Talk:Darth Wyyrlok (III)

So, now not only are the Sith picking lame names, they're repeating them? Tocneppil 06:44, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * They've apparently lost their creativity. Or, it's in honor of the previous Darth Wyyrloks. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 12:19, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * That's quite interesting actually - do you think it's to try and legimimise the "there must always be a Darth Traya" idea? I know that there are a few who believe that Jacen is going to become "Darth Traya"... ;) (217.135.164.216 13:51, 8 June 2006 (UTC))


 * I don't know. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 13:52, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Think it's a question of the writers having lost their sense of creativity. KEJ 16:17, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Along with their entire sense of canon... Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 17:02, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Maybe its a Chagrian thing. Actually quite interesting, so don't be too hard on Ostrander. So does this mean we have or need a Darth Wyyrlok II and Darth Wyyrlok I? -- Riffsyphon1024 23:40, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Perhaps First Darth Wyyrlok and Second Darth Wyyrlok instead? Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 23:41, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes that would work. We would have to say that they were mentioned only, and they wouldn't have much to say about them, unless we conjectured something which we can't do. We might need to wait a little more for an in story reference, perhaps he has pictures of them on his countertop. -- Riffsyphon1024 23:51, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Perhaps... Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 23:52, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I actually thought that as soon as I read the "third to bear the name" thing. I agree.  But i think maybe "Darth Wyyrlok (first)" and etc.....  But either way I support it. Lonnyd 06:55, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
 * The reason I think that it should be the way I suggested is because I don't think it should sound like the second one was the first one's son and so on, unless that ends up being the case. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 13:07, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I thought it over, I thinkof the three presented here, we should use Riff's one. Just because they are numbered like that doesn't mean they were a line of fathers and sons, look at various nobility here on earth, or the popes. Lonnyd 21:49, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
 * True... Well, as long as there are articles for them, I'm fine with it. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 22:13, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Possibly a clone of himself and simply inherited the name?
 * I don't think so. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 11:47, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Crazy thought - Is Mas Amedda a previous Darth Wyyrlok? He kind of seems to serve the same function within Palpatine's regime as Wyyrlok does in Krayt's.  I know, rule of two and all, but maybe he was an honorary Darth or something, or interim Darth between Maul, Tyrannus and Vader. Lonnyd 09:11, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I really doubt it. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 12:09, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Title
This really shouldn't be at Darth Wyyrlock III, seeing as how he's never called that. It's amazing how many people on message boards think that the "III" is part of his name because of this. I propose just moving it to Darth Wyyrlok. Or if people think that the fact that he's the third should be mentioned in the title, then do it in the usual disambiguating way, like Darth Wyyrlok (third). The problem with this particular one is that it suggests that "III" is really a part of his name, which isn't the case. - Lord Hydronium 03:32, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I've actually been thinking that lately. It does imply that it is his title.  But I do think It should be something like Darth Wyyrlok (third).  We may get info on those other two as of yet.  It was important enough to put in his issue 0 bio. Lonnyd 03:45, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I disagree. I think this is fine. There were three Darth Wyyrloks, meaning this is Darth Wyyrlok III. It's like saying John Smith I, John Smith II, and John Smith III. The third person doesn't always have to be called "(name) the Third". Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 18:26, 21 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Whenever I read the name, I think that it sounds like a word you would find in the Shyriiwook language.--Darth Oblivion 00:22, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Could be... It does look like Shyriiwook. However, it's just speculation. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 00:23, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I think we should change the title of the article, but merely by putting it like this:


 * Darth Wyyrlok (III)


 * Just like that, after all, he's just called "Darth Wyyrlok", and he will probably be called just like that, the "III" should merely be in parenthesis to indicate that he is the third, but it's not the same sort of system as, say, Pope names, which includes the number in the name--Sauron18 00:29, 25 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I also don't really see the need for the "III" -LtNOWIS 00:42, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I think we should use Sauron18's suggestion. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 00:49, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I like Sauron18's idea. It's like the way IMDB disambiguates people with the same name (like the 44 John Smiths), which is a sensible system. -- Darth Culator 00:56, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
 * It could also be used for Darth Wyyrloks I and II, as well as Fels I and II. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 00:58, 25 July 2006 (UTC)