This is the talk page for the article "Galactic Republic/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.


Galactic Republic/Legends was the improvement drive project for the week of 7 May, 2006.
See how it improvedOther improvement drives

Article milestones
Date Process Result
1 December 2005 Featured article nomination Failure
1 January 2006 Failed Featured article nominee
Current status: Failed Featured article nominee

A lot of articles are not editedEdit

A lot of articles are not edited, please get all Star Wars information from [] to complete these articles. - User:John-1107

  • We are aware of that. I am currently getting those who can help with tedious process. -- Riffsyphon1024 06:50, 12 Mar 2005 (GMT)
    • Anyone thought incorporating all the wikipedia articles, then delete them and make redirections to Wookieepedia (a parallel to our Wikipedia:article|article feature)? MoffRebus


Does anyone know who the Senator to Naboo was between Palpatine and Amidala? -- Riffsyphon1024 17:26, 16 Mar 2005 (GMT)

Now, this comment is two years old, but I'm pretty sure there wasn't a senator in between the two. 09:36, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

There were 2 between the two.-- 00:27, May 26, 2012 (UTC)

And now you're editing a five-year-old comment. Why? Cade Calrayn StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit 00:29, May 26, 2012 (UTC)

"First full-scale war since the founding of the Republic" Edit

Which character said that?

  • Im pretty sure its Sio Bibble, and the exact quote is 'there hasnt been a full scale war since the founding of the republic.' Oh, and please sign your comments. Durnar 19:29, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
    • It was Palpatine who said that quote not Sio Bibble, and there were many full scale wars between the republic and other organizations before the clone wars (examples: jedi civil war, the sith wars, and others). Drake Zanzabar 10:44 15 June 2006


Did the Old Republic have an Army and Navy? During the events of the Freedom Nadd Uprising, the Republic deployed specially trained airborne troops called Republic rocket-jumpers. In the Tales of the Jedi comics, Republic troops are shown. They wear helmets and light armour similar to the Rebel troopers onboard the Tantive IV. The Republic also had a military shipyard at Foerost, as shown in Star Wars: Tales of the Jedi — The Sith War. During the Jedi Civil War, the Republic had a naval fleet most notably the Ravager and the Leviathan. The Republic decomissioned most of its military after the Seventh Battle of Ruusan in 1000 BBY. The Judicial Department then takes over the role of the Army and Navy.

  • They definitely have a navy. Remember that courier that transported Qui-gon and Obi-wan in Episode 1? They probably just didn't have a dedicated Army till AotC. Narvi 12:13, 11 Oct 2005 (UTC)
    • Actually, that ship, the Radiant VII, is just a diplomatic cruiser. That ship was not part of any navy; by the time of TPM, the Republic basically had no army and/or navy. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 21:08, 11 Oct 2005 (UTC)
  • Mm. Really? Then why were the Trade Feds so afraid of Senate intervention? They must have had some sort of defence force, if just to ward off pirates and the like. I think they had sector level defenses, (like, say, the Corellian Defence Force) but there was no formalized 'navy', persay. They probably could have organized a massive fleet to finish off the trade fed blockade, but, you know... senate corruption. Just off the top of my head, might be wrong. Narvi 10:00, 12 Oct 2005 (UTC)
  • Actually, no. The Senate was the government of the Republic. Therefore, it had the power to shut down the Trade Federation in a trial or so had the "diplomats" failed. So, prior to AotC, the Republic was really defenseless. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 21:01, 13 Oct 2005 (UTC)
  • The aforementioned Judicial Department had a significant force capable of dealing with piracy and small threats. Though the Judicial Forces weren't a military per se, but rather well-equipped police, they were still occasionally referred to as the "Republic Navy." jSarek 01:20, 14 Oct 2005 (UTC)
  • As JSarek said, prior to the Clone Wars, the Republic relied on the Judicial Forces and the various home fleets of its member worlds. (These home fleets had limited hyperdrive-capability, so weren't usually capable of leaving their home sector.). QuentinGeorge 21:03, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC)

The Old Republic dis have a centralized Navy, just a small one concentrated in the Core Worlds


  • How do we know that this wasn't just a defense fleet for a planet or system? Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 02:19, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
  • It wouldn't suprise me if what was left of the Republic Navy was guarding the Core Worlds. What the Core wants, the Core gets. The only time the galactic government hasn't withdrawn fleets to the Core was during the Galactic Civil War—and that's because the Empire had enough ships to defend the Core Worlds and hunt down the Rebel Alliance in the Outer Rim. -- SFH 03:25, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
    • It wouldn't surprise me, either, but I want to know why SWF thinks that this was the Republic's Navy. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 12:24, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Well...I think the Old Republic had an army/navy. Though after the New Sith Wars, it was dissovled. Considering THEY fought wars before then, like the Mandalorian Wars.-HERADITE 1:13, April 4, 2006
    • Well, yes, we know they had a navy and an army, but we're not sure whether they still had one before the Clone Wars. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) Imperial Emblem 19:08, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
  • the clones were the army of the Galactic Republic, and we were the best army the galaxy ever saw or will see. Alpha-007

it all depends when you mean. for a long time, about from its founding through the various sith wars and mandolarian wars it had a standing military, then i think about a few hundred years before clone wars they droped most of the military and relied on the jedi for the most part. then there was the judiciary fleet, which was supposed to be a police force sort of thing, but was really just a scaled down navy. then there were senate commandos, and ive read in a book or two that they maintained a small army for parades, and a "show the flag" sort of thing if there was a conflict. besides that they just let members have pretty much whatever military they could build, and would call on them if there was a real threat. once the sith empire and mandos were pretty much beaten down and the sith had rule of 2, there wasnt anyone who could challenge the republic.

  • Actually there were limits on the defense fleets, both the number of ships and the size of them. Anything bigger then a Dreadnaught were limited to class 5 hyperdrives (Most warships in the Clone Wars era, and the years leading up to it had class 2 drives) and could only carry local maps in their navigation systems. Rich sectors used loopholes to expand their fleets beyond the normal numbers allowed though, and in the last decades the Republic allowed major conglomerates to build battlefleets which ignored the limits on speed.

--Roguestar (talk) 01:57, November 13, 2013 (UTC)

Lead in quoteEdit

Can we get a lead in quote that's less damning of the Republic? I mean it lasted for 25,000 years, so it had to be doing something rigth. Also, I was under the impression that the Republic's decline was attributed to the Sith silently interfering in the thousand year period between the New Sith Wars and the Battle of Naboo. -- SFH 20:59, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC)

  • Quote changed. Old quote moved to section "end of democracy". QuentinGeorge 05:56, 11 Nov 2005 (UTC)
  • Ahh, much better. Many thanks, Quentin. -- SFH 05:57, 11 Nov 2005 (UTC)


What is the source for Tiberius and Xobah? -- SFH 07:19, 24 Dec 2005 (UTC)

  • Nothing relevant on Google, so removed. -- SFH 07:38, 24 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Behind the scenes sectionEdit

Somebody want to thoroughly revise and expand it? I don't have the time or inclination to do it myself at the moment. Not only is it factually inaccurate (Palpy's line was in AOTC, not TPM), but it takes a needlessly damning tone towards EU "inventions".--Valin Kenobi 06:20, 31 Dec 2005 (UTC)


We know when the 'current' symbol of the Republic (received form Dai Bentu) replaced the former one? Did it happen on Ruusan reformation? MoffRebus 20:40, 8 Jan 2006 (UTC)

all depends when, there would be no current symbol, becasue after the clone wars it became the empire, you should know that. though i think we should use a symbol other then the one that looks imperial.

First appearanceEdit

I think (First appearance) should not be Episode One, but rather one of those Marvel or Dark Horse comics. I just don't know which. I'd put Tales of the Jedi saga but I am not sure they are the first old republic-era tales. MoffRebus 11:13, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

  • Don't put things at the top of Talk pages. Admiral J. Nebulax 20:59, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Tags Edit

Does the article really need all three tags saying it need sto be worked on?


I have the feeling that evenbefore the rise of the Empire, there was the term Old Republic, referring to the pre-Ruusan Republic. After the fall of the Republic, the term came to include all of it. What do you say? MoffRebus 12:47, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Military section pictures. Edit

Why must we have them? They add little or nothing to the article, and plus, they're in the main articles for that section. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 11:03, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

  • The article has too few images for its size and importance. And no, the command ship pic is not found in the Navy main article, and neither the Clone pic is not found in the Military main article. The section needs some better formatting though. MoffRebus 11:45, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
    • So? It's a galactic government article. It doesn't need many pictures. And if those picture aren't in the navy or army articles, remove them from here and put them there. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 19:20, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
      • New Republic, although lasted only for 24 years has more images. MoffRebus 21:05, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
        • Yes, but most of those images are pointless as well. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 21:30, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
          • The point is that I like them. Anyone who doesn't, is just free to remove them. MoffRebus 21:33, 9 May 2006 (UTC) :)
            • Remember, no one person owns Wookieepedia. Saying you like them doesn't mean they have to stay up there. And since you said "Anyone who doesn't, is just free to remove them", as well as the fact that no one else has said anything, I'm taking them down. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 21:35, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Check out timelineEdit

I've made some improvements on the The Old Republic part of the timeline, if you think it will help as a reference. Jaywin 18:38, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Should this artical be split? Edit

should this be split in to two articals for Post and Pre Ruusan Republic? we could use this one for Post Ruusan and redirect all Pre Ruusan details and information in to "Old Republic" - CorellianJedi

  • No. —Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 20:25, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
    • Hold on, technically it's a valid point. Palpatine's line about "this" Republic standing for 1000 years confirms the pre- and post-Ruusan Republics are considered to be two separate entities - although personally I don't think we should split the article, we could do with a good reason why not. After all, we have the three phases of the Empire and the four phases of the Alliance as separate articles - \\Captain Kwenn// Ahoy! 20:29, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Well actualy like i said we could name the post Ruusan Republic the Galactic Republic and the pre-Ruusan the Old Republic
  • Why not? We have multaple articles for the Sith Empire - Corellian Jedi
  • Those were different empires with different origins and formed for different reasons. -- SFH 03:08, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Still both Republics seemed to have diffrent forms of government base3d on how you word it with the diffrent heads of government and such -CorellianJedi
  • I have been a long time reader of this excellent wiki, but this is my first attempt at a contribution. I believe the Republic should not be split into two separate articles as well, but I do think the differences between the post and pre-Ruusan Republic should be further expanded upon in the article. To me, I think the Republic of the first 24,000 years of its history as a more powerful version of the U.N or something like the E.U., and not a real government per se. The post-Ruusan government to me is much more along the lines of taking step towards a super state, where the Senate is interfering more in affairs of individual planets and regulating galactic trade. More to the point, I believe stripping the power of the Supreme Chancellor, the lack of a federal military, instituting term limits on the Supreme Chancellor (considering Boltus the Hutt, Pius Dea), and a more powerful Senate, are some major changes between these two Republic Eras.--Darthscott3457 16:57, 14 October 2007 (UTC)


I wonder... Did the Galactic Republic assign influence to member worlds according to population or did all worlds have (in theory) equal power? Does anyone out there know?


  • Sort of. But that can't be right. There were about a million member worlds, weren't there? All film shots of the Senate show fewer. I think...


    • Well, although officially the Senate chamber holds 1,024 Senate pods, the Petition of Two Thousand seems to say otherwise. And obviously, there were still thousands more Senators that did not sign the petition. So, either the Senate chamber filled up and the rest of the Senators ended up elsewhere, or the Senate chamber expanded as new worlds joined. —Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 01:42, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
    • Well, the republic is a parliamentary system, and the UK House of Commons can't fit every MP in, so it could be something like that.--The All-knowing Sith'ari 20:05, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
          • i belive that after a certain period, it wasnt each individual world that was repsented by a senator, but sectors. though there would still a heck of alot of sectors.

Founding WorldsEdit

Should we put a list of Core Founders in the astography section?--The All-knowing Sith'ari 19:56, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Old Republic Political LeaningEdit

Whould somebody could give me their idea on the political leaning of the Old Republic in our real world politics? Thanks207.134.243.138 23:04, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you my friend.Starship Troopers 02:44, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Images? Edit

Does anyone think that the article needs more images? Unit 8311 11:11, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, Moi!! MoffRebus 12:21, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Government? Edit

I know it may be matter of semantics, but instead of referring to the Republic as a galactic “government” as in the article, I believe a more appropriate description would be that it is a democratic “union” of planets. The Galactic Republic is referenced to as such in the Databank and in other resources like the Essential Guide to the Force. Since every planet has its own sovereign government, laws, styles of governments, economics, and military, the Old Republic is definitely more like an alliance than a government. Like the article says, Republic legislation is usually ignored at the planetary level and its main purpose is to settle disputes between members and provide a common defense. I just think that the Old Republic is best described as a union because it seems to me to be more along the lines of the United Nations or the European Union. Just a thought. Thanks. --Darthscott3457 02:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

  • If no one has any objections, I am going to try and write something up in the Behind the scenes section regarding how the Old Republic acts and functions much like the U.N. or E.U. At least for me, I find that a common misconception among casual Star Wars fans is that they think the Old Republic was a government no different from say the United States. They think that the Old Republic was a strong central government, where everyone in the galaxy gets to vote, thus making for one big happy democracy. This could not be further from the truth, where in Star Wars reality the Old Republic contains sovereign planets (many of which gave non-democratic governments), that have different cultures, large independent militaries, and other measures of self-rule. In other words the planets of the Old Republic are bounded together into a loose confederation or alliance rather than a centralized galactic government. I just think this would be a good addition to this article. Thanks.--Darthscott3457 01:00, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
    • it seem to me like a EU with a bit of leaning towards a gov. it make laws, and had some sort of military for its entier existance, granted it was small somtimes, but it was always there. it was complete with representative of powerful companies, and eu type things dnt have that.

Citizens of the Republic Edit

What exactly is the proper term for a member of the Republic? Is it Republican or something else? A sith soldier in KotOR calls them "Republics". Does anyone know the correct term? Flag-Waving American Patriot 02:52, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

  •, IDK...usually, they call people of a Republic nation by that nation's name (i.e. the citizens of the People's Repblic of China are called Chinese). Seeign as the Galactic Republic doesn't really have a name, that's difficult to answer. I'd agree with the title "Republican", but I can't speak with definity. --LtCol. JuiceStain 00:12, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
    • I'd imagine that they'd be more likely to refer to themselves as natives of a specific planet (ie: Coruscanti, Alderaanians), or members of a species.--The All-knowing Sith'ari 12:00, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
      • Well yes, when they are speaking as members of their home world, I would think they would use "Coruscanti" or "Alderaanian". But what about when a less specific term is needed, i.e. KOTOR. The dialogue on Manaan between the Sith soldiers and the Republic Troops uses the derivatives "Sith" and "Republic" as nouns to describe the individual soldiers; in that case "Sith" (plural) and "Republics" (plural). I really hope that made sense, in retrospect... Flag-Waving American Patriot 04:11, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Appearances Edit

Suggesting to replace Appearances section with All stories, which take place prior to Revenge of the Sith and then list appearances in later stories as mentioned and flashback as follows. That way we can stop trying to list every pre-19 BBY story, which is near impossible. Mauser 05:32, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

I agree, but the republic didn't appear in every story it was mentioned in all (i presume), but then it was also mentioned in a new hope, and even by the name Alliance to restore the republic mentions the republic, i think it would be easyer to list every story it didnt apear in.

Neutrality? Edit

Why does this page have the "neutral point of view" template on it? DarthEinstein 04:19, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

I think that the republic is both good and evilbecause they ´´help´´ planets not as the CIS and evil because they are leaded by an old wrinkled sith lord. Labj 7:04, 23 June 209

Yeah... but what makes the article not neutral? DarthEinstein 04:41, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

they were only lead by paptine for about 20 year before it turned into empire. it existed as a symbol of freedom and all that jazz for millenia before that.

Help me, <name here> Edit

Help me, . You're my only hope!

It starts with name here then goes to blank.

Name here was fine, why not leave that?

Or, 'Help me, anon.' Maybe?

it turns to "help me null" for me

Date of FoundationEdit

Sure, the TOR website says 21,400 BTC (25,053 BBY). But what about the many references to 25,000 BBY period? I'd much prefer it to be 25,053 BBY... nevertheless, I'd like to know why earlier citations are being disregarded. Makashi Flourish 09:07, May 2, 2010 (UTC)

  • Because of a hastily misinterpreted reference on the TOR website. Everything there but one mention says "about 21,400 BTC." The one that has no "about" or "circa" is being taken as hard fact over everything else regardless of other established canon. Proper research was not done on this, but I am not willing to fight the changes right now. Fiolli {Alpheridies University ComNet} 20:34, May 21, 2010 (UTC)

POV issues Edit

Of course, there are a few choice words throughout this article that need to be looked at, but I want to address the phrase "dominant galactic government" in the succboxes. Frankly, there is nothing that says, yet, exactly how long the Cold War lasts and how long the Sith have control over at least half of the galaxy. The Atlas actually implies that it might have gone all the way to Ruusan by its wording. Also, there is nothing that says that the Republic was dominant even concurrently with the Sith. The Sith blew them out for a while. This needs to be reconsidered, especially with the release of TOR. Fiolli {Alpheridies University ComNet} 20:32, May 21, 2010 (UTC)

  • Lots of our succession boxes have similar issues. The whole concept is a Wikipedia artifact, one that I don't really see the need to continue. But future CT plans aside, this particular series of succession boxes is iffy. As you pointed out, the political landscape actually fluctuates quite a bit over the millennia. It might be worth simply getting rid of the whole thing. --Imperialles 20:36, May 21, 2010 (UTC)

States lose independence when Republic became Empire-PLEASE ANSWER Edit

I have a question. Did all the different member states, with their cultures, independent militaries, and seperate governments, lose their independence when the Galactic Republic was re-organized into the Galactic Empire? The Empire was described as a opressive, totaltarian empire in which the planets had no say in the rule of law. --Larry Young 03:38, July 25, 2010 (UTC)

  • Under the Republic, member states had more freedoms but they weren't exactly independent either. They still had to answer to Republic laws much as in the US the individual States have their own laws and government but are still under the US Constitution. The Empire did cut a lot of the political freedoms member states enjoyed. Examples include the Empire's coup on Naboo and the Emperor dissolving the Imperial Senate. On culture, the Empire was very fond of the Human High Culture and enslaved other species such as the Wookiees. Coruscantfan 16:49, July 26, 2010 (UTC)

Type III on the Kardashev scale? Edit

The designation of Type III in this article doesn't seem at all in line with what Wikipedia says in the very article linked here.

Type I — a civilization that is able to harness all of the power available on a single planet

Type II — a civilization that is able to harness all of the power available from a single star

Type III — a civilization that is able to harness all of the power available from a single galaxy

The scale is driven by energy consumption, not "scope of civilization" for lack of a better term. Type II status would require capturing all the output from a single system's star in something like a Dyson sphere, or coming up with some equivalent. Wikipedia mentions farming black holes or capturing partial output from many starts. Type III status would require fulfilling Type II requirements across every system in the galaxy (or at least a high percentage).

I've seen very few mentions in the EU of individual systems that could come close to the Type II definition - it most definitely doesn't apply to even a majority of them. So there's no way the Republic could qualify as Type III. Somewhere above a Type II, sure, but closer to that than a Type III. Even the various ancient system-shaping races probably weren't hitting Type III levels or there would be a lot more artifacts left lying around. Even a constructed black hole cluster like the Maw would only cover a handful of systems at Type II energy levels.

Probably overdoing the ranting (sorry, it's late) but it should really be fixed. Anyone who sees that mention and follows the link to the Wikipedia article for more info as I did will immediately spot that it's wrong.

Mike: 07:45, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

Decline of the RepublicEdit

I created a page with that title, at first it got deleted, i thought it was becuase it had missing words and spelling mistakes, becuase I was in a rush. So I can understand. I made it agian with three paragraphs it got deleted again. Why can't we have a page dedicated to its decline, so we can go into more depth. Unsigned comment by (talk • contribs).

Hi, unfortunately that's not how this wiki works. Instead, you can add all sourced information to this article. (: – Tm_T@Wookieepedia:~$ 11:46, November 29, 2011 (UTC)

History DivisionsEdit

I think that the History section of this article does not accurately represent the Republic's history, and should therefore be improved. At the moment it is divided into

I propose that "Early History" be limited until up the Alsakan Conflicts 17,000 BBY--as these were very important for the Republic and went on (and off) for 5,000 years of history. I then suggest that the Pius have their own era from 11,987 BBY to 10,966 BBY, then have something along the lines of "further history" until the Sith Wars. After the "New Sith Wars" I think that--before "decline of the Republic" there should be a short on the Golden Age of the Old Republic.Thus,

Etc. Thank you, M108.56.196.116 19:02, July 17, 2013 (UTC)

Old Republic/Galactic Republic Edit

It has been established that both Old and Galactic Republics are two separate governments. I know this is the Legends section, but should it not be noted that it was reorganized 1000 years before the Clone Wars? I see some correlation between the reorganization of the Old Republic into the Galactic Republic with the aftermath of the Battle of Ruusan.

  • Whatever changes NuCanon makes have no relevance here. Also, the Ruusan Reformation is what you're referring to, and it's already in the article. Cade StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 18:12, September 22, 2014 (UTC)

Hmm, interesting. So, in a way, the "Ruusan Reformation," while non-canon, could essentially be the same thing as the canonical creation of the modern Galactic Republic. The "no full scale war" since the foundation of the Republic was probably the war against Kaan. Not saying we should mention it or anything, but do you, personally, see a correlation?

  • They're copying the original concept behind the Ruusan Reformation, yes. It's a frequent occurrence with NuCanon. Cade StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 18:21, September 22, 2014 (UTC)

First Jedi purge/events of KOTOR IIEdit

Um, this isn't even remotely mentioned one time. This was an important conflict for the Republic....and there is not EVEN ONE SENTENCE discussing it.

Is the main quote even canon?Edit

The main quote at the top of the article comes from the original version of the novelization of A New Hope, and as far as I am aware, that renders it non-canon, seen as how inconsistent it is from the actual film. As much as I would prefer it over any other quote, it has to be replaced, doesn't it?--Jace Onasi (talk) 09:34, December 16, 2016 (UTC)

  • Not in the Legends continuity. Either was canon, from a certain point of view. NoahR9 First_Order.svgChat with me! 09:37, December 16, 2016 (UTC)
    • The novel is the pre-theatrical release version though. As far as I am aware, the older versions of the novels are non-canon, only the most recent version.--Jace Onasi (talk) 05:40, December 22, 2016 (UTC)
      • There are two continuities. There's Canon, and then there's Legends. The quote at the top of this article is part of the Legends continuity, as is the information in the article itself. You are right, then, that the quote is not Canon, but, at the same time, neither is the article itself. Thus, the quote is fine where it is. Darth Occulus (talk) 01:26, December 23, 2016 (UTC)
        • Yes, I am aware that there is Canon and Legends. What I am saying is that it is non-canon within the Legends continuity.--Jace Onasi (talk) 02:27, December 23, 2016 (UTC)
          • Well, it isn't. Literally all the novelizations were published before the associated movie came out. Well, except for Phantom Menace, but even that novelization came out the same day. The novelization is canon within Legends, except for details that conflict directly with the movie. Darth Occulus (talk) 05:28, December 23, 2016 (UTC)
            • Well, in Insider 79, p. 55, Pablo Hidalgo says the following: "There is no real Journal of the Whills—George Lucas added that to spice things up a bit." I suppose this means that the Journal of the Whills is non-canon within A New Hope, which would render this quote non-canon. The Journal is still canon, though, just not within the novelization. The text from the novelization also appears in the Star Wars: The Roleplaying Game, Second Edition, but I suppose despite this appearance it is still non-canon because it originated from the novel? The quote probably still needs to be removed, regardless.--Jace Onasi (talk) 11:23, January 6, 2017 (UTC)
              • I suppose Pablo could also simply mean that there is no real out-of-universe Journal of the Whills, come to think of it. What do you guys think?--Jace Onasi (talk) 11:26, January 6, 2017 (UTC)

State Religion Edit

Shouldn't the Jedi Order be considered the State religious body, even unofficially? I mean it's odd that the canon article has the Jedi as the State religion but the Legends article, with much more information, does not. I'd like to add it but lack a verifiable source to cite it with. Can anyone point me in the right direction? --Hiigara129 (talk) 07:08, December 20, 2017 (UTC)

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

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Stream the best stories.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Get Disney+