User talk:Toprawa and Ralltiir

'''Do not leave messages concerning FAN or GAN objections. I will not respond to them. Use the nominations pages.''' '''For the sake of chaos, there is no telling where I may respond to messages on my talk page. Depending on multiple factors, you may receive an answer on your talk page, under your original message on my talk page, or I may not respond at all. There is no method to my madness. You are required to decipher the inconsistency, not me.'''

Archived talk: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Re: Vacation
I have not forgotten about this one, Tope. Rest assured, my vacation does not mean that I'll simply let the nomination sit idle on the GAN page. I'll be monitoring it and my FA nominations, as well; I just won't be able to contribute much beyond that. Still, thanks for the heads-up :) QuiGonJinn  (Talk) 19:33, November 19, 2010 (UTC)

Date
The Xim map on page 117 has a notation in the bottom right stating "25,102 to 25,096 BBY - War with the Hutts". The old 21,105 date seems to have been an approximation with the Battle of Ko Vari, which in all articles is an unsourced date, and most references are even labeled "circa". The First Battle of Vontor is confirmed on the next page as being in 25,100, which leaves nothing concrete for 25,105, and does give a reference for 25,102 for the start of the war. The 25,096 date is a little nutty considering Xim's been a prisoner for four years at that point. But I'm not messing with that, yet.  DD97 Which bear is best? 07:39, November 21, 2010 (UTC)

Question
Maybe a stupid question, but could you also edit info from an author who have done other work then Star Wars? i just want to know ;) --Station7 20:16, November 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure exactly what you're asking. Toprawa and Ralltiir 20:33, November 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * An author writes more stories then Star Wars stories. Should I edit info, from an author, if he/she writes other stories then Star Wras stories.--Station7 20:36, November 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * You could list the info, though be aware that Wookieepedia's Sourcing policy states that "it is typically Wookieepedia's policy to not include a full biography on this site. That is usually best left to sites like Wikipedia." Meaning don't go overboard with it. Toprawa and Ralltiir 20:38, November 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I will keep it in the lines.--Station7 20:40, November 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * If I may butt in here, that sentence was included in the very first revision of WP:S, dated March 2, 2007. That was subsequently amended by Forum:CT Archive/Real-world biographies, which passed a little under two months later. That CT decided that we would include full bios, but WP:S was never updated for some reason.  Master Jonathan New Jedi Order.svg ( Jedi Council Chambers ) 20:46, November 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't care. Toprawa and Ralltiir 20:48, November 21, 2010 (UTC)

Ozzik Stum
Hi. I was wondering why you deleted Ozzik Stum, a redirect I created. I don't see how it's unnecessary. Could you please tell me why it doesn't need to exist? San Saber 22:20, November 21, 2010 (UTC)

Contesting my ban
While my ban has ended I would like to contest the grounds on which I was banned. Please explain the situation and then I will retort. Rac Ward

Luca
Are you planning on working on his article? Because I was, and if you are, I'll step aside.&mdash; 01:13, November 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nope, feel free to take it. :) Toprawa and Ralltiir 01:15, November 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks. The image you uploaded will prove useful, so thanks. :)&mdash; 01:36, November 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * Good deal. Toprawa and Ralltiir 01:38, November 24, 2010 (UTC)

Morseerians
The UAA says as follows: "Despite having lived on the fringes of galactic civilization for nearly twelve thousand years..." I added the information to 12,000 BBY in the hopes of getting it supplemented by whatever source qualifies the date to be on the Morseerian Featured Article, my library is pretty sparse on a lot of the sources listed there. If it needs further immediate support, I'll get with SavageBob to find out what his source is for the date.  DD97 Which bear is best? 19:26, November 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * No, it's the same dating issue I mentioned before, WotC books are anywhere between 32 BBY and 25 ABY. You want I should put a source tag on the date in the Morseerian article and see if I can get the source from someone that way?  DD97 Which bear is best? 19:37, November 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * None at all.  DD97 Which bear is best? 19:55, November 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey, guys. The Morseerian article currently says "some 12,000 years before the Battle of Yavin." This is like saying "c. 12,000 BBY", and despite the ambiguity of the WOTC books' time references, I'd say that 50 years is negligible when we're talking thousands of years. Thus, I don't think the Morseerian article needs to be changed. ~ SavageBob 23:09, November 24, 2010 (UTC)

Re:GAN
Sorry, I didn't noticed this rule. When I last checked, it was applyed only to FAN. Darth Morrt 22:43, November 24, 2010 (UTC)

Wookieepedia Manual of Style problem
Hello, while reading the Manual of Style today, I noticed a grammatical error. However, when I tried to fix it, I found out that I do not have permission to edit that page. Could you correct the error? Here is the error: "===Human and other sentient species=== In all sections of in-universe articles, the words "Human" and "Near-Human" should be capitalized, just as the name of any other sentient species (Twi'lek, Rodian, Wookiee) in the Star Wars universe would be. The word "humanoid," however, should not be capitalized.
 * → See Forum:CT Archive/Capitalization of Human, and Forum:CT Archive/Capitalizing "human" -- some more details

Please note that semi-sentient or nonsentient creature names must not be in capitals unless dictated otherwise by canon. Hence, writing "Rancor" instead of "rancor" is agrammatical. As much as we don't capitalize "Dog" or "Cat" in real-life, we shouldn't capitalize fictional creature names."

In the second sentence, instead of reading "humanoid,", it should say "humanoid",. Also, this may seem nitpicky, but...when I read the last sentence, it counfused me. I thought that there was a grammatical problem regarding possesives. Upon reading it again, I guess that it techincally works, but to avoid further confusion, could you rewrite the sentence as "As much as we don't capitalize "Dog" or "Cat" in real-life, we shouldn't capitalize the names of fictional creatures."?

Thanks,WIERDGREENMAN 18:47, November 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * No, I cannot change these things for you. This is the reason this page is fully-protected, to prevent people from just changing the wording any time as they see fit. The Manual of Style is an official policy page. If an error or mistake exists, it needs to be amended through formal Consensus track procedure. Toprawa and Ralltiir 21:19, November 26, 2010 (UTC)

Re: Galaxy 11
Yeah, you're right, it's actually a poster from Galaxy 9. Sorry about that. Here's what it says about the Executor: "Intimidation is a powerful weapon, and few vessels are more intimidating than a Super Star Destroyer. At 8,000 meters&mdash;five times the length of a standard Star Destroyer&mdash;possessing thousands of weapons and carrying legions of starfighters and stormtroopers, they are the most fearsome components in the Imperial armada, short of the Death Stars. Built and presented to Darth Vader following the Battle of Yavin, expressly for hunting Rebels, the Executor is featured prominently in Shadows. Ironically, it figures in Luke's escape, and leads to Xizor's defeat. Later, the vessel is destroyed during the Battle of Endor." Xicer9 ( Combadge) 04:03, November 28, 2010 (UTC)

RE: Sinube's cane
Hey Tope,

No discussion whatsoever, it was just changed at the user's whim. I noticed it the other day but I was on my phone and preoccupied so I ended up forgetting to revert the change. If you want to put it back and issue a warning of some sort (if you deem it necessary) I am okay with that. —Tommy 9281 11:46, November 29, 2010 (UTC)

Something interesting...
Hey, you gonna be around IRC later? I've come across something interesting that I want to share with you. —Tommy 9281 12:22, November 29, 2010 (UTC)

GAN objections
If I were to strike all my objections on a review, must I actually support the nomination, or is it kinda implied? MasterFred (Whatever) 21:54, November 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * One is not required to vote on a nomination, nor is a support vote ever implied. Toprawa and Ralltiir 21:56, November 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks! MasterFred Commerce Guild.svg(Whatever) 21:59, November 30, 2010 (UTC)

New article
Hi Toprawa! In your opinion, does Unidentified stormtrooper squad (Tantive IV) deserve its own article? My only sources of these trooper being a squad are the script of ANH, which isn't really canon, and the ANH novel, which is obscure. Darth Morrt 03:21, December 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * I really can't say without further information, because I don't know what information is in all of the listed sources. My first instinct is no, it probably does not, but it deserves to be researched. Toprawa and Ralltiir 04:59, December 1, 2010 (UTC)

Re: Palmer
Oops, sorry; didn't catch that. :P I'll archive the nomination in a minute, though you're welcome to do so (and please do so) if I forget.  CC7567  (talk) 05:48, December 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry about not getting around to archiving it; I was busy with something else, and it slipped my mind...like I thought it would. :/ See you on IRC some time.  CC7567  (talk) 06:06, December 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey Tope. I (literally) just found that there's a page in the Star Wars: The Clone Wars Comic UK 6.14 issue that's dedicated to the wampa. I'm not sure if there's any new info, but I've uploaded the comic page here so that you can take a look on it; it was published some time in November according to a StarWars.com article, so apologies if I accidentally misplaced it in the Sources list. If you have any questions, you can pop me a talk page message or ask me when I'm next on IRC, which will hopefully be soon. Hope that helps.  CC7567  (talk) 06:26, December 1, 2010 (UTC)

Re:update tag
Sorry, I actually wasn't aware that the article had to be reevaluated by the Inqs first, but thanks for telling me that. And as for images and quotes, there are places where I found a space for quotes but also some where I did not, and therefore will not place any. For the images, there are a few places where there are images of other related oeple that can be replaced with quality images of Kota, the character in question. Then I will wait until the tag is removed and most likely discuss changes to the article with him, since he desrves a lot of credit for writing this article. Cheers.-- ID-21 Dolphin  (Talk) 03:22, December 5, 2010 (UTC)

Kix
Hello sir,

I don't know if you realize this, but I have been changing his first quotation for a long while. There is part of the sentence that is missing. I would like you and everyone else to quit changing my frickin changes. Or, I advise you to watch the episode to confirm my objection, and to prove that I'm right about this and you're not. I'm really not trying to sound rude (and I know I failed spectacularly) but I'm sick and tired of people changing it.

Thank you, Natalie Crescent


 * Well, sir I have not violated the rule. I have only made the change twice today, but it has been changed back to it's original format. Okay, I'm very new here, and I'm grateful you informed me of the rule before I changed it again. So, where do I talk about changing the page and keeping it that way? Because I really don't like seeing incomplete quotations anywhere. Thank you for your help.

Natalie Crescent


 * Okay, I understand. I've upset you. I'm stupid, and since my membership I have not yet bothered to read the Wookieepedian manual or whatever it's called. I appreciate this, and I know you're not trying to be rude, or mean, you're just trying to do your job as Administrator. If you're gonna start yelling at me through another comment with a rule link in it please proceed. I appreciate anything else you might have to say.

Natalie Crescent

Need an Inq opinion
Hey Tope. I'm looking for the opinion of a few Inqs on one of my objections to the Wedge FAN. and I disagree on whether Quote or Dialogue should be used for this quote. As neither Havac nor I are Inqs, it would be helpful to obtain the opinion of a few Inqs on this matter. Your input would be appreciated, and I've also asked Tommy and Grunny to weigh in on the matter. Thanks.  Master Jonathan  ( Jedi Council Chambers ) 18:46, December 10, 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem, MJ. The MOS clearly states and provides an example of two-speaker quotes utilizing the Quote template, which was originally established for two speakers in a CT forum vote of which Havac was even a willing supporter. :) It's no secret among some longer established Wookieepedians that Havac will have varying degrees of pouting hissy fits if he doesn't get to format articles exactly his way, so my best recommendation to you is not to engage in a protracted debate with him, because the majority of the time it will only make him more stubborn and it gets no one anywhere. Clarify the rule for him and leave it up to him to make the change. Toprawa and Ralltiir 18:56, December 10, 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I've informed him of your, Grunny's, and Tommy's responses on the nom page.  Master Jonathan New Jedi Order.svg ( Jedi Council Chambers ) 22:27, December 10, 2010 (UTC)

Re: Webcomics
No problem, though I only wish that someone had done so much sooner.  CC7567  (talk) 05:30, December 11, 2010 (UTC)

no proof?
first and foremost if you look up urdruua it says gran assitant it also gives no name.secondly it says aurra sing set off a bomb that killed everyone in his palace so.i dont understand what you mean no proof.Trominid 22:51, December 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * can you write back pleaseTrominid 23:39, December 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * Does your article look anything like this? No? That's why it's considered Unverified. You need to add a valid Appearances or Sources list like you see in that article. Otherwise, your article will be deleted. Toprawa and Ralltiir 23:43, December 11, 2010 (UTC)

You are giving Wookieepedia a bad reputation in the online community
Dear Toprawa and Raltiir, I would like to shed some light on the fact that you are one of the most disrespectful and arrogant people on Wikia. It all started about a year and a half ago you unfairly blocked me for something I didn't do, perhaps you remember. But anyways since my year long block expired in August, you have completely turned me away from contributing anything to Wookieepedia. You are an administrator, you are supposed to represent the site well, but you are doing exactly the opposite. You are a douchebag to so many new registered users on this site, it is unbelievable. When I first joined Wookieepedia 3 years ago, this one outstanding administrator Greyman showed me around. Sure, he blocked me once or twice but he taught me the rules of the site. You are the exact opposite. According to your user page, you "have no personal interest in becoming an Admin; it is simply not why I'm here." You also said " You won't ever find me creating a list of my greatest contributions, articles created, or anything like that." Have you seen your mile long list of FA and GA contributions on YOUR USER PAGE? You, sir, are a dick who has no business being an administrator on this wiki, and I really hope another administrator sees how badly you represent the wiki. You do not help out others, you simply block them. I know you have made some great contributions to articles on the site (as shown by your narcissistic user page), but you have no business being an administrator for many reasons. You are on a power trip and I hope that someone ends it. Cheers,  Skypopper (Talk) 21:12, December 12, 2010 (UTC)

ESB adaptations for 4-LOM and Zuckuss
Figure I might as well tackle these while I can. Anything missing in their articles that was mentioned in the various ESB adaptations that I should throw in? Or did they only receive mentions? Were they even in any of the adaptations in any capacity, and if so, which ones? Anything interesting, like name swaps, misspellings, description errors? If in the audio adaptations, did they receive speaking parts?  Trak Nar  Ramble on 03:43, December 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * Hopefully prior to the next Inq meeting. I wanna get these guys up to par so they can finally lose that FAR tag.  Trak Nar  Ramble on 04:35, December 14, 2010 (UTC)
 * Alrighty, Master Fred provided me with the junior novelization, and the mentions were added to Zuckuss and 4-LOM's Bts. I then hopped on YouTube, hunted down the bounty hunter scene in the audio, gave it a listen, and only Fett was mentioned by name.  No background babble could be attributed to either Zuckuss or 4-LOM.  Zuckuss's misspelled name in the novelization was sourced, and I just confirmed with Goodwood that 4-LOM makes no appearance in the novelization.  Master Jon's supplied  sources of the two, as well as confirmed that only 4-LOM makes an appearance in the comic, whereas Zuckuss does not (gave me a link to the exact scene), and that's already been sourced.  They should be good to go, now.  Any other wacky flaws that're dug up in the next meeting, and I'm gonna start to wonder if you guys aren't just making stuff up to give me a hard time. =P  Trak Nar  Ramble on 06:38, December 22, 2010 (UTC)

Category
Well to tell you the truth clone troopers refer to cloned soldiers that served the Grand Republic not the direct term of a clone.You I'll just put a human clone category for some clone troopers since they are the clones of a human.Master of the Force 00:12, December 15, 2010 (UTC)

No Problem
I love me some chronologies, in-universe and out.  DD97 Which bear is best? 03:12, December 15, 2010 (UTC)

Re: Teckla
Sure thing; it should be better now.  CC7567  (talk) 08:57, December 18, 2010 (UTC)

Sykes
Hey, Tope. Just wanted to remind you about your objections on my Gavyn Sykes FAN, which I believe I have addressed quite a while ago. When you have the time, could you take another look at them? Thanks, QuiGonJinn  (Talk) 19:16, December 21, 2010 (UTC)

138 ABY
The Extremes TPB says right on the cover and on the inside information that all events in the TPB take place in 138 ABY. Why am I the only one seeing this? Is there a variant TPB saying 137?

PS, yes I know I uploaded this but it isnt tampered with. Heres a link http://www.darkhorse.com/Books/Previews/17-549 --The Great and Grand Count Mall! 16:16, December 23, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry. Your's wasnt the talk page I ment to put this on. Moving it... --The Great and Grand Count Mall! 21:45, December 23, 2010 (UTC)

Thank you
I, Xd1358 the  award you, Darth Burger the Master and Apprentice award for everything you have done for me this year. Not only have you always helped me when I needed help, but also offered your assistance, helped me to become a better writer, reviewer and Wookieepedian in general. I would definitely be where I am right now if you hadn't assisted me so much. Thank you, and keep up the good work.

And then, the Pit Droid Award of Diligence goes to you since according to my calculations, which may or may not be correct, you have been the most active AgriCorps member this year, being the only AC who has performed over 200 reviews. In addition, you are definitely the de facto leader of the AgriCorps. So thank you for keeping the GA process smooth and fast! :P


 * Merry Christmas and a happy new year, Tope. Truly deserved awards. 1358  (Talk)  20:54, December 23, 2010 (UTC)

Where can I find help?

 * Sorry if I posted my question on the wrong page... I am used to working on Xenopedia, it has a different layout.

I am getting major brow beated and one of the guys doing it is a cop... Have you read Dark Empire? I cant be wrong it says that Palpatines force storm destroys the fabric of space... how could that mean anything but what it says in the book?

These punks also tell me that anything written in the back of the collectors set for the Dark Empire by the writer does not count as canon @-@ which they also have gotten nasty about...

I wish there was a number I could call this is getting real real bad...--WAVE 05:12, January 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * They don't publish it if they don't intend for it to be canon, man. Graestan ( Talk ) 05:43, January 2, 2011 (UTC)

Coular Peen IV
As I recall, you left on my talk page, Wizcharles5, that there is NO proof that there is a planet called Coular Peen IV. Why don't you check this, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Star_Wars_planets_(C%E2%80%93D). It might be Fanon, but I will check the records to see if Anakin Skywalker really went there. I also made 2 OTHER pages, Antazi, and Ayrondof wich might or might not be Fanon, that I got from Wikipedia also. Wizcharles5 21:07, January 2, 2011 (UTC)

Categories
Sorry about that I wasn't ingnoring your warnings!:)CloneCody 05:20, January 3, 2011 (UTC)

Executor
Hey Tope. I left a message on Executor talk page about a couple of obscure appearances a while back, but you seem to have not acted on it, so I just wanted to give you a little poke in case you hadn't seen it. :) See Talk:Executor, and let me know there if you have any questions.  Master Jonathan  ( Jedi Council Chambers ) 21:10, January 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Toprawa and Ralltiir 21:16, January 3, 2011 (UTC)

Good Looks
My fault, I had a total brain fart :P Thanks for looking out. —Tommy 9281 23:02, January 4, 2011 (UTC)

3032 BBY
A while back, you deleted this article for being unverified (and rightly so). I did a little digging and the 3032 BBY date comes from Boss Nass's narration of the War of the Gungan Tribes in Star Wars Galactic Battlegrounds, describing it as three thousand years prior to the Invasion of Naboo. Would you mind either undeleting the article or allowing me to undelete (and source) it? Cheers. Atarumaster88  ( Talk page ) 15:47, January 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * Anyone is welcome to recreate any articles with canonical verifiability. Toprawa and Ralltiir 20:44, January 8, 2011 (UTC)

T-6 shuttle
Hey Tope, on the T-6 shuttle article, I think the LEGO thing might be worth mentioning, since action figures and other collectible items are commonly mentioned in the BTS sections of good and featured articles (see the Darth Caedus BTS). LEGO isn't always cited, but it's an interesting fact to be mentioned, IMO. But if you don't like it, I don't mind.-- ID-21 Dolphin  (Talk) 00:06, January 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * We mention action figure information when they have a degree of canonicity to them or are otherwise significantly notable for some specific reason. There's nothing notable or significant about the fact that the T-6 shuttle is included in a LEGO set. Mentioning it as an "interesting fact" falls under the guidelines of WP:TRIVIA. This type of LEGO information belongs on the LEGO Star Wars Wiki. Toprawa and Ralltiir 00:11, January 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * Hmm, wasn't really aware of the trivia policy. It makes sense, then.-- ID-21 Dolphin  DolphinJedi.png(Talk) 02:20, January 10, 2011 (UTC)

Tiperoo
Why did you delete my Tiperoo page? I even supplied a picture of it! XxTimberlakexx 03:31, January 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * You've made the mistake of assuming I know what in God's name you're talking about. Toprawa and Ralltiir 03:35, January 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * Check your deletion history, you deleted the Tiperoo page. I made it, and i supplied a picture, and want to know why you deleted it. XxTimberlakexx 21:41, January 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * 23:39, 7 December 2010 Toprawa and Ralltiir (Talk | contribs | block) deleted "Tiperoo" ‎ (-- 1.7 Unverified for over 7 days: content was: "  A Tiperoo sitting on the music changer. A Tiperoo is a blue creature only seen in Star Wars: Yoda's Challenge Activity Center. O) (view/restore) -- Because you didn't add an appearance/source to the article. Unsourced article creations are deleted after 7 days. Toprawa and Ralltiir 21:50, January 11, 2011 (UTC)

Delrakkin/Reference?
Hi Toprawa. I just wanted to say my bad about that edit I made on Delrakkin, when I forgot to close out the end of the reference with ]]. I had a question about it though, as well as a question about the bullets. When you reverted the reference edit back, it looks different than the ones I have been adding. I have been going through The Essential Atlas Online Companion and just comparing pages to make sure info is up to date. If you take a look at Abar system, that is what I have been making my refs look like, hundreds of pages like that.
 * Which way is the correct way? I had someone tell me to do the references as I displayed above, but the way you have it looks better. I am asking this because I am usually adding references and sources to Outer Rim systems, and updating them as much as I can, just making them look pretty I guess. I also wanted to ask about the bullets I added as well. I believe I removed the <br thing you used, and replaced it with bullets. I asked a question about this in Senate Hall, but only got an answer of bullets are used for 2 or more items that are listed, and someone else mentioned the br thing. Which way is the correct way? I just want to do my best in editing and not mess up too many things, so thanks for the help and sorry for the poor edit on the FA, I should've paid more attention.  TK-299  (Click Here) Imperial_Emblem.svg 13:46, January 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * Understood! Thanks for the help, and I will start fixing those references as I come upon them. And I will just leave the <br things alone if I see them, until something comes along where I would HAVE to change it. Thanks again for your time!  TK-299  (Click Here) Imperial_Emblem.svg 10:55, January 12, 2011 (UTC)

Rail class ARC
Sorry if I'm a little blunt here, but didn't you get my note?! there is not enough info on the Rail class ARC for the article to be wookieefied further! I can't add a complete infobox because there's virtually no info on them. There's no source, there's no external links for it, and I can't find any "add category" thing on the page. I'm sorry, but the articles at it's best unless somebody else who knows more about improving a page helps. I'm about two months into being a member of this wiki, I'm not the type who can look at an article and see every single flaw! brightfur 03:53, January 12, 2011 (UTC)

Welcome message
Hello! I'm assuming from you deletion of User:83.94.225.117 that I was in error when I posted the welcome message. I take it that welcome messages are reserved for registered users and not for IP users? I'd appreciate any clarification. Thanks. &mdash;fodigg  (talk) | 13:46, January 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * You're perfectly welcome to issue a welcome message to an anon, though we recommend using this template instead. Additionally, we place welcome messages on talk pages, not user pages. I only deleted the page because you posted it on the anon user page. Toprawa and Ralltiir 18:48, January 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * Aha! That does make sense. Thanks for the clarification! &mdash;fodigg  BlackRebelStarbird.png (talk) | 13:42, January 14, 2011 (UTC)

Request
Hey, Tope. While working on Darth Phobos, I've tried to create the article Cult of Darth Phobos, but you seem to have protected it from recreation. However, according to Star Wars: The Force Unleashed, there was such a cult. It was never identified as the "Cult of Darth Phobos" per se, but it was devoted to her, so I thought I'd use this name as a conjectural title. That being said, could you unprotect the page? Thanks. QuiGonJinn (Talk) 20:41, January 13, 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure, the page was protected because of constant nonsense recreation. Now unprotected. Toprawa and Ralltiir 20:42, January 13, 2011 (UTC)

Inq Review Redux: Form V: Shien / Djem So
Good day! Based upon our discussion at our last meeting, a thorough Inq review of Form V: Shien / Djem So has been initiated. Please take the time to review this article as if were a present FAN. The review page can be found here. Thank you and have a wonderful day! &mdash; Fiolli ; 15:43, January 18, 2011 (UTC)

Inquisitorius Meeting 40
Here is a preliminary reminder that Inquisitorius meeting 40 is scheduled for 12 February 2011. Absentee voting for probationary articles is available at the posting of the meeting page, and absentee voting for new articles will begin five days prior to the meeting. Thanks! &mdash; Fiolli ; 15:43, January 18, 2011 (UTC)

Re:Fact Files
Thank you! I will ensure that I make use of that resource in the future. --Jinzler 20:18, January 18, 2011 (UTC)

Something
I noticed that under Admiral Ackbar Behind The Scenes, there was no mention to the Family Guy special that was named in honor of Ackbar. I thought that it should be at least mentioned, so I wrote the passage that i copied on below, but then i realized i couldn't edit it. I was wondering whether you thought that it would be a valid addition to the Ackbar page.

The new Family Guy Star Wars special was also titled Family Guy: It's A Trap! in honor of Ackbar's famous line. There are two scenes that feature Ackbar prominently in the special. The first is when Mon Mothma is wrapping up her part of the briefing aboard Home One prior to the attack on the Second Death Star. As she turns the briefing over to Ackbar, he appears suddenly shouting "It's a trap! No, just kidding." The second scene was actually where it was in the movie, where he shouts "It's a trap! It's a trap!" Then the camera pans out, and we see a cat swatting at Ackbar (who is actually a fish in a fishbowl mounted on top of Ackbar's real body. He then says "Also, who's cat?"

590 BBY
Hi, Toprawa! Shouldn't this year have the conjecture header, since "590 BBY" does not appers in any of the sources? I have added the JvS page numbers. Page xix and 19 are two different pages in this book. The Dark Empire comic doesn't have printed page numbers and the actual number is differs in every edition. That's why I didn't add eny number. The endnotes don't have page numbers either. Tha fact files use BAA1-2 as page numbers. Darth Morrt 01:07, January 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * I mean, "590 BBY" is not written in sourcebook, while e.g. "600 BBY" is written down in JvS. Although thinking about it, here is not the case of conjectural Unidentified Troopers, who get name later. The title of the article won't change if it will be references by a sourcebook. Maybe the event will be moved to another year, but 590 BBY is going to be 590 BBY, anything happens. So, I decided not to re-add {Conjecture}. Darth Morrt 02:18, January 25, 2011 (UTC)

Hija
I recently realized that the script appears in more sources, such as the different editions of The Art of Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope, the online Visual Guides, an ongoing feature of the Insider, and presumably some more. IMO, mentioning all is unnecessary and mentioning two of them is incomplete. So I decided to mention only one source, as an example. Darth Morrt 04:06, January 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * The original edition of The Art of Star Wars Episode IV, was released in 1979, before the SOTE sourcebook. Darth Morrt 18:43, January 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks. Darth Morrt 18:51, January 25, 2011 (UTC)

FD3 Userbox Question
Hey man, just curious why you deleted my userbox for Fan Days III. I noticed you pointed me to a page that explains how to create a basic userbox with several parameters, but I thought this deserved its own custom userbox like the other ones I have on my user page for Celebrations and The ForceCast. Why do Celebrations get userboxes but not other big Star Wars conventions? --Eric Geller 04:46, January 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * We don't really create official userboxes anymore. We used to have a "userbox proposal" page where people could design new userboxes, like you're doing now, and then we would vote on whether we wanted to make them site official, but we agreed via community consensus to stop doing that. Now we just let people make their own custom user boxes without a formal template with the directions on that page. Toprawa and Ralltiir 04:51, January 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah, understood. -- Eric Geller 04:59, January 28, 2011 (UTC)

Image request
Would you mind going and deleting the old revision of File:HodgesReply.jpg for me. I forgot to blank out some of the personal info the first time I uploaded it. Thanks. -  JMAS  Jolly Trooper.png Hey, it's me! 21:44, January 29, 2011 (UTC)
 * Done. Toprawa and Ralltiir 21:47, January 29, 2011 (UTC)
 * Much appreciated. -  JMAS  Jolly Trooper.png Hey, it's me! 21:46, January 30, 2011 (UTC)

Question
Tope what's goin on,

I recently objected to the inclusion of a "Relatioships" section on Chantique, because I've always been under the impression that such sections were reserved for the romantic endeavors of the character in question. I've noticed this as a growing trend around the site, and I feel like we need some concrete rules with regard. There currently is nothing in the LG or MOS with regard to that, and I figured you'd know how to proceed. Thoughts? —Tommy 9281 13:36, February 1, 2011 (UTC)

Bakura Fleet
Just now, you deleted a page I created, Bakura Fleet. May I ask why?74.37.180.6 23:22, February 8, 2011 (UTC)

I read the note, it said nonsense. In what way was it? If I am not mistaken, in accordance with our deltion policy, even if it was "nonsense", it is not simply deleted, but a delete tag is added. 74.37.180.6 23:59, February 8, 2011 (UTC)

Re:Rasi
Sure, I'll be glad to take care of it. Can't do it right now, but I'll take care of it soon.&mdash; 05:21, February 9, 2011 (UTC)

Possible CAs
Hi Toprawa! May I create articles for other participants of the Ambush in Cloud City? IMO, we had enough information (species, profession, participation in the ambush) about the members of Bossk's band: Unidentified Twi'lek scoundrel 1, Unidentified Twi'lek scoundrel 2, Unidentified Quarren assassin, Unidentified Duros mercenary. I am not sure about Lando's band. The Twi'lek is OK and done, but all the information about the four Bespin guards are the same. Also, there are four other Bespin guards, whose story is a bit different from the others, but the same for themselves. If I would cover the Sore Loser's Revenge completely, may I make these 8 Bespin guard articles too, or they are too unnotable? Darth Morrt 08:14, February 10, 2011 (UTC)

Quick question
Hey Tope, I was wondering why it's preferred to have thirty as opposed to twenty-nine? It's not a big issue, but I don't get the point of rounding when we know the exact number&mdash;I only switched it because it makes the reader do a double-take (me at least), when this "Tanner and twenty-eight others" is only a few sentences earlier. Plus, if readers don't see that we've rounded up, they may think that one of the two sentences is in error. Whaddya think? Darth Trayus ( Trayus Academy ) 21:50, February 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * I think Tranner is the one you want to speak to about this. :) Toprawa and Ralltiir 21:53, February 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * Ahahah wow. Okay I don't know if I can't read or if I just have it out for you :P Sorry about that. Darth Trayus ( Trayus Academy ) 21:55, February 10, 2011 (UTC)

Infobox refs for single-source articles
Hey, Tope. I've been operating under the assumption that all infobox items need a source, but on the CAN page, this has been questioned for single-source articles, where it can be assumed that the infobox items come from the only appearance/source listed. Is there any policy on this? It's quite possible I've been over-sourcing in cases like this, and I figured you'd be the guy to ask about this. FWIW, it seems that Sourcing does not explicitly require infobox sourcing, but that Forum:Infobox sourcing indicated a strong community consensus toward sourcing. Has there ever been a CT on this? How should these single-source articles be handled? ~ SavageBob 03:33, February 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * It's long been our practice that if there is only one Appearance/Source item, then infobox sourcing is optional in the same way that sourcing the rest of the article is. Though many, like myself, would recommend just sourcing everything anyway. Hope this helps. Toprawa and Ralltiir 04:09, February 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * OK; looks like I was just being a bit source gung-ho after all. Thanks for the clarification! ~ SavageBob 04:12, February 11, 2011 (UTC)

Dear Toprawa and Ralltiir... ;)
Dear Toprawa and Ralltiir,

I guess you are an admin who moderates and controls a portion of what happens on Starwars.wikia.com. I do apologize for what I said to JangFett, but I did not address him regarding the matter about the main picture of CIS navy. I was addressing JMAS and wanted to resolve the issue. I would like to point out that I only used more harsh tone towards those who right away jump and deny or dismiss any minor suggestion. I do not harsh words towards any other, except CC-7567 who I a little confronted before. For which I apologize to you, Mr. Admin. Further more: "I do not know what is wrong with you, Fett...but the picture feels like if we put the burning "Resolute" and other ships from "Storm over Ryloth" or "Nightsisters" as the main image of the Republic Navy. It just feels wrong, doesn't it. Apperantly you do not like the seps that much, Jango. But I thought all articles should be treated equally good. The same would be if you put an epic and clear image of a character and then for another one you put up an image which does not represent him well at all like facing down or making a stupid face. I doubt you would leave a character with a messed up main picture, the same is here. The image works for the Battle of Coruscant perfectly, yes, but you are wrong if the destruction shown on it works to present the CIS navy article in front of a random reader."

I assume the moment that makes it in the category of incivility is: I do not know what is wrong with you, Fett... I am sorry for that, but it annoyed me that he totally dismissed any comment regarding the image and something that was not at all address at him. In other words, he entered a discussion that did not require his critisism. The matter was entirely pointed to the person who uploaded both pictures - in other words JMAS, who uploads the best images here and that is why I turned to him for help and just raised a minor suggestion. I did not attempt to delete or harm any of JangFett's articles. Just wanted help with improving an article. And I also did not attack him, I gave staight away an example of the injustice regarding the article. That is why I said: "But I thought all articles should be treated equally good." Cause everyone would like to see a very good image of the Republic Navy, but he totally ignored any saying from me that the article of the CIS navy deserves an equally good and cool image and there are many. Not the riot that is the image, showing an exploding Recusant-class light destroyer, a Drop Ship smudged in the lower end of the screen, Obi-Wan's figther and a Rep. Cruiser. Am I wrong or out of place to say that the image is not good for the main pic of the Separatist armada. Maybe for the battle of Coruscant, yes. It would be perfect for that article.

Second, I turned to JMAS, as he: 1. Uploads highest resolution images from the show. 2. I guess you or other admin have removed my right to add pictures, I know I made mistakes about the uploads in the past. Apologies deeply for those. These are the two main reasons, I did not think that that would be a problem. I never turn to any admins when somebody critised me about an edit or attacked me, cause there usually is not point of taking it personally. I just wanted to point to JangFett that he is not right in his claims that the page does not need improving. At least on the visual part, editorials of the text I do not want to make to cause somebody to come and revert it.

Third, correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't correction or editing happen from a neutral point of view. This occured, not only the Navy article... when several battle results were reverted back, because the Republic does not say it loses in the show in any article. I tried to write that during First Battle of Felucia, the Jedi did RETREAT and I think again JangFett reverted the file to site with the Republic point of view and the more incorrect term: Escape. My question is why when the Republic wins or loses, it only pontificates that it wins and shows other kind of result. Never I have seen a result in the battles of the show or EU, a major CIS victory...always something else that does not fully show the result as whole. When the CIS is looses, it is majorly pointed out and written down. Republic victory. Aren't these editings from a Republic point of view as they show the Republic in a good light and the CIS in demeaning manner, just my assumption. Is that not wrong?

PLEASE, except my deep apologise for making you read this and deal with an issue because of me. I see that you have a lot on your plate as an admin. I do not cause any trouble, I only want to at least have the right edit something and it usually has info good for an article, but it is always dismiss by others in high places. After which the same thing I wrote is written by the guys who removed it, in the first place. I ONLY want to have the choice to edit minor Clone Wars articles...I will not get in the way of the major articles like the ones about Rex or Ahsoka or Anakin.

'''I am very, very sorry about all the trouble. Thank you for reading and sorry if it so long.'''

'''Have a great day and May the Force Be with You! Keep up the good work.'''--Dangrievous 07:49, February 11, 2011 (UTC)

Page move
Hello there, I am responding to the page you moved last night, Unidentified Ithorian (Force student). I plan on creating the other articles for Shon-Ju's students; they are all currently redlinked as "UnID Species force user". Should I go with that or change them to UnID Species (Force student)? Corellian PremierAll along the watchtower 22:30, February 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * I would recommend going with (Force user), unless you have a better idea. Toprawa and Ralltiir 22:31, February 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, sounds good. Corellian PremierRobotech.jpg along the watchtower 22:43, February 11, 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you, but I understand that a certain Daigear has been blocked for having more than one account. We happen to share a room in rez and therefore share an IP I can tell you that he did not have more than one account. I did. I said on my talk page that I don't know how to delete previous accounts (and I was courteous enough to wait until the block on my former profile was over before I made another account). If you're going to block anyone it should be me. Darth Crate 03:28, February 12, 2011 (UTC)

I forgot to mention, can a block be undone? I don't mean to be a bother, but the whole thing seems unfair. Darth Crate 03:30, February 12, 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for leaving a third message, but I think I know what may have happened. I requested a former profile blocked, but I was referring to GreenTis4poofs; instead, someone else who has a profile on the same IP address was blocked. That's Daigear. I don't blame for anything wrong. We (Darth Crate and Daigear) are both just unfamiliar with policies regarding accounts. Sorry again. Darth Crate 03:38, February 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * I might be more inclined to care and show more mercy if the vast majority of edits coming from your accounts hadn't been "generally disruptive," as the terminology here goes, and if you hadn't already been issued a block for this sort of behavior, and hadn't already attempted making who knows how many accounts at this point. You see, we get the "it was my little brother" excuse all the time. Assuming you are even speaking the truth, the fact remains that these edits are originating from one place, be they from one person or not, so at this point I'm inclined to block the IP and lock out your entire building and just be done with you for good. I'm giving you and your alleged roommate one account to go with the one IP you're editing from. See that you don't abuse it any further. Toprawa and Ralltiir 03:42, February 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * What clemency. I'm sure you get the same excuses all the time because you can't see us, but I think that you might wish to look at Daigear's history. He's not been blocked. Also, I think that you may notice that I'm a better writer than he is. I'm willing to be blocked indefinitely if you will let Daigear have his profile back. Darth Crate 04:04, February 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * The gist of my message obviously didn't register with you, so allow me to reword it. I'm not debating that I'm potentially dealing with two generally mischievous youths here. Frankly, I don't care if there's one person or twenty in your dorm room. If your collective editing history had been more constructive, I would be more willing to extend some "clemency" to you. But given the mischievous nature of edits coming from both of your multiple accounts, I'm holding you both responsible for all of the edits originating from that IP. I'm going to let you fine gentlemen hash out on your own who gets to edit your remaining account. Toprawa and Ralltiir 04:13, February 12, 2011 (UTC)

I fear that it is you who misunderstands. Only one of us has had multiple accounts. What do you mean by mischievous? Our dear Daigear, I am aware, has corrected numerous grammatical and spelling errors on various pages. I have asked plenty of fair questions on Knowledge Bank, while my suggestions on Senate Hall to improve the quality of the site seem to be speedily deleted.

I have decided, though, that I have had enough. By now most of the users are in the administration because chaps like you block new users. I was attempting earlier to be polite, but because you failed to even reply in a professional manner, spouting rude and insulting remarks as you tend to do to many users, I shall tell you what I think. You are an administrator of what has become an increasingly private wiki, where editing is restricted to long-time users and administrators. While I understand that many users will abuse priveleges, not everyone wants to destroy your precious Wookieepedia. Indeed, I think that this could be a really splendid community wiki. Star Wars is great and it's nice to have so many of the answers in one place. The problem is that the administration has grown rather unhappily autocratical. I ask you, why do you seek to be an administrator if you go about your duties so angrily? The answer, I shall presume, is that this is the place that you can push people around, if only virtually. I'm sure other students of psychology might find this site to be a mine of psychological complexes. If you were mistreated in your youth, you cannot fairly attack other people.

By now, if you're even still reading this, you are resolved to block me. Well, I welcome it. I spend too much of my free time on this site and, while it is on rare occasions the tiniest bit rewarding, I don't want to become like one of the private users. But that is where the real problem lies. I'm not enough of a geek to fit in with such a society of 20-something losers with little better to do than sit in their parents' basements eating greasy chicken wings.

So, block me I say. Both I and Daigear declare fresh resentment towards this site. Good day.

There are two of us, by the way.

Verify The Jedi Assembly
I tried to verify The Jedi Assembly's page, but no one on your staff could tell me a good way HOW to do so. You do not allow linking so i could not post a copy if the letter we have from LFL to prove our point. You also did not accept the related link I had about being able to produce said document at any time. Just how are people supposed to verify? The facts that we were awarded tables at the past 3 Star Wars Celebrations should be enough for anyone to realize that The Jedi Assembly is not just a fly-by-night group.

Re: Archive
No problem; always happy to help. :P  CC7567  (talk) 05:55, February 17, 2011 (UTC)

Skor II travel times
Hey, Tope. Your GAN of Morvogodine made me realize that I should probably add a cartography BTS section to Skor II to report the travel times Rebellion uses. I don't have the game, so do you know if there's anywhere online to find them? Or are they easy enough to look up that you might be able to get to them without too much trouble? I appreciate your help! ~ SavageBob 17:25, February 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * I can get you this info without much trouble, but in the case of Skor II, I would actually recommend not including this table. How I've been handling the table with Rebellion planets is only including it in the instances that the Rebellion sector placement corresponds to the planet's current canonical sector placement (i.e., from the Atlas). You'll see, for example, I left it out of Gandolo IV and Douglas III, since later canon has overridden their Rebellion sector placements. The reasoning being that for planets like Skor II that have since been given a new sector, their location in relation to other planets on the Rebellion galactic map, specifically in its individual sector, are now all but entirely irrelevant and incorrect. Morvogodine, on the other hand, still shares its Rebellion sector placement with a number of other planets, so those travel times still may hold some level of canon relevance. The only thing I would suggest that might be even worth mentioning is its distance from Coruscant, though even that should probably be considered totally incorrect. I think it should just suffice to say for planets like Skor II that all of its Rebellion info is now defunct. Hope that makes sense. Toprawa and Ralltiir 17:43, February 17, 2011 (UTC)

RE: Darth Millennial
Exuse me? I wasn't "perpetuating" anything. I reverted the anon once, and it was over ten hours ago. I wasn't even the first person to do so. Did you warn Tommy9281 likewise?. Why on earth did you single me out? Jayden Matthews 20:38, February 19, 2011 (UTC)
 * You're excused. I sent messages to everyone who I observed perpetuating this reversion war directing them to the article's talk page. If I missed anyone, then I apologize. The notices were distributed equally. Don't take it so personally. Toprawa and Ralltiir 20:40, February 19, 2011 (UTC)
 * I understand, it just seemed a bit heavy handed, especially as no policy has been violated. I was simply changing the infobox back to the one that Millennial has had for the past two years. I will, as you suggested, take it to the talk page. Can the article not be put back the way it was until a consensus is reached? Afterall, it was the anon who started changing it. Jayden Matthews 20:50, February 19, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, feel free to revert the article back to its original state. I intended no ill-will with my message, just trying to nip another edit war in the bud. Thanks. Toprawa and Ralltiir 20:51, February 19, 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you. No harm done:) Jayden Matthews 21:00, February 19, 2011 (UTC)

Wampa
Star Wars: The Clone Wars Comic UK 6.16 is up on the latest page of the Kaskus thread. The Wampa attack is only one page out of 8. Wampas attack in a mob. There is no explanation for the wampas being on that planet, and the creatures are identified (and therefore recognized) by Obi-Wan. Context: Obi-Wan and Anakin use speeders to drop onto Asuin, a planet in Hutt Space, to recover stolen plans of the Confederacy's Hypermatter Generator from a jettisoned escape pod. Upon (crash) landing near a ravine, their speeders are mobbed by large cluster of wampas (~10+). The Jedi leap across the ravine to escape, while the wampas push the swoop bikes into the ravine. The Jedi move on with their lives. Later, a clone says that crashing on the planet has made him "jumpy." That may imply that he has come across the wampas, but there is no real elaboration. Asajj is present, so this takes place after her gladiatorial appearance. SinisterSamurai 20:21, February 20, 2011 (UTC)
 * Gotcha. Will probably download this from Kaskus. Thanks for your help, I appreciate it. Toprawa and Ralltiir 20:27, February 20, 2011 (UTC)

Re: Check
Hey Tope, the added information is correct; in fact, after reviewing PoD, it seems that the Bespin information was almost complete speculation. Basically, we know that the skirmish on Alaris Prime happened exactly one month after the Battle of Phaseera, but we have no idea exactly when the battle of Bespin took place in relation to either Alaris Prime or Phaseera. In fact, the sole mention of Bespin takes place when Kaan is thinking about his recent conquest of the Bormea sector; he notes that he was met with little resistance, and then recalls that a similar thing had happened when the Sith had taken Bespin, Sullust, and Taanab. Basically, we have no idea when the battles of Bespin, Sullust, or Taanab took place other than that they were all before the battles of Corulag, Chandrila, and Brentaal (three "key" battles that were mentioned as taking place in the Sith campaign for the Bormea sector). Jonjedigrandmaster ( Talk ) 20:03, February 21, 2011 (UTC)

Essential Online Companion
Sorry about my error. Thank you for pointing it out.--Exiledjedi 00:35, February 22, 2011 (UTC)

User Boxes
Hi there! I really liked your userboxes for "Hating the fact that they changed Boba Fett's voice" and the box for thinking Fandalorians are totally gay. Would you be so kind as to share the code for those boxes with me? I'd like to display those on my own page. Thanks! -- Promus Kaa ( Subspace Comms ) 09:18, February 22, 2011 (UTC)

Rahm Kota
Hey Tope, Why is the Rahm Kota article now protected completely? I'm not sure exactly what copy-editing is, so I'm a little confused. Thanks.-- ID-21 Dolphin  (Talk) 03:12, February 23, 2011 (UTC)

Re:Page move

 * Understood, though because the page was originally created due to an arithmetic error, most of the redlinks are actually correct and should not be directed to 2,132 BBY. I have gone through the list of redlinks, and only one actually required fixing. Still, thanks for letting me know. Axinal  Convocation Chamber 20:30, February 23, 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you!
Nevermind sorry... LOL! I need to upgrade my browser!

--Anr0328 02:16, February 24, 2011 (UTC)


 * Sorry about this signature thing... is it ok now? > ANR0328


 * Sorry again, ANR0328  02:25, February 24, 2011 (UTC)

Kota
Tope; I've addressed the Kota stuff on my talk page. Sorry for taking a few days to get to it :) - Cavalier One ( Squadron channel ) 15:33, February 25, 2011 (UTC)

Thx & Btw
Thx for the compliment on GA nomination. Btw, since you're a member of the AC, do you know why I didn't receive that "official" notification for nominating Numa's father for GA? Kreivi Wolter 19:19, February 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm assuming you're referring to this template. It really depends on who archives your nomination. In that instance, it was me. I don't issue that template to people. It was created as a way of notifying people that their article had graduated to GA status, but I feel like people should be paying close enough attention to their nominations anyway that it isn't necessary. Nothing personal. Toprawa and Ralltiir 19:23, February 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah, alright I get it, no prob. Thanks for clarifying. Kreivi Wolter 19:27, February 25, 2011 (UTC)

Millennium Falcon good article
Hi seeing as i'm not very good at following instructions, please can you nominate it for me?
 * No. Read this to find out why. Toprawa and Ralltiir 22:41, February 25, 2011 (UTC)

Re: Cookie
Huge thanks for the cookie, Tope! As they say, I was just doing my job. :) Jonjedigrandmaster  ( Talk ) 22:38, February 28, 2011 (UTC)

Suba in Murder on the Executor
Hello Toprawa, does Suba indeed appear in Murder on the Executor? I do not have the source, but I talked about this on Yodapedia, and according to the admin Wild Whiphid, he did a search for that name in his downloaded Murder, a two-part PDF, and no results came up. Hanzo Hasashi 16:16, March 11, 2011 (UTC)

AC Meeting 33
Hey Tope, just a reminder that Meeting 33 takes place at the usual time for the Americans, at 4 PM EDT (Daylight EST), even though the Europeans don't observe DST. Hope to see you there. Cheers. 1358 (Talk)  15:59, March 15, 2011 (UTC)

Will the ban end...
I think it is time I asked since I have not bothered you more than a month, but I got to ask! When does the ban on my fight to upload pictrus on the site ends?! Curious. I think it should not be permanent and I have learned how to upload. Pictures...Thank you!--Dangrievous 12:19, March 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * I have not done anything to prevent you from uploading pictures. I think you're experiencing some kind of site-wide restriction. Toprawa and Ralltiir 18:36, March 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you very for clearing that up! Have a nice day!--Dangrievous 22:02, March 19, 2011 (UTC)

Imprint
In this edit summary, I pointed you to four existing FAs that format those images as left-aligned, without "thumb" or captions, and with Clear. Why must it change all of a sudden? Based on those four articles (and there are others also that I couldn't link in the edit summary because I was out of room) having passed FAN in that state, the community clearly, at that time at least, had no problem with that formatting. Star Wars: Tales of the Jedi has been an FA for close to three years, and nobody's complained about that formatting on it.

I feel that the caption is pointless because it's horribly redundant to the header, Main, and the prose, and by extension the "thumb" attribute is pointless also because the only purpose of it is to allow a caption to be given. As for left-aligning with Clear, that's clearly the current status quo. If we're going to change the formatting of all of these articles (and it should be done to all of them or none at all), it's probably best to do it through CT so as to avoid disrupting status articles with unilateral changes and potentially triggering edit wars.

Anyway, that's my opinion on the matter. I'm going to bed now, so I won't get your reply until tomorrow (Sunday) afternoon. Thanks.  Master Jonathan  (Council Chambers)  Sunday, March 20, 2011, 06:20 UTC


 * An SH discussion is now underway regarding an overall OOU layout guide, so it's probably best to discuss it there now. See Forum:SH:Help me hammer out this CT proposal!.  Master Jonathan  (Council Chambers)  Sunday, March 20, 2011, 16:15 UTC

Clabburn
It is only a minor mention, in the entry for space slugs: Rumors claim that the space pirate Clabburn used several space slugs to guard the entrances to his asteroid base. --Jinzler 19:20, March 23, 2011 (UTC)

Re:Kessel
Yeah, just put the reference note into the infobox, and I will correct and source the rest of the article. However, I also have Battle of Boz Pity (Galactic Civil War) on the FA page, should I do the same with that page, and what about the other two Renegade Squadron battles I've done in the past, should I fix those too? Kilson 22:33, March 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * You should if it's correct to do so. I've never played this game and have no idea about timeline placement other than what I read in the article itself. If all of these battles take place right around the same time, it's probably ok. Toprawa and Ralltiir 22:35, March 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks for telling me about my mistake and for the ref. I made the corrections to my articles. Kilson 23:08, March 28, 2011 (UTC)

closing post
hey toprawa, next time let a guy respond to comments in his own post before closing it in the forum. Rw2011 08:22, March 29, 2011 (UTC)
 * Hey, you...who are you again? Toprawa and Ralltiir 17:28, March 29, 2011 (UTC)

RE
Noted thanks. just being bold, anyway, does wookieepedia have a policy on common sense? I couldn't find a counterpart to what wiki has. Perhaps there should be a policy, but i shall look around for a little while more first. To me this seems like reading too much into or following the rules for the sake of following it. Would a sentence that reads "Luke Skywalker got sand in his eye" look nice to you? that is what i am talking about. theres no need to be mean about my views. but i shall read the manual of style and take note of the policies thank you for bringing it to my attention :) Songjin 04:06, March 31, 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Wookieepedia is not Wikipedia.
 * 2) Follow Wookieepedia's community-established policies or face the corresponding consequences.
 * 3) Have a Wookiee-tastic Day. Toprawa and Ralltiir 04:15, March 31, 2011 (UTC)

Wookieepedia isn't wikipedia yes, but certain wikipedian policies including wikilawyering, assume-good-faith and the BRD policies are indeed adopted by wookieepedia. for reference, here & here. The part common sense policy was merely a question to see if there A)was a counterpart policy that wookieepedia adopted or B)if wookieepedia has adopted wikipedia's guidelines, similiar to the policy "Assume good faith" that can be found referenced under the blocking policy you have cited twice under my talk page. These policies are part of community-established policies.

My reply was not meant to be a hostile kind of right-back-at-ya (i apologise if they were taken the wrong way) but i do find your comments to be very.. how to put it.. "DO IT THIS WAY.. or else" and rather putting down. I find that your constant threatening of blocking to be, well, a little on the hostile side and i also have noticed that you have been "stalking" my edit history, which i find rather disturbing for a number of reasons being 1)is it implying that you think i am a vandal? 2)displays a lack of trust due to me being new to the community? I highly doubt that this is a display of community spirit. you may cite "And, of course, others here will boldly and mercilessly edit what you write. Don't take it personally. They, like all of us, just want to make Wookieepedia as good as it can possibly be." from here but to me, it is too coincidental that you have edited those few pages that i've done some work on, especially regarding my expansion on marriage, to be otherwise. DO correct me if i am wrong, i am not one to assume the worst in people and i do not mind being wrong about this particular point.

Furthermore, I do not see how i qualify for blocking as per the policy guidelines, unless you are accusing me of 14)violating consensus? The policy states further to "Always assume good faith, but remember that the rules apply to everyone equally."

All this said and done, i hope you have a great day ahead! :)Songjin 10:28, March 31, 2011 (UTC)
 * If I may butt in, Toprawa doesn't need to "stalk" you, only to keep an eye of the Recentchanges and would more likely to end up reviewing the recent edits, just like many of us regulars do (and that apparently happened with many regulars in case of Marriage). That kind of helping happens all the time, there's no reason to try to provoke or be provoked by it. –Tm_T (Talk) 10:36, March 31, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, duly noted :) just wanted to clarify to see if it was personal or not, thankfully it isnt :) i shall explore the recent changes section another day. The matter regarding the blocking issue still stands though. PS: it was not my intention to provoke although if you feel that my message appears so, i apologise and i'd like to say that i am not trying to provoke, just to get things straight. I'm sure it isn't nice in any internet community or even physical ones to welcome people by telling them that they will be punished if they violate the rules, with a less-than-discreet emphasis on punishment. cheers :)Songjin 11:51, March 31, 2011 (UTC)

WOTM
Just hoping you realize that isn't a real nomination. Learn to play along. --  Riffsyphon  1024 00:48, April 1, 2011 (UTC)

Uh
Why delete Force time freeze. did you even bother to go to the linkDonmax 04:05, April 1, 2011 (UTC)

That was terrible...
The most orderly Mofference I've attended, and it's definitely no easy job running one. Just a little token of appreciation for your great leadership during the Mofference :). Grunny  ( talk ) 00:06, April 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * I second that motion, but that is how gritty democracy can be. ;) --  Riffsyphon  1024 00:10, April 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nice job Tope. Kilson 00:10, April 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * I was literally just about to give you one of these myself, but Grunny beat me to it! Seriously, huge accomplishment keeping that kind of madness as orderly as you did. Mega-props. :) Jonjedigrandmaster  ( Talk ) 00:14, April 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * Kudos to Tope. Tyber J. Kenobi's Droid 00:15, April 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * WooHoo! NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 00:17, April 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * Your forbearance was exemplary. Karohalva 00:18, April 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks to everyone for the kind words. I'm just glad to help keep things running smoothly. :) Toprawa and Ralltiir 00:31, April 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * Additional Star Wars-themed compliment, Tope!  OLIOSTER  (talk) 00:42, April 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * /me highfives 1358  (Talk)  08:14, April 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * /me hides (: –Tm_T (Talk) 13:04, April 3, 2011 (UTC)

Commented out source publication dates
Hey, Tope. I appreciate your review of Filar-Nitzan, and I also understand your dislike for the commented out publication dates. Rather than continue the conversation on the nomination page, I thought I'd come here and just provide a bit more explanation for how I use those notations. Basically, I find ordering sources by publication date an onerous task because it does require the constant clicking and checking of source pages you mentioned. It gets confusing fast, especially when other editors have just placed sources willy-nilly. The commented-out publication dates have been especially helpful when dealing with an article with dozens of sources, although, certainly, their utility on something like Filar-Nitzan is debatable. In the end, I'll continue to use them, for sure, but I could see you or others making an argument that they should be deleted out once the article is "finished." My response would be that they still come in handy in those situations where someone discovers the article's topic mentioned in some half-forgotten source down the line. So, for example, if there's a Filar-Nitzan mentioned in some old WEG source that none of us has noticed yet, it would be easy to insert that source into its proper spot without having look up two or even three of the listed sources for their publication dates to find the correct placement. Anyway, my point isn't to come and say my way is right or wrong; I merely wanted to explain a bit more about how I find these things useful. I appreciate your voicing your opinion, and I hope this explication has at least shown you that I'm not crazy or trying to impose some bizarre style or anything! :) Thanks, ~ SavageBob 01:18, April 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure thing, no worries. Thanks for getting back to me and explaining your side of it. Toprawa and Ralltiir 01:19, April 5, 2011 (UTC)

CSWE pages
Hey Tope. I couldn't help but notice that you keep removing page numbers from the CSWECite template. I just wanted to ask, is there a particular reason for not using the page numbers? If there is, I won't be adding them in the first place in the future and will save you some trouble :) QuiGonJinn  (Talk) 16:47, April 5, 2011 (UTC)
 * I see. I'll make sure to follow this practice then. QuiGonJinn  Senate seal.svg(Talk) 20:39, April 5, 2011 (UTC)

Re:Arena changes
Thanks. Fixed. MasterFred (Whatever) 17:38, April 6, 2011 (UTC)

Junk articles
Hey Toprawa, I'd like to ask your opinion on something. Several Force-related articles have been created by this user. Most of these articles are, in my humble opinion, junk, and could easily be classified under a similar, already-created article. The articles in no way follow the manual of style or layout guide, despite both our messages on his talk page encouraging him to properly source his articles; I'm wondering what you think should be done about these articles. Should we clean them up and keep them, or should we just TC them? Like I said, the articles are mostly crap, but I don't quite feel right about deleting these potentially genuine subjects. Thanks for your thoughts.&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 01:56, April 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * It's hard for me to give a straight judgment on these subjects, only because I know nothing about them. If you feel they can be more generally covered under another article (assuming they are in fact based in canon), feel free to just redirect them. If anyone wants to make a stink about it from there, we can always hash it out in TC. Toprawa and Ralltiir 01:59, April 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Tope. It looks like is on the case anyway.&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 02:41, April 12, 2011 (UTC)

WHY
Why should I stop removing red links? If they aren't articles then wont they end up as stups because they don't have enough info to be articles people are interested in making??? Darth Needham 04:17, April 15, 2011 (UTC)
 * Because they show which articles still need to be created. Redlinks have a useful purpose. They should not necessarily be considered a bad thing. And please sign your comments using four tildes, like so: ~ Toprawa and Ralltiir 04:11, April 15, 2011 (UTC)
 * Not necessarily. Every article gets created at some point. Redlinks are there to encourage the growth of the wiki. There are plenty of people interested in creating those articles.  IFYLOFD  ( Floyd's crib ) 04:19, April 15, 2011 (UTC)

Jedi (individual) without a talk page. Really?
I was creating a talk page for the article. Why did you delete the talk page thing? Obi-Wan Kenobody (Cone of Silence) 22:41, April 16, 2011 (UTC)
 * You don't need to create talk pages just to add the Talkheader template. If there's no content, wait until someone starts a discussion. Toprawa and Ralltiir 22:43, April 16, 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, I was going to discuss that it is ok to imagine that Jedi (individual) fought against Desann's minions without even having it typed on the article. Obi-Wan Kenobody  [[Image:Era-njo.png|20px]](Cone of Silence) 22:45, April 16, 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, don't do that, because no one else knows what your intentions are. Use the edit preview button and save everything all at once. And remember to actually abide by what Talkheader says, or your post will be deleted anyway. Toprawa and Ralltiir 22:48, April 16, 2011 (UTC)

Re:Hudiss
Yeah, that's no problem. Your logic makes sense. :) Thanks for giving me a heads-up about it; really appreciated. Menkooroo 01:59, April 21, 2011 (UTC)