User talk:SparqMan/Archive1

SparqMan, -- Riffsyphon1024 18:25, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

Not to be rude or anything, but when will you ever make a user page? It's clogging up wanted pages. -- Riffsyphon1024 22:42, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Oh, ha ha. -- Riffsyphon1024 22:53, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Hey, it does the job. That's what matters, right? ;-)  Now we just have to get on Fade, JimRaynor55, and Vermillion. ;-)

Do you have a picture of Cin Drallig SGCommand

Rebel Alliance
Sparq, what are you accomplishing by redirecting Rebel Alliance to this other long name that noone, not even me, knows. "Alliance to Restore the Republic" can be included in the article on Rebel Alliance and the term redirect to Rebel Alliance, but not the other way around. -- Riffsyphon1024 03:07, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
 * The same thing we're accomplishing by titling articles "Galactic Empire", "X-wing starfighter" or "Ulric Tagge" -- giving them titles based on their full, proper name. If users put "Rebel Alliance" into the box, they will be directed to the page with its proper title. That's why. --SparqMan 03:09, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
 * But how many people will actually type "Alliance to Restore the Republic". The most commonly used term is the one that the title of the article should be. Everyone can relate to the Rebel Alliance, and I've never heard the longer title in any movie, that is something invented by EU literature. Should we also change Galactic Empire to something on the order of "Galactic Empire to Rule All Below It For A Thousand Years"? -- Riffsyphon1024 03:13, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
 * "Should we also change Galactic Empire to something on the order of "Galactic Empire to Rule All Below It For A Thousand Years"?" If it was supported by canon, yes, we would. If we're going to use the thing that most people will remember, then we should forget about redirects and simply change the titles to "X-wing", "Tarkin" and "Vader". No one has to type "Alliance to Restore the Republic". If they type "Rebel Alliance" it will take them there. That's the magic automatic redirects. So we should title articles appropriately, and allow redirects to handle the rest. --SparqMan 03:19, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
 * But Rebel Alliance in this case is the most used form, there is no shorter form, however compare this to Grand Admiral Thrawn. His full name is Mit'thrawn'udo. Now who will actually want the article titled that when only a fraction of people have actually known how the thing is even spelled, but 10 times more people can relate to Grand Admiral Thrawn? With the Alliance to Restore the Republic, it does not need to be the title because less people associate with it, not to mention all the unnecessary redirects that will be created. Alliance to Restore the Republic can redirect to it, because less articles will use it and less people will refer to the Rebel Alliance as it, and then you can leave it in the Rebel Alliance article as another name in bold. Why must I argue with you on this anyway? Shall we have a vote by other members on this issue? -- Riffsyphon1024 03:30, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
 * If you want to bring it to a vote, go ahead, but it will undo the entire precedent set forth on naming articles. Maybe you fail to understand how redirects work. Enter "Rebel Alliance" into the search box, or click on a wikilink to Rebel Alliance, and it takes you to the full, proper name. Wikipedia does not title the article on the United States of America as simply "America", "USA" or "the States" just because that what most people refer to it as. I'm glad you brought up the Thrawn issue. As long as redirects are in place, the full article should be titled with his name. Otherwise we aren't creating much of an encyclopedia here, are we? --SparqMan 03:40, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
 * That's not the point. Of course I know the redirects will work, but its the question of why go through all that. I voted For on the precedent with exceptions. -- Riffsyphon1024 03:45, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Go through all what? It requires one quick shift on our part. If you don't want this to be as informative and accurate as possible, why continue to be involved? You may have vote for exceptions, but that not everyone else did. If you believe that this requires a new vote, then go for it. Other articles, such as Confederacy of Independent Systems seems to do just fine on redirects from Confederacy. --SparqMan 03:57, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

Your quick
You were quick with that post, Anywhere I always check to see if there is another same article, I just assumed there wasn't. Will do next time, Thanks! [User:SGCommand]]

Garm Bel Iblis
Garm Bel Iblis; Just came across this, not sure if you've checked it recently. You're being nagged :P --Fade 14:37, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Holonet News
I like your idea of the HNN page. I was able to give Quantill City a small city stub to expand on. Can't wait for more. -- Riffsyphon1024 23:14, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Glad you like it. I'll try to add as quickly as I can, but there are at least 8 article per issue. --SparqMan 00:00, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Erl: Copyright questions
I got all of my pics from http://warlords.swrebellion.com/gallery/Starships and I'm not sure how they break down, copyright-wise. Could you check it out and help me understand?
 * These are screenshots from a computer game, and should be tagged as such with the tag. Just my 2 cents--Eion 16:56, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Not entirely. They are images of a mod of a computer game, but that should cover it. Remember that it's always best to try and use an image from a canon source, rather than a fan created image. --SparqMan 17:02, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Okay, SparqMan. What if there is no image already in the page? May I add one? Should I discuss all images that I wish to add, or just fan-made ones? Sorry about all of these questions, but I'm new here

Tense
You also bring up a good point with the equipment and vehicles. However, most likely, all sorts of ships and weapons are still in existence somewhere, so it should be in the present tense. As for characters that are not revealed to be dead or not, then it should be in the present tense until some author comes out and writes a book/comic or whatever that says otherwise. I believe that until you are completely sure, then it should remain in present tense. I hope I'm not stirring up too many problems here...I'm just saying what I personally think is correct. And, if need be, then I will conform to the past tense thing, but I think it's worth considering at the least, and it's great that somebody is taking notice. I'm sure that we can come to an agreement here eventually... Bob rulz 13:48, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Remember that our goal is a comprehensive collection, so the wiki includes many entries on obscure characters, places, etc. There are plenty of characters from, say, the era thousands of years before the films take place that we never see die and are not given the details of their deaths. Should they be written in the past tense? Also, as changes are made, it would be frustrating to constantly change an article. Boba Fett would have been written in past tense after Return of the Jedi, but would require a rewrite after he was worked back into the storylines. The point I'm trying to make is that there are lots of exceptions that would make a mixed tense sloppy, confusing and frustrating. By choosing to always use past tense we both promote consistency and accuracy. I appreciate the civilized debate. --SparqMan 15:39, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Hmm...well, how about this. I can agree that characters can be written in the past tense. I'll give you that. I may noyt agree with you completely, but I don't have a huge problem with that one. But what about planets, cities, moons...any location? I believe that they should be in the present tense at least. With planets, you can't destroy them then bring them back, so you shouldn't have that problem. It just feels wrong to read about a place in past tense. Bob rulz 16:07, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * That bring us to the next point. This all takes place a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away. We're being told a story that already happened in a setting that existed long ago. Just because there are still being books written doesn't mean we should consider it to be happening now. You wouldn't say Mordor is a place of evil or that Narnia is a magical kingdom. Cities, planets and moons are all settings and thus part of the overall past-tense of the entire Star Wars experience. Even if you don't accept those ideas, it is still benefitial as a matter of keeping things consistent, straightfoward and easy to edit. Writing those articles in the past tense is not incorrect, but it does assure greater accuracy. --SparqMan 16:14, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Again, I repeat what I said on Riffsyphon's talk page...planet's aren't events...planets don't happen. Planets are just there. Events happen, planets don't, and therefore planets are not events. Bob rulz 16:48, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * But planets do cease to exist, as well as stars and galaxies. From an "in universe" persepctive, we have set ourselves far beyond the "present" of the Star Wars galaxy. As I said above, even if you reject those grounds, you must be able to see the convenience and accuracy this provides us. --SparqMan 17:45, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

HNN
I would like to notify you that I have completed Holonet News articles from issues 45 to 47 on your subpage, and man do we have alot of stuff. Hope you like what I put up. Oh, and one other question. One of the links is not working right, the first one in Issue 47. Check that to figure out whats wrong with it, because I can't seem to fix it after several edit changes. -- Riffsyphon1024 01:34, 29 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks for going through those, although it might be a duplication effort as I had already gone through and made notes. I'll merge my notes into your work. --SparqMan 01:46, 29 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Shit. -- Riffsyphon1024 01:54, 29 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Ok, just to make sure we don't end up doing the same thing, I need to know what you have worked on or are working on, so that I may assemble other things. -- Riffsyphon1024 21:05, 29 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I'd like a response, so that I have at least something to do tonight. -- Riffsyphon1024 04:53, 30 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Learn some patience, or least how to write less snippity notes. The answer: I've done them all. Devote your time to covering DOOMED articles instead. --SparqMan 05:29, 30 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that. -- Riffsyphon1024 18:40, 6 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Corvette Summer
Just how bad was Corvette Summer? -- Riffsyphon1024 18:15, 6 Jul 2005 (UTC)
 * Very. --SparqMan 18:23, 6 Jul 2005 (UTC)

August 2005 Wookieepedian of the Month
I'd like to congratulate you on being this month's WotM. You have earned it. -- Riffsyphon1024 04:58, 1 Aug 2005 (UTC)
 * Ditto. :-D – Aidje talk 05:17, 1 Aug 2005 (UTC)
 * I ditto that ditto. --Imp 18:29, 1 Aug 2005 (UTC)

You were very rude yesterday.
It is not nice to call other people rogue or accuse them of exaggerating. You got me so mad that I had to leave the wiki yesterday for fear I might leave something nasty on your talkpage. — — Ŭalabio‽ 01:40, 4 Aug 2005 (UTC)
 * He said "go rogue", as in you acting against consensus. It's not an insult, it's a figure of speech. As for the exaggerating part, you really were, according to canon. A thing to keep in mind is that canon and logic don't always go hand in hand. --Imp 01:54, 4 Aug 2005 (UTC)
 * Sorry you feel that way, but both statements were accurate. --SparqMan 14:41, 4 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Categorization Scheme
Hey, I know it was like a month ago, but my computer was dead. Just getting back up to speed now, so if you still want a hand with this then I'd be happy to work with you. --beeurd 19:13, 28 Aug 2005 (UTC)
 * I've also been wondering if we were going to be taking action any time soon. – Aidje talk 04:10, 29 Aug 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, I would like Aidje to start his Force categorization as soon as possible also, or else it won't get done. -- Riffsyphon1024 04:13, 29 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Congrats
Congratulations on your new adminship, Sparq. -- Riffsyphon1024 02:28, 25 Sep 2005 (UTC)
 * The Force is strong with this one! WhiteBoy 02:35, 25 Sep 2005 (UTC)
 * Congratulations, Sparq. – Aidje talk 06:00, 25 Sep 2005 (UTC)
 * That image explains my pleasure. Thanks, guys! --SparqMan 20:28, 26 Sep 2005 (UTC)
 * Congratulations! :-) jSarek 20:37, 26 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Palpatine's sucession boxes
I believe that Palpatine's sucession box during his first reign could be reinstated. I've never heard any argument about Pestage not being his sucessor. The second one, I admit, is a little more ambiguous, but i think that the first one should be restored. Just an opinion, but I figured I tell you without adding it unilaterally, as you are the Admin here (congrats, by the way). -- SFH 22:31, 29 Sep 2005 (UTC) Speaking about the Galactic Emperor succession boxes, in all the histories were you removed them, it says "Removed succession boxes per CP discussion)." Just curious as to what CP is. Thanos6 19:55, 13 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * You're correct that there is no question about Sate Pestage succeeding Palpatine, however there is little purpose in having a succession box across two pages. --SparqMan 03:09, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)
 * I was refering to the CP discussion here: . Kuralyov has recently added his own objection, so please add your thoughts on the subject there. Thanks. --SparqMan 20:12, 13 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Thrawn's position
Okay, I'm confused. In your arguments against Thrawn being considered Galactic Emperor, you said that the Council of Moffs placed Thrawn in command of the Imperial Fleet, yet you say he should not be considered the Supreme Commander. Part of the appeal of Thrawn (in my opinion) is part of his mystique, but what exactly is your position on Thrawn? Was he an Imperial loyalist, or a warlord? -- SFH 20:49, 15 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * The Council of Moffs grudgingly gave their approval to Thrawn, but he was by no means fully supported by all elements of the Imperial Remnant, nor did he lead it politically. Yes, he instilled a new sense of morale in the fleet and forces, but he was not an Emperor, nor did he aim to be. As far as loyalist or warlord, Thrawn sought to continue Palpatine's vision of order. --SparqMan 22:11, 15 Oct 2005 (UTC)

What's the Source?
Hiya Sparqman, I just wanted to know what is the source you used to create the Baby's cry article (I'm currently working on the Category:Sourceless page). Cheers. --Azizlight 01:52, 28 Oct 2005 (UTC)

New Chronology Pics
I'm about too upload about 2mb's worth of the new chronology's pictures... would that be alright? it might bring down the man in the flannel shirt upon us. - Unsigned comment by Razzy1319
 * It's fine by me. Just make sure that you tag them appropriately and realize that when you upload the images, you take sole responsibility for any copyright violations in which you may be partaking. --SparqMan 18:40, 3 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Spelling
Hey, I see that you just went through and fixed a bunch of spelling on my recent edits. Thanks. Next time I resolve to run things through a spellchecker before posting. --Culix 23:02, 4 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * I wasn't aware that they were your edits. I was just going through the misspellings page. --SparqMan 00:38, 5 Nov 2005 (UTC)

The CUSWE template
>> ''Why bother adding an external link to CUSWE in articles when you can integrate the text yourself? --SparqMan 06:48, 9 Nov 2005 (UTC)''
 * I just figured it might be a nice additional resource for people to look at. But yeah it's probably not needed, delete it if you like. --Azizlight 07:13, 9 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Cat Fix in Things to do

 * Thanks for fixing the category problem I was having, SparqMan. :-) jSarek 10:09, 10 Nov 2005 (UTC)