User talk:Dangerdan97

Dangerdan97, welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wookieepedia. I hope you like the place and choose to join our work. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• Internal pages:
  • Community Portal
  • Manual of Style
  • Online sources
  • Wookification
  • Things to do
  • Jundland Wastes Sandbox
• External Wikipedia pages:
  • How to edit a page
  • Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
  • Picture tutorial
  • How to write a great article

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wookieepedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the Community Portal talk page or ask me on my Talk page. May the Force be with you! -- Riffsyphon1024 04:58, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Reversion of your edits

I've re-reverted the changes you've made to several date articles. Removing information without an explanation generally is a bad idea. If you're going to do so, you need to explain your reasons in the accompanying talk page. Or, if you're making sweeping reforms for the Wook, please start a Consensus Thread. Thank you for your cooperation. Toprawa and Ralltiir 18:13, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Warning

You have broken Wookieepedia's three-revert rule. If you revert either of the articles in question once more, you will be blocked form editing. Graestan^(Talk) 02:09, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

• All I did was warn you not to further flout policy. Your paranoia is unfounded; no one is more "important" than anyone else on the wiki, and you could just have easily taken your arguments to the talk page. Your activities on the wiki determine your relationships with the community—perhaps taking a more measured approach would benefit you. Graestan^(Talk) 21:54, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Manaan

Thank you for providing the source – especially the direct link. Keep in mind that if you add information to articles, especially featured articles, they need to be sourced or they risk becoming reverted on sight. Manaan is a FA and as such, there are many people who monitor it to ensure factual accuracy. Thanks for providing the information. Master Aban Fiolli ^{{Alpheridies University ComNet}} 15:54, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Year templates

Just so you know, I reverted the changes to the year templates because of their usage in canon. The Old Sith Wars is a canonical period; one, in fact, that as of right now ends with the Battle of Malachor V. This is confirmed in canon and can be found in a couple of sources. Until LFL changes this date, we have to assume that the era still ends at 3,951 BBY even though there are events after it which might appear to fit into the era. Thanks. Master Aban Fiolli ^{{Alpheridies University ComNet}} 16:15, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Sithy emblems

File:SithEmblemTOR.PNG

Here you go. Just did a printscreen TOR website and cropped it. :) The other image looks so much like the Jedi Order emblem during The Clone Wars that I think I mislabeled it as "Republic." SinisterSamurai 22:14, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

The Clone Wars retcon

I saw your comment in the Senate Hall about the Clone Wars being completely retconned and I completely agree. That time period had to have been the most exhaustively documented in the entire Star Wars saga. And instead of trying to make the new content fit, they just decided to overwrite all the existing canon for it. Someone should start a petition or something. -Milo Fett^[Comlink] 14:30, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

• I agree 100%. Older pre-prequel (pre May 1999) sources place the clone wars further in the past justifying the adjective Old Republic. Is 18 to 20 years long enough to call something like a government "old"? -- Frank V Bonura - The Bane of Revisionism 01:23, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Post April 1999 SW Material

"You're always welcome to create your own wiki that stops recording SW material at 1999 if you like. Dangerdan97 00:04, 26 May 2009 (UTC)"

―{{{2}}}

Do I know you sir? You seem to know me rather well sir. I can't help but ask, why can't this Wiki respect the views of those who recognize the prequels and those who do not? Can we not be open-minded and inclusive of both camps? Thank you in advance for your time. -- Frank V Bonura - The Bane of Revisionism 02:13, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Cooldown block

• You've got a one-day cooldown block for edit-warring and NPA violation in edit summaries. While we're appreciative of your edits here, there's no need to express that kind of attitude; it's not helpful to the community. At any rate, the official release date is the one that should be used. Atarumaster88 ^{(Talk page)} 22:56, 28 May 2009 (UTC)