User talk:Gethralkin/Archive02

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Re:Apology
No problem; everyone can get tired. If you want to, I can link to my user page from the nickname.&mdash; TK-999  ( Rise of the Empire ) 12:29, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * That would be great, thanks.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 12:37, May 11, 2011 (UTC)

File source
Can we get a proper source for this file please? A link to an attachment download on a forum that requires logging in to view does not qualify as a valid source. -- Darth Culator  (Talk) 21:56, May 13, 2011 (UTC)

CAN
Please see my comment at WP:CAN. 1358 (Talk)  15:41, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
 * In fact, while GANs and FANs are to be handled by their respective panels, CANs can be archived by anyone. You can either remove the nomination yourself or request it to be removed if you want to GAN it instead. And yes, you should wait until the CAN has been archived before you GAN, to avoid confusion. Cheers. 1358  (Talk)  17:30, May 16, 2011 (UTC)

Re:CA accoutrements
I'll direct you to this archived forum, which should answer your question. Grand Moff Tranner (Comlink) 00:42, May 26, 2011 (UTC)

CAN
Geth, if you think I was being rude, it's only because I care. That articles would be unnecesarily shortened in that way was one of the main concerns over implementing the entire CAN process, and I find it distatesful of you to be actively doing that despite people telling you that that isn't the what this was meant for. Furthermore, if you honestly think I was being uncivil, grow a thicker skin. There is a big difference between taking a sharper tone and being mean. Much, much worse has been said on this wiki. Complaining about my tone, and citing it as unconstructive when I specifically said what needed to be done (description, write the article out), instead of directly answering the whole objection (even if you still complained) is unproductive. Also, to put a finer point on this, do not cite inexperience. You've been through the length transfer of CAN to GAN before and you've proven that you are completely capable of writing articles at both lengths. The difference between articles that go to the GAN and those of the CAN is that any article has a justified length and those that reach that point without getting to 250 words go to the CAN. If it can be a GAN, it should be a GAN. NaruHina Talk  05:36, June 7, 2011 (UTC)
 * I never threatened you or called on any rank at all. Please don't read into what isn't there. Gaming the system is frowned upon, but is not a bannable offence until it is taken to an extreme like the provided example taking advantage of the 3RR. I was not threatening to have you banned, but rather bringing this to your attention to underscore that what you were doing was not OK. Keeping an article that can clearly be expanded past the 200 words limit so you don't have to write it out is pretty much "the use of Wookieepedia rules to thwart Wookieepedia policy." That said, the CAN awaits more SWPM stuff. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 01:37, June 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I should have said "threshold" instead of "limit." When it reaches 200 words and it does not have an intro, you write an intro and see if the articles reaches 250 words. Save the revision. If it does not, you may change it back to the way it was or leave in the intro, but you must link to the revision in which you tried this in the nomination. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 20:12, June 8, 2011 (UTC)

Re:72nd Flight CAN
Hey Geth, my objections were pretty much struck, but I went through and struck another one just in case. It seems still has a few objections left for you, though. Cheers!&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 23:13, June 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * 's objections are under the proper Object section. :P&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 00:23, June 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * Heh, I hear ya. Another day, another credit.&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 00:28, June 10, 2011 (UTC)

Warning
From this point forward, any JPEG image captured from the TCW webcomic viewer will be deleted on sight and without warning. Those comics are PNG files in their native format, and inflating them beyond their native resolution is also pointless. This kind of (which will be gone by the time you get this) is not tolerable. If you can't figure out how to acquire the comics in their native format, I'm sure you can find someone who can. -- Darth Culator  (Talk) 19:00, June 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for making the correction to the image I uploaded. I meant to upload as a PNG and I am well aware of the loss of resolution of jpegs from png captures; however, my mistake was not based on inexperience but distraction. Just so you know.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 19:35, June 18, 2011 (UTC)

Rish Loo behind the scenes
Regardless of the reviewers, the behind the scenes section is not meant for unofficial trivial information. Unless an official source, such as StarWars.com, states that the episode featured references to so and so, any other information will be regarded as speculation and has no place within an article. Cheers,  JangFett  (Talk) 04:11, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

Re: Squad Seven
Images don't belong in introductions, only in the body of an article, and the article was too crowded with that image placement.  CC7567  (talk) 07:39, November 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, everything should be fine.  CC7567  (talk) 08:51, November 12, 2011 (UTC)

Meetra Surik
Hallo. I see that You deleted my edition - text about Meetra´s whereabouts during the Revan Book. I agree that my grammar is not 100% since I am not native speaker but wouldn´t be more productive if You just fixed the grammar instead of deleting all the text? I mean, the facts are there, i finished Revan 2 days ago so I have it fresh in my memory and since there was nothing on Meetra´s page about this, I wanted to contribute. Thank you and have a nice day.--ScorpiO 12:06, November 23, 2011 (UTC)

Hi again. I finally have some time, so i fixed the text. But just to be sure, could you check it please? I think it is OK, but I am a noob and You have a lot of experience ;). Thank You and have a nice day. --ScorpiO 18:55, November 27, 2011 (UTC)

Re:181st edit
My edit was because the next citation within the same paragraph was cited to the same exact 2 sources, then the one after that to one of them. Perhaps it was a mistake though, and I can see why it was reverted. Hanzo Hasashi 04:58, November 25, 2011 (UTC)

Re: Darths
Yeah, I realized I was wrong&mdash;don't know why I thought that we did that. Sorry bout the confusion.  CC7567  (talk) 22:59, January 14, 2012 (UTC)
 * The difference between Darth and other titles is that Darth actually becomes part of the Sith Lord's name, whereas "Count" Dooku is a simple title that does not. So no, the article is currently fine as it is.  CC7567  (talk) 23:22, January 14, 2012 (UTC)

1stm
To be in line with a literal interperetation of the LG, we've started putting the 1st templates on every article, regardless of its number of appearances. NaruHina Talk  18:38, February 6, 2012 (UTC)

Re: Nome/Tenebrous quote
Hey, no harm done. It's always good to double check things like that, if only just to make sure somebody didn't accidentally add something to the wrong article. You were also right to add that bit about Plagueis to the attribution line, since he was apparently speaking specifically to him. I appreciate your faith that I could bring him up to Good Article status, but while I did find him interesting, I already have a few other things on my wiki to-do list at the moment. Maybe sometime in the future, if someone else doesn't scoop him up. :) Bella&#39;Mia 05:44, February 14, 2012 (UTC)

Re:Rugess Nome
You are talking about me changing the name that is displayed under Tenebrous' image, right? My apologies. Smashb96&#39; 18:11, March 17, 2012 (UTC)

Re:
Simply requesting an administrator to remove it would be fine. In this case, since the two-week nomination has expired, I can just archive it as normal. Toprawa and Ralltiir 20:14, March 19, 2012 (UTC)

Re:Great ReSynchronization Dates
Thanks for the info. Smashb96&#39; 00:13, March 22, 2012 (UTC)

Qui-Gon Jinn's talk page
Hello. There seemed to be a vast misunderstanding with what I wrote on this talk page. I've been on the Wook for more than five years by now, so I do not think talk pages are Q&A forums... I asked this question because I think this might be revelant to the personality and traits section of this article. --LelalMekha 20:36, March 22, 2012 (UTC)

Palpatine
Hello Gethralkin, as you have learned, I'm from the Spanish Star Wars Wiki so I don't know very well how the things are here. I'm translating Palpatine's article from here to there, so I asked both on the Inquisitorius entry and the discussion of Palpatine why it hadn't stopped being FA. The two times I made the question, my question was eliminated, so I want tou ask you: why you eliminated it from the discussion? Where do I have to put it to be answered? Please help me, because I'm not from here and I don't know very well what to do. Thank you.Skenar ( Talk )  05:37, March 26, 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm so sorry, I was talking about my entry on Revan's article, not Palpatine's. But about what I put on Palpatine's article: I think I was talking about why someone had put that phrase on the article, and that is something related to the article, not the topic of the article. But I've found the answer: the source is the novel of ROTS, but I will have to read it first to know why it says that. And I hope it's clear why, because if i's only because Palpatine's accomplishments, some other Sith Lords also did great things.Skenar Jedi_Order.svg ( Talk ) 06:00, March 26, 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you for telling me that information about The Essential Chronology. That's was I was looking for: a real and official explanation, not something like: "well, he destroyed the Jedi Order and 25,000 years of Republic, so he is the most powerful Sith Lord". You're right, next time I'm going to check the discusion (when I say "discusion" I mean "talk page") of the article. About Revan, everything that is wrong about the article is listed here? And what does it means that something needs to be "condensed"?Skenar Jedi_Order.svg ( Talk ) 06:41, March 26, 2012 (UTC)

Re:Voting for friends
Hey, Gethralkin. While I don't particularly have anything against having that site as a friend, I did realize that the nomination was there. I keep most pages like that on my watchlist so I can know when someone nominates something. However, what you're doing&mdash;going around to a lot of people's talk pages and asking them to vote in support&mdash;can be considered vote farming, something we don't do on Wookieepedia. I will take into consideration what you have said, but I suggest you cease from asking people on their talk pages to support your nomination.&mdash; Cal Jedi (Personal Comm Channel) 14:05, April 4, 2012 (UTC)
 * No worries. It's not necessarily against any "policy," but it is discouraged. Cheers.&mdash; Cal Jedi Infinite Empire.svg (Personal Comm Channel) 13:18, April 6, 2012 (UTC)

Hologram Fun World
Hi Gethralkin, I've noticed that one of your projects is on Hologram Fun World, which is one of my projects too, and i'm just asking of you have any books or sources to confirm the Distance from core, and if you have any references you can add to the artical. Thanks. --' Biggestleo ' 20:48, May 9, 2012 (UTC)

User template
Gethralkin, please do not create a userpage with user unless the user is clogging up important pages, such as the RC page, with his/her userpage redlink. So far, none of these users you tagged edited recently or caused such a problem. Thanks,  JangFett  (Talk) 04:28, July 19, 2012 (UTC)

88th Flight
Gethralkin, taking a look at the entire article, there are many instances, pretty much the entire article, that contains original research and speculation. No source, other than the trading cards, mentions this 88th Flight. "On July 26, 2008, the 88th Flight was first represented as a miniature in the Clone Wars expansion of WizKids's Star Wars PocketModel TCG. The squadron was then featured in Ambush in Season One, and in Duel of the Droids and Nomad Droids in Season Four of the Star Wars: The Clone Wars television series." The case of the 88th Flight appearing in those TCW episode is incorrect as no source (including the episodes) mentions this. Are you basing the 88th's appearance based on its appearance on the cards? Unless the 88th Flight and its members actually appear in the episode and are mentioned or if a source states so, that is pure speculation and it has no place within the article. While I am not judging the canonical status of the cards or your additions to the article, the cards have no control over what appears in TCW or not, unless TCW and/or its sources mentions that the episode had something that a card showed. In order to remove the unnecessary bits of speculation, basically the article needs to be reverted back to a July 2008 revision. I hope this all makes sense, Gethralkin, and the fact that you could see what is original research/speculation or not.  JangFett  (Talk) 01:26, July 25, 2012 (UTC)
 * I am sorry, Gethralkin, but regardless of what the card shows, no one has mentioned this 88th Flight before other than the cards. As for this "The identity of the droids fighters marked with the same markings as those in the game were confirmed by the game company prior to the airing of the show." Unless you could find a source suggesting that an episode showed the 88th Flight, the article being mostly speculation still stands.  JangFett  (Talk) 13:56, July 26, 2012 (UTC)