This is the talk page for the article "Core Worlds/Legends."

This space is used for discussion relating to changes to the article, not for a discussion about the topic in question. For general questions about the article's topic, please visit the Knowledge Bank. Please remember to stay civil and sign all of your comments with four tildes (~~~~). Click here to start a new topic.

I suggest we only add important planets to this list, not every freakin' planet from the Coruscant system. That is what that article is for. -- Riffsyphon1024 17:41, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Not all of the planets in the Coruscant and the Core Worlds WOTC book are Core Worlds. Some are near the Core, like N'Zoth, but are not counted amongst those primary planets. --SparqMan 17:55, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  • N'zoth shouldn't be in this list if its describing planets outside the Deep Core, where that is. -- Riffsyphon1024 17:58, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • And Muunilinst is in the Outer Rim (later Imperial space) not the Core - Kwenn 12:43, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
      • Bith is often mentioned as a Core world in references. Perhaps it should be added to the list?--KoopaTroopa211 04:49, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Bith is an alien species native to Clak'dor VII, which is located in the Outer Rim. Although I have heard it called Bith sometimes. -- SFH 04:51, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Ahhhh, I wasn't thinking straight last night. I meant to say Byss, rather than Bith.

  • In that case, Byss is located in the Deep Core, not the Core Worlds. The differences are explained in the article, but it's easy to get the two mixed up. -- SFH 23:51, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Um... where are all the important systems; the list has no Corusant, Alderaan, Corellia, Kaut, Fondor, Duro or Chandrela!? I don't know why there not here other than that they are part of subdivisions, (which would still mean that they are in the Core Worlds, plus it implies in the intro that Corucant is one). I have not heard of any of the planets on the list. Is the list of planets only for ones of which the sector is not known for? If so that seems a little strange.

This is because this way we know which planets' sector, system etc. is unknown, but are still in the galactic region. Other planets can be found in their respective sectors and systems. This provides an "easy-to-navigate-in" hierarchical system. If you are looking for a well-known planet, e. g. Coruscant, just read the respective article, and you can find system/sector data in the infobox. If you just want to know what planets does a sector contain, you just view it. Otherwise, if we listed all the planets in a region at the region's article, the article would become unnecessarily lengthy and would take greater time to load (this is especially true for the Outer Rim Territories, look at it, even the list of the sectors and the planets with unknown location is kilometer-long, how would it look like with all the planets - oh my!). And hereby I grab the opportunity to ask all wanderers, who stumble upon this page: please read the instruction at the top of the sections before adding Coruscant for the 100th time (and I revert it for the 101th). Thanks. Domlith 19:41, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Core SystemsEdit

  • I thought the Core Systems was used to refer to the Deep Core. -- SFH 00:28, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Tapani Sector Edit

Why is Tapani Sector here if it is technically in Colonies?

  • It's so old, rich, and powerful that it is "considered" an honorary Core sector...Damn Core Worlds. That can't stomach the possibility that there are sectors outside the Core that are as powerful as them. -- SFH 16:50, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Empire At War Edit

Shouldn't there also Eaw stand as appereance? Darth Stassen 10:28, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

  • I'm sorry, I have no idea what you're asking. --School of Thrawn 101 10:53, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Only if EaW specifically mentions the phrase "Core Worlds". Does it? Cull Tremayne 10:54, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
      • Cull, your skills at translating gibberish far exceed my own. I disagree with Darth Stassen, assuming that I understand that the user is asking to include the term "Core Worlds" into the EaW article. As Cull is implying, there is no mention of the term "Core Worlds" in either EaW or FoC. Not that I can remember, anyway. --School of Thrawn 101 11:00, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
        • Close, but he's asking if EaW should be added to the appearances of this article. Since you seem to confirm that the term "Core Worlds" does not appear in that game, then you're correct in saying that it should not be placed in the "Appearances" section of this article. Cull Tremayne 11:26, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
          • Indeed. Again, Cull...your abilities at babble-translation far exceed my own. I salute you. --School of Thrawn 101 11:32, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

This article leaves out MAJOR planets. Worst Wookieepedia article I've seen. Needs Coruscant, Alderaan, etc.

Appearances Edit

Where are all the appearances. We shouldn't just include times when it was called "Core Worlds," we should include the times when a planet in the Core was mentioned or appeared. And I know that list is incomplete anyway, because the quote's sorce isn't there. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 23:25, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.