This is the talk page for the article "LEGO."

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 Wookieepedia Discussions. Please remember to stay civil and sign all of your comments with four tildes (~~~~). Click here to start a new topic.

Lego vs. LEGO

The official company name is not Lego, but LEGO. Should we change the title of the page to reflect that? -Gorblax, 5:29 August 24 2006 (EST)

  • Wikipedia also has it as "Lego." - TopAce 09:59, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Wikipedia is wrong then. Check the official LEGO site for confirmation. It is LEGO not Lego. Sulgran 10:17, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
      • I checked wiktionary and found this. Moving it to LEGO.

New sections added

Hi. The new sections added in the past week (crafts, locations etc.) were done by me (not a Wookieepedian...yet).I hope you like them. hopefully some pictures will be added. 05:56, 6 October 2006 (UTC)


Why do we really need a list of Star Wars LEGO (or Lego) sets? Couldn't that be considered advertising?Geekboy42 21:57, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

  • Would having a list of Star Wars movies be considered advertising? —Xwing328(Talk) 23:52, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Yeah, but this isn't LEGO(or Lego)pedia. It's WOOKIEpedia-star wars, not LEGO (or Lego). See the difference? Geekboy42 15:44, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
      • Nope, because, by the same token, "it's WOOKIEEpedia-star wars, not MOVIES. See the difference?" It's Star Wars, ergo it's relevant. We also have lists of Star Wars books, games and trading cards, so why not LEGO? -

\\Captain Kwenn// Ahoy! 16:00, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

        • That was meant to be a completely rhetorical question. Anyways, it was decided before that a list of, say action figures, was okay, but individual articles for each figure usually isn't appropriate. —Xwing328(Talk) 04:50, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
          • It's probably alright to have a list of LEGO sets as long as you don't list the suggested retail price and where to find the set next to it... And I for one use this list occasionally. --Darth Phonebook 22:27, 3 December 2006 (UTC)


  • There are several references to how the fans were "disappointed" by the sets or how the sets were "well-recieved". This could be a bit opionated, considering that not all fans were "disappointed" and not all fans like those sets that were "well-recieved". Do we have to put in how popular the sets are? --Darth Phonebook 21:36, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
    • I've made this article as objective as I can now, but if there are still problems with neutrality I missed, feel free to fix them -NighthawkLeader 00:22, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
      • I assume that since it's pretty free of opinion, that this means the neutrality banner on the page can be removed... --Darth Phonebook 01:28, 13 January 2007 (UTC)


I proposed this article for deletion. - Patricksheridan 6:31pm, January 11, 2007

What?? Why? --Darth Phonebook 01:51, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

  • What have you got against LEGO? While we're at it, we may as well delete all computer games, toys, rpg's, card games and reduce Wookieepedia to 10 pages -NighthawkLeader 02:22, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

This article was nominated for deletion on January 11, 2007. The result of the discussion was keep.


  • Does any know what parts of this article needs to be fixed so that it is Wookified? NighthawkLeader 22:12, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Just taking a quick look at it, I'd say the lists should be made with bullets, instead of just having the items spaced apart. Not much else though. It's come along way since it started. —Xwing328(Talk) 03:47, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
      • Ok thanks. I'll get started on it tomorrow. NighthawkLeader 08:05, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
        • Would it be alright to remove the Wookification template now? NighthawkLeader 05:18, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
          • Yeah, I went through after you and fixed it up even more. I also removed the template. —Xwing328(Talk) 06:08, 18 March 2007 (UTC)


Should this article be N-canon? Darth Whatever

  • No it doesn't need to be- it's already a real-world article. NighthawkLeader 23:34, 11 July 2007 (UTC)


umm we should keep this because it is part of the star wars stuff and dude it is part of star wars -

  • No one said it should be deleted. Drewton 23:40, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Additional Link

I think this link should be added, it has pages on nearley every minifigure and set, including asscesories like keyrings.

http://www.wikia.com/wiki/c:lego:Star_wars Kingcjc 16:37, 3 September 2008 (UTC)


Should there be a list of the LEGO Star Wars sets on this page? Kgrimes2 19:23, 5 November 2008 (UTC)


Ummm, I found this [1]. Should it be included in the article? Should Wookieepedia take action/further investigate? --Darth shohet 03:32, September 27, 2009 (UTC)


"10th Anniversary of lego Star Wars Series"—Do we really need all the descriptions nad seplign annd gramr mstaks? (Intentional Misspellings)B-Boba Fett! He'll kill us all! Jaster's Feather.svg 20:24, October 12, 2009 (UTC)

2.3 Expansion/Update

In the "Expanded Universe" section it lists several sets that should now fall under a new section "The Clone Wars." I don't know how in depth the list should be - as there are many more new sets - or if they should be listed at all, but as this coincides with an ongoing series and since this article already exists, I think it could use some updates. Nate

Good point. Also, should the TIE Defender be mentioned in this category? Is it even still considered "Expanded Universe"? It's part of Canon since Rebels.