at Kuat) as occurring in 37:10 (2 ABY) in the news bulletins preceding the story. Hence, the Companion is contradicting the existing timeline.--Matthias777 (talk) 18:18, November 8, 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes The Essential Reader's Companion mentions Small Favors but this story was not dated in Adventure Journal. The commisioning mentioned in 2 ABY in GalaxyNewsNet is something different, even if it could have intended to be the same. Hk 47 (talk) 18:26, November 8, 2012 (UTC)

Cilare
Dude, read Fry's blog again. He's talking on creating Vonak system for EGTW when mentioning Cilare - surely he wouldn't be meaning the species, when the context of the sentence is that of systems and planets. Why do you have to make things so complicated? --LOST-Malachi (talk) 17:37, November 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * You have found a retcon I didn't have seen but you are wrong. Fry just mentions the Cilare species not the planet (Cilare is a ice planet). So Vonak is the new name of the planet in invasion. Hk 47 (talk) 17:42, November 11, 2012 (UTC)

About revert
This happened a while ago now, but I edited the Star Wars: Galactic Battlegrounds article and removed several names from the cast list that were only from the expansion pack. I happened to go back on the page today and found that you'd reverted this edit and in your summary said it was reverting vandalism. I wanted to ask you here why you said it was vandalism instead of reverting it myself and possibly starting an edit war. Thanks.  Commander Code-8  To say hi, press 42 06:07, November 13, 2012 (UTC)
 * You can't delete this content like this. You must before add it on the Clone Campaigns page. Hk 47 (talk) 22:30, November 13, 2012 (UTC)
 * Fair enough then. I'll do it soon.  Commander Code-8  To say hi, press 42 09:02, November 15, 2012 (UTC)

Former CA
Hey, Hk. I was curious about your edit here. I don't recall Ebenmal going through any process of CA removal. If it did, I would appreciate it if you would link me to the page. If not, please notice that there is a page for that. An article does not get stripped of status simply because a user thinks it should be. There's an official process it must go through. Like I said, if it did indeed go through this process, please show me. If not, please revert it to its status. Thank you for your cooperation.&mdash; Cal Jedi (Personal Comm Channel) 23:16, November 13, 2012 (UTC)
 * Hello. Sorry, it was just because my edit made the status obsolete. I had the intention to ask the official process but i forget ! Hk 47 (talk) 23:23, November 13, 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, thank you for rectifying it. If there is still a particular issue with it that you believe warrants review, please let me know, since I'm the original nominator.&mdash; Cal Jedi Infinite Empire.svg (Personal Comm Channel) 23:46, November 13, 2012 (UTC)

Mitth'raw'nuruodo
Hi there, Hk 47! I've been following with great interest in your work with Mitth'raw'nuruodo's article. Great work. I was wondering if you would like a hand, particularly on the section dealing with Choices of One. Currently there seems to be only two sentences about it, and that is not nearly enough to cover all that greatness which is the fore mentioned novel.--Dionne Jinn (Something to say?) 20:36, November 19, 2012 (UTC)
 * Hello. Yes you can help me expand it, I don't have read this book. Thanks Hk 47 (talk) 21:06, November 19, 2012 (UTC)
 * Ooo! You have no idea what you are missing. That books is brilliant! Anyway, now the couple of sentences have grown into three paragraphs. I'm obsessed with Thrawn, so if there is anything else I can help you with on the article, just let me know.--Dionne Jinn (Something to say?) 18:11, November 20, 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I will continue to expand and improove this page but you can also do everything you want with it, it's a free encyclopedia ! Hk 47 (talk) 18:53, November 20, 2012 (UTC)
 * That it is. Which reminds me, there is one issue I've been wanting to discuss with another Thrawn-fan. And that is the relative age of Thrawn and Thrass. I know it has been talked before on the talk page, but as another recent editor for the article I'd like to hear your opinion. Currently Thrawn's article says he is the younger one and it is sourced to Outbound Flight. But OF never states which one of them is older&mdash;if anything it makes it sound as if Thrass was the younger of them. I believe the current statement that Thrass is the older was is based on the title Syndic, which is held by Thrass in OF, but is attached to Thrawn's name in Vision of the Future, and it is thus assumed that Thrawn inherited that title from his brother.--Dionne Jinn (Something to say?) 19:04, November 20, 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure there is no exact indications of thrawn's age but i don't remember very well the point where thrawn and thrass discuss of their family. So if you are sure there is no precise indication that Thrass is older, this must be remove from the article. Hk 47 (talk) 13:54, November 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * Their relative age is never mentioned, when Thrawn and Thrass talk about their family. Only reference to topic, in fact, is in a scene when Jorj Car'das first meets Thrass. He refers to him as a "young Chiss male".--Dionne Jinn (Something to say?) 15:19, November 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok, well. Don't hesitate to correct it if you find other mistakes. Hk 47 (talk) 16:00, November 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, I won't. I've noticed couple of other things that need checking, but not much.--Dionne Jinn (Something to say?) 16:03, November 21, 2012 (UTC)

Second Battle of Kuat numbers.
Okay, I added in those numbers based on a Youtube playthrough for the mission. Also, I also based it on the Rebel forces amounts. In fact, at the beginning of the mission, they explicitly listed the amount of ships in the mission for Zann's Consortium. Here's what I'm referring to:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJJCfQC9YNM

Now, if I made a big mistake, then my mistake. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 23:53, November 27, 2012 (UTC)
 * So he isn't very good. Last time I did this mission I had less than five cruisers... Anyway, it's better to limit your edits to the games you have played. The consortium forces depend of the player and the ennemies are unlimited. Hk 47 (talk) 00:01, November 28, 2012 (UTC)

Lexi Degarienne
Can you explain to me your reasons for removing this information from two separate articles? If there's a fanon discussion about this, it's not on this character's page, nor his daughters. I understand that you think it's fanon, and it may well be, but I don't see the discussion you speak of, so I'd love to know exactly why you think this needs to be removed.--Demos Traxen (talk) 18:02, December 4, 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry, grand-daughter's page.--Demos Traxen (talk) 18:03, December 4, 2012 (UTC)
 * Nevermind - I found the trash compactor page you were referring to and double-checked with my copy of Adventure Journal #12. Compact that trash.--Demos Traxen (talk) 18:05, December 4, 2012 (UTC)

Re: Calendar
Apologies Hk_47, yeah User:Menkooroo has explained this further and I've conceded that I should resist changing anymore dates until people understand fully what I'm trying to convey. Rokkur Shen (talk) 14:29, December 11, 2012 (UTC)

GemDiver Station Starship changed to a YT-2000 light freighter
The Corellian starship I made for the GemDiver Station picture wasn't intended to be a YT-2000 (since it preceded it by a couple of years), but one could say that it was heavily modified! :) Bantha68 (talk) 03:10, December 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok it looks very similar. So you're free to revert my edit if you decide it is not a YT-2000. Hk 47 (talk) 03:17, December 21, 2012 (UTC)

Happy New Year
Hey, I wanna wish you a happy new year, sorry for being little late! :) --XXLVenom998 (talk) 19:50, January 7, 2013 (UTC)
 * thank you too! Hk 47 (talk) 19:54, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

Planet systems
Please see Forum:CT Archive/Atlas and systems some names in the online companion are conjectural. If they have not been mentioned in any other sources then a conjecture tag is to be placed until they are confirmed in a published source other than the online companion. Rokkur Shen (talk) 01:36, January 26, 2013 (UTC)

Hakartha Space Station
Hi there Hk 47. The Essential Atlas Online Companion lists this as "Hakartha Space Station". Which source explictly states "Hakartha Station"? Rokkur Shen (talk) 12:12, January 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * The others sources mentioned on the page.  Hk 47 (talk) 12:15, January 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not interested in participating in an edit war with you. Have you confirmed that for yourself? If so, can you please kindly add a 1stID confirming the specific source. Rokkur Shen (talk) 12:25, January 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes I verified it. When there is multiple sources in a page, you have to verify all of them before adding these kinds of templates. According to my Beetle Nebula edit, people have already said you that systems and other objects were created from previous mentions in the EU. And Javin (Anoat) means anoat sector in the greater javin, this was explained in the essentail atlas.  Hk 47 (talk) 12:35, January 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * Thankyou, for correcting the Hakartha Space Station page. That's all I was asking for. As for your addition to Beetle Nebula, it's still speculation on your behalf sorry. Rokkur Shen (talk) 12:49, January 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * You can modify my sentence about the Beetle Nebula to make it less speculative but you must keep the relation between the ship and the nebula.
 * The template 1stID is very few used so it's not a good idea to add confirmation templates in any cases. Use it only when you are sure the names are wrong. Hk 47 (talk) 12:54, January 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * No I still don't think you understand. There is no connection. The designer of the transport may simply have liked beetles and nebulae. Unless it is specified in a printed source it is speculation. Non-canon. Fanon. However, you want to term it. I've already reported this to a higher authority. It is now in their hands and for them to decide I will not be goaded into constant reverting. Rokkur Shen (talk) 12:59, January 26, 2013 (UTC)

Re: Skaross system battle
The battle title itself is conjectural.
 * Ok but the battle exists, so why do you remove it from ths system page? Hk 47 (talk) 14:16, January 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * Fixed. But please don't remove Conjecture and Stub tags when it clearly is still a stub. Rokkur Shen (talk) 14:20, January 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok. If the name is conjectural, where does "Skaross" come, a planet name ?

Caridan system
Hi Hk 47, I appreciate your efforts to rectify the "Caridan system" debate however I was waiting for an administrator to step in and move the page correctly. Unfortunately, a few other users see it differently. Rokkur Shen (talk) 23:20, February 1, 2013 (UTC)

Forso
Hi Hk 47. What was the reason for reverting my edit on Nebula Forso?  Stake black   msg 23:15, February 12, 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello, you can't place this image in the infobox since it don't depict the page's topic. But you can add the picture anywhere else in the article if you explain the relation. Like there. Hk 47 (talk) 00:12, February 13, 2013 (UTC)

Unidentified jungle moon
Hi Hk. You may want to crop a little more or at least indicate which moon is the moon you want to focus on this image. It's not very clear from this crop. Cheers.  Stake black   msg 14:00, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello, there is no way of knowing which one was the inhabited moon on the picture from space. That's way I left both. Hk 47 (talk) 21:51, February 19, 2013 (UTC)

Re:Tatooine
Yes, I have, and it completely contradicts a number of sources that came out both before and after the book. I don't remember the exact details, but the novel's placement is incorrect on several notes. Cade  Calrayn   00:28, March 2, 2013 (UTC)

Skirmish in the Ithorian Compound
Hi, I would say that Skirmish in the Ithorian Compound isn't "important event of First Jedi Purge" and is meaningful only in the context of the Exile's story. (: – Tm_T@Wookieepedia:&#126;$ 19:01, April 7, 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello, are you mentioning the template ? I agree with you completely about this event, it doesn't deserve its own page according to me. I add it in the template until the article was merged in a larger page about all the firefights and skirmishes involving the Exile on Telos. Hk 47 (talk) 20:20, April 7, 2013 (UTC)
 * What I meant is that it doesn't deserve to be in the timeline of "important events of First Jedi Purge", including the template. But I do think it being individual event it does deserve its own article. (: – Tm_T@Wookieepedia:&#126;$ 15:23, April 9, 2013 (UTC)

Wookiepédia, version en français
Bonjour Hk 47, je te contacte car tu semble être l'un des contributeurs francophones de Wookieepedia. Je voulais te faire part de l'existence de Wookiepédia_fr, la "version en français" de ce wiki et par la même occasion t'inviter à venir nous donner un coup de main si le cœur t'en dit :) (création, traduction, organisation...) Ton expérience sur Wookieepedia nous serait d'un grand secours ! A bientôt j'espère Trazeris (talk) 14:40, July 3, 2013 (UTC)
 * Salut, je suis bien un contributeur francophone de Wookieepedia. Mais pour aller droit au but, je me suis inscrit à la version anglaise de wookieepedia car elle est bien plus complète qu'aucune autre et qu'elle est la seule à ma connaissance à être vraiment axaustive. Du coup, ça ne m'intéresse pas vraiment de participer à une nième encyclopédie française. Il y en existe des tas qui sont affreusement incomplètes et qui auraient énormément gagné à se réunir... Hk 47 (talk) 15:37, July 3, 2013 (UTC)