This is the talk page for the article "Midi-chlorian."

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.

Questionable canonicity.[edit source]

While Disney has stated that the prequels and The Clone Wars are canon, but a recent interview with Abrams makes me think if we should keep an eye on something like this to see if things are changed in the future, in terms of canonicity. Vidboy10 (talk) 14:15, August 5, 2015 (UTC)

  • Yahoo is taking what was said waaaaaay out of context. Midi-chlorians are not of questionable canonicity, and it's not something we need to keep an eye on. The prequels are canon. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 14:52, August 5, 2015 (UTC)
  • The interview says only that midichloriany will not be mentioned in Episode VII. (Sorry for my bad English) Michalomatek 17:06, August 5, 2015 (UTC).
    • Fair game Brandon, just thought I would mention since you know those journalists that try to throw you off guard. And Michalomatek, it was more about the tone that the article gave, which was implying that midi-chlorians aren't canon anymore. But no probelm, everything's now sorted out.Vidboy10 (talk) 01:31, August 19, 2015 (UTC)

I just watched the movie again and I seem to remember that Han's "it's all true" speech when he first meets Rey was a little longer when the movie was in the theaters. In it, he included midi-chlorians in what he listed as being true. There were a couple of other things, but where I'm thinking he does mention them is because I have this memory of thinking at the time "huh, J.J. Abrams just confirmed something that was controversial in the previous movies" (paraphrased). Kind of like how people weren't really sure if the Eighth Doctor from the Doctor Who movie was really a part of the series until references to him were specifically included in later episodes.

If I am remembering this right, it's been removed from the home video release. It's not the first time a movie was re-edited or adjusted after it got done in the theaters. The most recent example is Zootopia, where part of Lionheart's interview at the end of the film was removed for the home video version. Does anyone else remember Han mentioning midi-chlorians? —RRabbit42 (leave a message) 05:31, June 20, 2016 (UTC)

  • Midi-chlorians were never mentioned in the theatrical release (or script). The only theater-to-video change I've suspected is the patterns on flags outside Maz's castle. - Cwedin(talk) 05:56, June 20, 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the confirmation it wasn't there. I'm normally pretty good at remembering obscure details like this, but it looks like I got it wrong this time. —RRabbit42 (leave a message) 01:40, June 21, 2016 (UTC)

The mention of Midi-cholrian levels in the "Star Wars: Absolutely Everything You Need to Know"[edit source]

Hi there, Just wanted to point out that it's recently come to my attenion thanks to a YTer (Rob Explains) I follow that Midi-cholrian levels are present in the new canon. It also is stated in the book "Star Wars: Absolutely Everything You Need to Know", which is considered apart of the new canon as it has the "Journey to force awakens" banner, that it's 5000 Midis pre cell is a sign of force sensitivity. BUT, one of the higher nidi-cholrian count people from the films and materials released leading up to Force Awaken is Grievious. Grievous who is stated to have more Midi-cholrians than Bane (11.9k to 10.5k) yet not said to be a force sensitive. My personal take is that they are introducing that Midi-cholrians aren't the only source of the force/the only sure fire way to tell who is and isn't sensitive. Could be an accidental oversight but it is glaring how much of an oversight that is, if it's that. And mind you the books where it's stated Grevious got midicholrians from Sifo-Dyas are now no longer canon.- 01:33, November 18, 2015 (UTC)

Wait, does it mention Darth Bane having a Midi-chlorian count? If it doesn't mention it. It's not canon. Midi-chlorian counts from Legends don't count. Vidboy10 (talk) 09:35, November 18, 2015 (UTC)
He read "Absolutely Everything...". If you have not read them book, you haven't nothing to say. Please end with "midi-chlorians aren't canon"!. Unsigned comment by Michalomatek (talk • contribs).
What the fuck? I never said "midi-chlorians aren't canon." And I was just mentioning that if it doesn't mention Darth Bane in the book, (from what I've looked up, he isn't) and specifically his Midi-chlorian count. He must be reading things from somewhere else, most likely SuperShadow. Vidboy10 (talk) 19:16, November 18, 2015 (UTC)
None of what you're saying here "counts." No source ever revealed the midi-chlorian counts of either Bane or Grievous. What you saw online was only SuperShadow's fake material. --LelalMekha (talk) 10:00, November 18, 2015 (UTC)
LMAO!!! Nice one! Vidboy10 (talk) 18:33, November 18, 2015 (UTC)
Let's please remember to keep it civil here too. Thanks all. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 19:41, November 18, 2015 (UTC)
Oh no, I was laughing with him, not at him. Vidboy10 (talk) 02:17, November 19, 2015 (UTC)
Neither that nor the Wikipedia page even defines what civility is. Nonetheless if it means what I think you mean, it obstructs good writing and attracts bad editors, bad not defined by offensive attitude but mental and social defect, both which repels readers in general and good editors. So the policy defeats itself. Alysdexia (talk) 02:11, September 4, 2017 (UTC)

According to legend[edit source]

Why does this article state that the Midi-chlorian homeworld is a legend? We have no reason to believe the Force Priestesses weren't telling the truth, their is no indication that the planet was a legend to anyone, and the other articles discussing the planet do not treat it as such.

Origin[edit source]

It looks like midi-chlorian (1977) is a spin of chylo-micron (1921):

chylomicron, n.
Etymology: < chylo- comb. form + micron n.
An extremely small particle of unhydrolysed fat visible in the blood after the ingestion of fat.
1921 Gage & Fish in Jrnl. Amer. Vet. Med. Assoc. LVIII. 400 The term chylo-microns has been designate the particles found in the blood and chyle, since the particles are of the same nature in both fluids, and the name fittingly indicates their origin.
1957 Encycl. Brit. XIV. 520/1 If the lymph is collected from an animal fed some time previously with a fatty meal, it has a milky appearance, which is due to the presence of innumerable fine droplets (chylomicrons) about 0·5 to 0·75μ in diameter.
1962 Lancet 2 June 1153/1 Very possibly, chylomicron triglycerides are directly removed from the plasma by contracting muscle.

Chylomicrons (from the Greek chylo, meaning milky fluid, and micron, meaning small particle) are lipoprotein particles that consist of triglycerides (85–92%), phospholipids (6–12%), cholesterol (1–3%), and proteins (1–2%).[1] They transport dietary lipids from the intestines to other locations in the body. Chylomicrons are one of the five major groups of lipoproteins: chylomicrons (a.k.a. ULDL ultra low-density lipoprotein relative to surrounding water), very low-density lipoprotein, intermediate-density lipoprotein, low-density lipoprotein, high-density lipoprotein, that enable fats and cholesterol to move within the water-based solution of the bloodstream.

Similar to other lipophilic nutrients, CoQ10 is taken up into the lymphatic system alongside fat absorption contained in chylomicrons.

Alysdexia (talk) 02:21, September 4, 2017 (UTC)

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