FANDOM


Wiki-shrinkable

This is the talk page for the article "Gavyn Sykes."

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.

Premium-FeaturedIcon

Gavyn Sykes is a featured article, which means it has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wookieepedia community. If you see a way this page can be updated or improved without compromising previous work, please feel free to contribute.

Premium-FeaturedIcon

This Featured article was showcased on Wookieepedia's Main Page on May 15, 2011.

Article milestones
Date Process Result
6 September 2010 Featured article candidate Success
31 December 2010 Featured article
Current status: Featured article

Continuity QuestionEdit

What do you mean his flight was about to destroy the ship? Is that canon? To me, it looked like the Naboo were desperate and losing badly until Anakin blew it up. -Aiddat 13:08, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

You haven't played the game, where Gavyn destroyes one of the shield generators.

I noticed a lot of he also's in this article to. Josh'derman 12:49, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Could someone who plays Star Wars Galaxies get a picture on this article? RDMio 21:30, 10 March 2007 (UTC) --Never mind, I've started playing and I'll get the pic tonight or something. This is RDMio but I'm not logged in. 24.229.135.128 16:55, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Picture Edit

Okay, running with a lot of lag I got the best Sykes pic I could on Galaxies. If anyone wants to get a better one, go ahead and try. I suggest going for the same angle from the opposite side, if that'd give better lighting. But it's your pic.Unsigned comment by RDMio (talk • contribs).

So how should we pronounce 'Gavyn Sykes'? Is it "Gavin Sikes" or "Gaveen Seeks"?

In Star Wars: Battle for Naboo, it is pronounced "Gavin Sikes". 172.135.70.218 06:52, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Year? Edit

What year is it exactly, in the Battle of Yavin calender, that Sykes appears in Star Wars Galaxies. Or is there no exact date? Tarvin Calaan 00:18, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Obi-Wan Kenobi quote Edit

Can somebody please tell me why the crap we that quote on the page??? --The Wolfe22 18:58, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

  • Nope. Removed. -- Ozzel 22:10, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Shield generator: Movie vs. game mechanicsEdit

In the game Battle for Naboo, the main objective of the character is to blow up an exposed shield projector/generator. This is apparantly a protruding object not found on the movie model of the ship. In the movie, which one poster apparantly uses as a source, several fighters struggle to hit the ship, but get deflected by the shields. The "projector" hit, is also seen intact later on in the battle, and is identified as a sensor rectenna elsewhere. Why then is the movie used as a source? Also, on the Droid Control Ship article, an anonymous person added that Bravo Squadron was led by Gavyn Sykes, which is false. Please stop adding fanon to these articles simply because you like a given character. VT-16 11:20, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Whilst I completely agree that people shouldn't be saying Bravo Squadron was led by Gavyn Sykes, and you are right to remove that, the rest of what you say is not quite correct. The actor who played Sykes has confirmed on his own StarWars.com blog which has not been removed by Lucasfilm that it is Sykes we see hit the ship, successfully disabling the shields. http://blogs.starwars.com/bravo/1. This is not fanon and as such I will revert its removal. Let's have some common sense here - if something is not only common sense, but also confirmed on StarWars.com, it should remain here.--90.213.2.55 14:56, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

  • I wouldn't be too quick. He's stating a third party, which doesn't confirm anything in an official source. And what the official sources say, is that the rectenna (seen undamaged later in the same film), is a sensor rectenna, not the actual shield generator (seen elsewhere on the illustration from EPI:ICS). Here's his passage:
you do still see Sykes running to his ship with his counterpart R2-C4, and then just after Ric Olié remarks about the shields being too strong, you see a certain rather nice and shiny N-1 fighter fire upon a large radar style protusion on the Droid Control Ship. Moments later that protusion explodes in a ball of fire! Yup, you guessed it, I am reliably informed by Lucasfilm that yellow fighter is Sykes responding to Ric Olié, and that protusion is indeed the shield generator (although it looks a little different in the game). Shortly afterward, Anakin lands inside, saves the day, and you see him, Sykes, and all the others at the end celebration (I'm 9th in the line of pilots)! So now you know - even more!
Bolded for emphasis. He's referring to a sensor rectenna which is still up when the ship blows up. It's easy to make a mistake like that. What remains canon is that the shields cover the ship, there's no opening for the shield generator to be hit when it's on the ship itself. VT-16 15:03, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
  • i have to agree with 90.213.2.55 - we cannot argue with something quote on a lucasfilm owned website by an actor who played the character in question. from my perspective there will always be discrepencies between video games and the movies due to different companies/departments building each, but it is pretty clear that the intention was not for lucas to be daft enough to think anakin could fly through a shield. he clearly intended for the shield to be destroyed by a weapon that could penetrate it. until we see another pilot clearly responsible for this task, i fully support the fact that it is sykes, and that we see it in ep1. i note you don't quote any source for the 'rectenna' claim, yet the other source you are arguing with is starwars.com! i am reverting the changes - suggest you leave it that way until an admin disagrees with starwars.com for some reason. 195.69.243.253 19:33, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
  • I also agree that Sykes is seen in the film performing this. Why has so much good material been removed from the article? This was a great article until all this over-editing for the sake of editing. We have it verified on a Lucasfilm owned website that Sykes destroyed the shield generator. Please can we stop the ridiculous changes now. There are 3 users in agreement, and 1 against.
    • Three different unnamed entries. I'm not convinced. And the facts are clear. The film shows the atmospheric shield opening due to a droid fighter exiting. It's clear in the film, it exists and Anakin's N1 enters. There's no destruction of any exterior ship-based equipment, since that is covered by the ship's shields. There is no damage seen on the ship after this explosion (which is against the shields and does no damage to the equipment beneath), and there is no official diagram showing anything other than sensor rectennas in that area of the Lucrehulk. I have a nagging feeling these comments are all coming from the same person. This is an offense and I will call upon the admins if it keeps up. VT-16 21:19, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
      • I also think the one person is very biased about all this, since he/she only edit this sole article (and occasionally related articles). -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 21:29, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Yep. It's either Sykes or the actor or the events surrounding the character. It's nice to be enthusiastic and all, but it's not an excuse to skip sourcing. I mean, I'm sure someone probably mentioned him being the one who fired the shot, but that doesn't remove the fact that the ship is still intact afterwards. The entire point was the ship wasn't vulnerable to the fighters from outside. I also don't think a squadron leader would not know of such a breakthrough if one of his pilots did it. Especially since the battle continues for so long, and a pilot would not keep quiet about it. Additionally, a novelization is used as a source, but I can't find any. I assume this is fanon, then? VT-16 21:51, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

  • Okay, being civil and sensible about this, yes I am a huge Sykes fan, but the editing has got a bit out of hand here. There seems to be no reason why events that are very clear in the video game Battle for Naboo which revolve around Sykes, have been removed from his character page - those comments about him destroying the shield generator (his shining moment in the SW Universe!) have remained there untouched by admins and clearly accepted, since 2006, yet suddenly his shining moment has been all but deleted today, replaced just with, "He participated in the Naboo Space Battle". AFAIK canon is the six Star Wars feature films, along with all officially licensed spin-off works to the six films. In the officially licensed game, Sykes clearly destroyed the shield generator (it was the entire point of the game!). The "novella" mentioned is not fanon although may not be the right word - it was a booklet supplied in the game's box and covered Sykes childhood as quoted on this article where referenced - I could even scan it in if I really have to. VT-16 - I agree with you, the film is unclear (it is still debated in forums how Anakin managed to land although you have your opinion as do others), and so we should not reference the film as a source for the info... The game however is 100% clear - Sykes did it, and that is Lucas canon and should be referenced high up in the article as the character's main achievement. To sum up guys, we are all on the same side here, we're all clearly passionate about Star Wars, and the previous version very clearly had a reference field after every mention of 'destroying the shield generator' which made it abudnantly clear that the source of this info is the game - full-stop. This 3-year old canon information should not have been removed from the beginning of the article, or from the Space Battle section. The previous edit is the perfect balance, and agrees with everything everyone is saying. Unless anyone replies with a strong disagreement to retaining the facts contained here since 2006, we will assume there is basic agreement to Sykes achievements in the game, and we will get the article unlocked. The earlier edits citing Sykes as the pilot seen in TPM should - I agree - not remain. I think that is what we have been disagreeing about and is all that should have ever been reverted. Any disagreement? --Ewik 21:57, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
    • Read my response at Graestan's talk page. Game mechanic elements don't override story elements. It's that simple and is the policy of this encyclopedia. VT-16 07:31, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
    • Okay, let's work together to find a compromise that satisfies your point - are you happy to do that? You 'quote' this site's policy, so let's look at what it actually says here: "articles must be based on canonical sources officially licensed by Lucasfilm Ltd. ... reliable sources are credible published materials". Okay I think we can agree that the game is a 'reliable source'. But is it "canonical" as required by this site? So then we go here: "Game mechanics ... separate any computer game from reality ... for example Kyle Katarn carrying 10 weapons simultaneously, fully and immediately recovering from wounds simply by touching a bacta tank, etc., are things not realistically possible. Health, shield, and Force repository are also game mechanics ... [With] Games ... generally only the stories are C-canon, while things like stats and gameplay may not be". So according to this site's very own policies, the storyline of a game (be it Sykes destroying a shield generator or whatever) is Canon. This site doesn't say that it can't appear at the top of that character's page. What you refer to as "game mechanics" is not, according to this site, as Sykes destroying the shield generator is clearly not a stat, or bacta tank, nor a human physical impossibility - it is "the storyline of a game". In fact, moreso it is the entire climax to the storyline! Ergo, this is Canon and is not game mechanics. That aside, just because we don't see him destroy the generator in the movie, we also don't see anyone else destroy it to contradict that he might have done so. Yes, there is dispute still as to how Anakin flies inside the ship. I have seen no official source referenced here to outweigh mine or that states that 'somebody' didn't destroy the shield generator. I just cannot possibly believe that a great SW encyclopedia like this, can know a character's crowning glory and shining moment from a Canon story, then all but remove it from his character page against its very own policy! I could name you umpteen other character pages on this encyclopedia where the character exists mainly in a game, and his/her game 'moments' are mentioned high up in the article even though we don't necessarily 'see' those moments in a film set in the same year. The movie camera could have been pointing away at that moment - doesn't mean it didn't happen. Yet with this character, what admins have left alone approved since 2006 has suddenly been removed, and then the article locked in that unfortunate and inaccurate state. VT-16 I do hear you, but we need to work forward to not have his one and only pivotal moment in the officially licensed Canon universe renegated to 'Behind the Scenes' as that section is reserved for info on actors, special effects, filming anectdotes - not canonical non-game mechanics story climaxes! It needs to be at the top - it is the character's famous moment. I hope you are able to agree on a compromise here as I really want to lay this to rest. Can we make friends and agree to revert the article to the previous edit which was already very balanced and had all photos of the space battle from TPM removed along with references to it being Sykes in the space battle also removed, but also to help you out, clarify the [ref] tag for each of the 2 mentions of 'destroyed the shield generator', so that at the bottom of the page it very clearly explains to everyone: "As seen in the climactic scenes of the game Battle for Naboo. It is disputed whether or not this is mirrored in Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace". Is that an acceptable compromise to you? --Ewik 13:05, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
  • But the behind the scenes info exists to describe anything not suitable for the main article. The gimmick at the end of the game is to hit an object that is not the shield generator in the film, in other words, it's a game mechanic. A mechanism to facilitate gameplay. Just as hitting the shield generator globes (which are mainly sensor globes) on Star Destroyers in a game, causes them to lose its shields. This is even mirrored in the Independence Day game, where the fighter you're piloting has to hit shield generator parts not seen in the film, in order to deactivate them.
Furthermore, TPM shows the ship under the protection of the shield, which is why the fighters don't damage it in the first place. The area hit by Bravo 6, is not only stated to not be a shield generator, having no affiliation with shield generation at all, but is also seen intact later on, and no piece of the rectenna is shown coming off in the explosion. VT-16 13:48, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Dude, we're supposed to be working together to find a compromise here - you're not helping achieve that lol. You are rewriting the policies of this website in your post about what is and what is not game mechanics. According to Wookieepedia, the storyline of a game is Canon and is not Mechanics. Just because you reword that into your own words, does not change the policy of Wookieepedia. However, that said, I agree with everything you say about Sykes in TPM - there is no argument there. That is why the article should be reverted but all references to the character destroying the shield generator should be clealy referenced only to BFN. By doing that, we both completely agree with each other and the article satisfies both of us. That is a win-win situation. However by doing it your way, you are disagreeing with 3 years worth of edits (not by me but by admins etc.) and only you win - which is the path to the dark side ;) Let's try to get along. Can we agree on this compromise that includes both viewpoints please dude?
    • Addendum: Gone through the game walkthrough and they were pretty accurate with where the generator is located. It's the block expanding from the ring to the sphere, before the "neck"-piece. However, this presents, once again, problems. The thing hit in the movie, is one of the sensor rectennas, not the generator. Again, every part of the ship is covered by the shield, the same shield emitted through the generators like the one described. The only way he could hit it with a starfighter-grade weapon, is if the shield is focusing elsewhere. Like the "Downfall of a Droid" episode, where the frigates focus all their shield power forwards only, or when the shield drops around the ion cannon on the Malevolence. The problem still remains that the parts of the ship where both the rectennas and generator are located, are still intact throughout the battle, until the moment the ship blows up, from the inside. You'd also think that not only would a pilot who successfully destroyed a shield generator, signal this, but that the other pilots, still firing, would be able to actually hit something now. Instead, everyone not only manages to see that the ship is blowing up from the inside, but also comment on it not being caused by them because they're on the outside. This being minutes after any supposed shield generator hit, which would have been noted, if nothing else, by visually seeing a piece of the ship breaking off. Which didn't happen until the internal explosion. VT-16 14:02, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Yes, which I'm trying to do, but you're not providing anything tangible. We know Simpson played Bravo 6, one of the pilots of Bravo Squadron, ergo he participated in the battle. We see no damage on the parts hit by him or anyone else from outside, ergo, no loss of shields. We see nor hear no acknowledgement of the ship being vulnerable minutes after the supposed shield breach. There's an amount of things to exclude if we're going to go for an event that only happens in a game. VT-16 14:02, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Also, the most damning: The dialog from seconds before the Captain aboard the battleship and his crew die, "Captain, there seems to be a problem with our main reactor!" "Impossible! Nothing can get through our shields!" The Captain and technician responsible for reporting a breach or error on the ship, can report an internal breach, but not a huge honking dish coming off from a fighter strike, right outside their command deck? And that the shields were down even though they said they were up? VT-16 14:06, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Ahhh, I think I know where we're going wrong. We appear to be having a misunderstanding! (I wish I could phone you - it's so much easier to 'talk' rather than read all this text lol). Okay thanks for trying to work with me, we're getting somewhere. Here's the misunderstanding (I said it already but let me clarify): I agree with you that Sykes actions are not necessarily mirrored in the movie. The fact you have spent some time above trying to prove that shows me that you think I disagree - but I do not, I agree. Okay, so that leaves just one thing to the discussion - the game. Now, in the game, you will agree that Sykes destroys the shield generator, regardless of the fact that we don't necessarily see that happen in the film - which we agree on right? Okay good. Now, according to this site's policies, "articles must be based on canonical sources officially licensed by Lucasfilm Ltd.". And we agree that the game is officially licensed, right? Cool. So my main issue is that if the article is canonical, it should not have been messed with, when it clearly referenced that the text about destroying the shield generator was referring to the game version only. The article in its former state completely utterly agreed with everything you are saying. Have you really studied the previous edit that you appear to disagree with so much? It agrees with your point, and mine! We're both humans, both good people, and both pretty tired of this, so since the previous edit agrees with the policies of the site, and your view, and mine, could I appeal to your good nature and ask you to agree to not stand in the way of closing this matter now by simply replying with one word - "Agreed"? :) If you don't agree, we're going to get into a really messy situation here, because every single part of the article that describes in-game storylines which aren't seen at all in the movie, is all going to have to be moved to 'Behind the scenes' - we've got to be consistent, but clearly doing that would be an act of insanity! The game storyline is a credible source for the 'Sykes' character as a whole, and as such it should all be in the main body. There are many things in Star Wars that are contradictory or 'plot holes', but they remain, and so should this. Peace? Agreed? :)--Ewik 14:35, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
    • I only want the game ending to be in the bts section, that's what it's there for. When there's a contradiction, it doesn't get put into the main biography, it goes there. The game is licensed, the story is canon, but the game mechanics "blowing up an exposed shield generator from outside the shield", isn't, it's a mechanic for achieving the goal of the game, destroying the ship. Here's also another problem, in the other TPM shooter game, Starfighter, the goal of the pilot is to fly into the ship, much like Anakin, when the containment field is opened to allow a landing craft to exit (in the middle of the battle?), much like how Anakin gets into the ship in the film. Then the fighter goes in, while the others don't make it before the field is reactivated. So the game mechanics is flying into the ship in pursuit of a mercenary pilot and kill him, but which doesn't conflict with the film, unlike the first game. The fact that this pilot is stuck inside the ship until Anakin blows up the reactor from inside, is also made into a point, iirc. Which wouldn't be the case if the shields were down before then. Everything stays but the isolated scene of something being blown up from outside the shielded ship, is in the bts section. VT-16 14:58, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Gone through the walkthrough on that game as well. There, you have to blow up the receiver antennas on the outside, get trapped inside the ship and then blow up an internal shield generator, from inside, to get out again. So neither game is consistent with each other nor with the film. VT-16 15:10, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Argh. It just doesn't make any sense to put the pivotal climax of a major canon storyline in 'Behind the scenes'. That section is clearly for 'movie making' revelations. There are no 'scenes' to be 'behind' in a game, and the game didn't take place behind the bluescreen on the set of the movie either! We have to make sensible logical decisions here, and that is the crux of the issue. This is not behind the scenes 'info' or gossip! The storyline you refer to does not take place 'behind the scenes', it has played out on 100,000s of user's computer monitors in a climactic battle culmination, very much in front of the scenes. To resolve this for once and for all, you need to quote your sources for the following 'claims', which is what I did. Just typing them doesn't make them 'fact':
"I only want the game ending to be in the bts section, that's what it's there for. When there's a contradiction, it doesn't get put into the main biography, it goes there." (I ask as I do not believe a major game storyline is behind the scenes info or that this website would say that it should be listed under such - please prove your point otherwise it cannot be upheld.)
"the game mechanics "blowing up an exposed shield generator from outside the shield", is ... a mechanic for achieving the goal of the game" (I ask as I clearly quoted above that Wookieepedia policies state that "game mechanics" are only things that are "physically impossible" such as 'picking up a health pack restoring the player's health'. We can only accept that the climactic moment of a canon game storyline that was released to tie in with Episode I is merely 'mechanics' if you show that the policity dictates this.)
"Game mechanic elements don't override story elements. It's that simple and is the policy of this encyclopedia." (Okay if it is that simple, where does it state that in the policy of this encylopedia exactly?)
That said, you say yourself "game mechanics ... don't override story elements", yet Sykes destroying the shield generator is a story element from the officially licenses canonical game release! Ergo, any mechanics you claim, do not override the story - and as such the story of Sykes doing so, should stay in the main article - just clearly referenced as being from the game! If you can provide 3 simple URL links to where you found these alleged policies that agree with your wording (for now I only have your word for it that they are even policies) then I will agree to disagree. If however the actual policies of this encyclopedia are - as I believe - what I have already quoted and linked to above, then we will need to take this matter above our heads. It just cannot be right that a popular and loved SW character's main achievement in his life is suddenly relegated to a small paragraph at the bottom of the page after 3 years in place and approved by admins since2006!!! - that doesn't help anyone and this website doesn't exist to let people throw their weight around, it exists to tell the world what a character is known for. I am however happy to work with you on refining the references to make it very clear that the events discussed at the top of the article are only from the game (that is - if you are able to appear less stubborn and more happy to work together on a simple and quick resolution?). Assuring you of my best intentions and in the sincere hope you will stop looking up unrelated game walkthroughs, and instead work together with me in a mature nature on making reference wording we both agree with :) Please? Come on dude - do the right thing and agree to work together? --Ewik 15:28, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
  • If you guys can't work together, I'd suggest waiting for/asking others to give their input. And, btw, "Behind the scenes" is merely the section for out of universe or non-canon information to go, regardless of how many people saw it. But Ewik, I don't think you're approaching this from an objective point of view; whether you're Christian J Simpson or someone else, you've clearly, based on your contributions and your comments - "It just cannot be right that a popular and loved SW character's main achievement in his life is suddenly relegated..." - got a biased opinion of this all, which could be skewering your perspective and certainly isn't helping the discussion get resolved any faster. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 16:59, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
  • @AdmirableAckbar, I have conceded I am a big Sykes fan (of course I'm not the actor - I wish I was!), but you seem to be agreeing with me. You said, ""Behind the scenes" is merely the section for out of universe or non-canon information to go", but as we see Sykes destroy the shields in the officially licensed game which is therefore in-universe and canon, you too seem to think it should be in the main article, not under 'Behind the Scenes'. That is my one and only point. That's the strange thing and what has caused me to become so heated about this - that I do not think admins are reading the full argument, but rather skimming and just siding with the user who is better known. In reality, as you have just demonstrated, you agree with my point - yet still the article remains locked to an erroneous edit. I am going to do as you suggested and ask others opinions.--Ewik 17:19, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
  • In order for this to hopefully end its cycle, I've taken the liberty of scanning from my copy of The Complete Star Wars Encyclopedia, Gavyn's bio and Dallows' bio. Nothing on either of them blowing up any shield generators or sensor arrays. If this constant nagging about the story continues, I think I'll have a cow. Look, the film, which represents for better or for worse, the highest canon on LFL's long and sordid scale, does not show any exterior element of the DCS being destroyed before Anakin's internal adventure. We see shots backfiring because of the shields, and all equipment on the ship, being protected by said shields, do not get destroyed until the end of the battle itself. Like with Super Bombad Racing, which I'm sure has some kind of ending for each of the bubble-headed characters, is also a licensed product by LucasArts, but that does not mean everything about it is an aspect of canon. VT-16 19:45, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorry it looks like most of you guys were wrong about this - I just saw the latest issue of the Star Wars Insider and on page 54 it says that Lt. Sykes was the one who destroyed the shields, allowing Anakin to enter the ship. Good to see the main article now reflects this.--76.243.71.198 16:34, September 24, 2009 (UTC)

Captain Sykes' Last Moments?Edit

Can anyone advise what Sykes was doing in the final few moments before Galaxies went offline forever? --NosFiesta 18:04, January 10, 2012 (UTC)

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