This is the talk page for the article "Sphyrna-class corvette."

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.

Removing linkEdit

The link to Hammerhead starship should be removed so the canon page can settle here. Nivlacanator(talk) 03:25, January 19, 2016 (UTC)

  • What about the link to the Thranta-class corvette? It is the same size (smaller variant of Hammerhead cruiser) and is also a corvette. It is just a suggestion. The design of the hammerhead corvette is very close to the Thranta. Darth Ravigious (talk) 04:00, January 19, 2016 (UTC)
    • i disagree. we need a throwback to the hammerhead starship. This corvette is SO CLEARLY a throwback to the hammerhead from KOTOR, it seems bizarre to not capitalize that.

Thranta Class Corvette Edit

The cruisers look almost exactly like the Thranta-class corvettes. It's just a thought, but it might make for an appropriate redirect. Name aside (the Thranta part, that is), it looks almost exactly the same and roughly the same size, and they are both corvettes. Darth Ravigious (talk) 12:37, January 21, 2016 (UTC)

I'm generally not opposed to adding fun BTS info, but there are a number of 3D models in the Clone Wars and Rebels that are reused or based on The Old Republic or Star Wars Galaxies 3d models (the flamethrowers the clones used in the early seasons of clone wars comes to mind) and we don't have BTS info for them. Is is appropriate to list it here but not on those other pages? Vaclon (talk)

  • What does this have to do with my initial question? (which is, may I add, now irrelevant as the issue has been settled as of today) Darth Ravigious (talk) 20:41, October 18, 2016 (UTC)

Legends Edit

The Hammerhead corvette is based on the Hammerhead-class cruiser. There's even a citation in the article. Even if the appearances are slightly different, it is the canon equivalent of said Legends ship. DarkKnight2149 00:20, October 17, 2016 (UTC)

  • Yes, it's based on it, but not an equivalent of it. For example, Kylo Ren is not the canon equivalent of Darth Caedus, although they're similar and the former may be based on latter. 01miki10 Open comlink 13:16, October 17, 2016 (UTC)
    • Except Kylo Ren is not an adaptation of Jacen Solo. The two are entirely separate and distinct characters, the only real similarity being that they are a Solo child that fell to the dark side. This situation is more in line with Korriban and Moraband. The databank even references the Old Republic history of the ship, calling it "a time-honored design that stretches back centuries". ([1], [2]) DarkKnight2149 16:14, October 17, 2016 (UTC)
      • This is very different from a few similarities between characters. Kylo Ren is not an intentional canonical depiction of Darth Caedus. The Hammerhead corvette, on the other hand, is an intentional use of a Legends subject. The tabs at the top are for readers to navigate, so we should of course include the tabs on this page. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 16:15, October 17, 2016 (UTC)
        • Hypothetically, if we were to use a canon/legends tab for this article, I think it'd be more appropriate to link this article to the Thranta-class corvette, as they are far more similar in design, being smaller. The Hammerhead Cruiser from legends is a capital ship. Hammerhead Corvettes are frigates. If not, I say no tabs at all. I say this because they would not have used these specific models during the canon Old Republic Era. They were simply based on an old design. They are completely different vessels. For instance, aircraft carriers during the Second World War may look the same in design to modern ones, but they are by no means the same class of ship. One is an updated model with far more advanced technology. For instance, that is why there are no tabs between Pellaeon-class Star Destroyers and the canon Imperial-class Star Destroyer. They look almost exactly the same, but one is an updated model based upon the star destroyers of old.Darth Ravigious (talk) 16:46, October 17, 2016 (UTC)
          • Now that you mention it, the source clearly states that it's based on a Knights of the Old Republic ship without clarifying which one. As far as I'm aware, there are three variations of the design (Thranta-class corvette, Hammerhead-class cruiser, and Hammerhead starship). DarkKnight2149 17:33, October 17, 2016 (UTC)
            • I guess I'll go ahead and link Thranta-class corvette to this article as well, for the reasons mentioned above (unless there are objections). Hammerhead starship is different enough that it can be ignored, in my opinion.DarkKnight2149 18:44, October 17, 2016 (UTC)
              • Actually, Thranta-class corvette appeared in The Old Republic and not Knights of the Old Republic. Therefore the citation must have been referring to Hammerhead-class cruiser. DarkKnight2149 18:48, October 17, 2016 (UTC)
                • But just because it is based on it, that does not mean it is the canon equivalent. The Rebels clearly weren't flying 3,000 year old ships, but rather vessels that utilized the same model. Darth Ravigious (talk) 20:19, October 17, 2016 (UTC)
                  • I don't think tabs need to be that literal. They're a device for readers to navigate. This is clearly a canon version of the Legends ship, even if the circumstances around it are different, so giving readers the ability to navigate between the two is a helpful UX. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 20:29, October 17, 2016 (UTC)
                    • I agree with Brandon Rhea. That's also one of the reasons why Moraband and Korriban are linked with tabs, despite not being exactly the same. As mentioned earlier, Kylo Ren and Jacen Solo aren't linked because Ren isn't meant to be a deliberate adaptation of Solo. But addressing Darth Ravigious' point, the Star Wars databank does state that the Hammerhead design dates back centuries. Also, in canon, the Old Republic era remains largely unexplored (so an earlier version of the ship may very well have existed in that period). DarkKnight2149 20:56, October 17, 2016 (UTC)
                    • I'm afraid I have to disagree. The Hammerhead corvette is not a canon version of the Hammerhead-class cruiser—it is merely based on the cruiser's design. The corvette's Databank entries states that they receive their name from a centuries-old design, which implies that they're not the original Hammerhead ship. I think we should have a {{Youmay}} template at the top of both this page and the Hammerhead-class cruiser page so readers can easily navigate between the two, but I don't think we should have canon and Legends tabs linking the two pages together since they are not the same ship. Cevan IMPpress (talk) 20:56, October 17, 2016 (UTC)
                      • But DarkKnight, Korriban and Moraband ARE EXACTLY the same planet. I've yet to see a single difference between them whatsoever. The ships are not, so, in all due respect, I do not think that it is a valid comparison. Darth Ravigious (talk) 22:13, October 17, 2016 (UTC)

The databank entry doesn't state that it's a separate ship. The original Hammerhead could very well be an earlier version of the same ship. Regardless, this is still a canonisation of the Hammerhead cruiser (at least to a degree) and having been based on the Legends ship, I think the tabs are warranted. We also don't know if we'll ever see the original Hammerhead ship in canon. However, Darth Ravigious does raise a point that the canon ship technically has more in common with the Thranta-class corvette. Like the canon Hammerhead, Thranta is a corvette that bases its design on the earlier Hammerhead-cruiser model. Although I think we should leave the tabs the way they currently are, I have taken everyone's arguments into consideration and come up with three different propositions:

- We temporarily keep the tab for Hammerhead-class cruiser, but also add a tab at Thranta-class corvette for Hammerhead corvette. If the earliest version of the Hammerhead ship makes an appearance in canon, we remove the tab for the Hammerhead cruiser on Hammerhead corvette and put it on the article for the original Hammerhead canon ship. That way, Hammerhead corvette and Thranta-class corvette will be connected, while Hammerhead-class cruiser/canon and Hammerhead-class cruiser will be connected as soon as it makes a canon appearance.

- We remove the tab for Hammerhead-class cruiser entirely and replace it with Thranta-class corvette.

- We keep the tabs the way they are.

Thoughts? DarkKnight2149 21:39, October 17, 2016 (UTC)

  • You know that there is also a way to connect both the Thranta-class corvette and Hammerhead-class cruiser with Hammerhead corvette via tabs, although the Hammerhead Corvette will only be able to link with one of them. Similar to how the two canon articles Old Republic and Galactic Republic are linked to the single Galactic Republic/Legends article. Darth Ravigious (talk) 22:17, October 17, 2016 (UTC)
  • This page cannot be linked with the Thranta-class corvette because the trivia gallery states the Hammerhead corvette are inspired by designs in Knights of the Old Republic, meaning the Hammerhead-class cruisers. The Thranta-class corvettes are not from KoTOR. Again, the Hammerhead corvette and Hammerhead-class cruiser are two different ships. Both "A Princess in Lothal" and Hammerhead corvette's Databank entry flat out call it a transport, whereas the Hammerhead-class cruiser is a warship. There's also the fact that the Databank says the corvettes received their name due to a centuries-old design, which I stated before. A simple solution to this page linking issue is to just add a {{Youmay}} template at the top of both this page and the Hammerhead-class cruiser page. They're not the same ship, so they can't make use of the canon/Legends tab. Cevan IMPpress (talk) 22:32, October 17, 2016 (UTC)
    • @Darth Ravigious I know. That's what Proposition #1 was. Link both articles here, then once an article is created if the original Hammerhead is introduced in canon, remove the tab for Hammerhead-class cruiser. DarkKnight2149 22:36, October 17, 2016 (UTC)
      • @Cevan I've already explained my position on the Hammerhead cruiser. It doesn't have to be exactly like the Legends counterpart to be a canonisation. Just look at the canon Dengar compared to Legends Dengar. Aside from being Correllian bounty hunters, the two have almost nothing in common except physical appearance. The source says that it was inspired by the Legends ship, which is enough of a reason to include the tabs. As Brandon Rhea pointed out, it doesn't always have to be taken 100% literally. We don't even know if the original Hammerhead will ever even make a physical appearance and the Databank pretty much said that this is a modern version of that design. And if you want a ship that is identical to the Hammerhead corvette in almost every way, that's exactly what the Thranta-class corvette is. DarkKnight2149 22:48, October 17, 2016 (UTC)
        • You're right that something doesn't need to be 100% like its Legends counterpart to be a canonization, but the Hammerhead corvette and Hammerhead-class cruiser aren't even the same class of ship—one is a large warship designed for combat, the other is a smaller transport. And, as I've stated before, the corvette's Databank entry says the corvette received its name due to a centuries-old design, so we know right there that a minimum of one other, older Hammerhead ship exists. The corvettes are not ancient ships, merely ships based on an ancient ship design. Just because something is inspired by something else in Legends doesn't mean we should link the pages with the canon/Legends tab system, especially if they're not the same thing. I absolutely agree that there should be an easy way for readers to access the Hammerhead-class cruiser page from this one, and vice versa, and I have already offered the best solution to that problem: just add a {{Youmay}} template at the top of both this page and the Hammerhead-class cruiser page. The tab system is not to be used in a case like this where something in canon may have been inspired by something in Legends, but they are obviously not the same thing. Cevan IMPpress (talk) 18:52, October 18, 2016 (UTC)
          • I agree. I don't know if we could get away with it due to little info, but someone could make a short article called "Hammerhead ship (Old Republic)", being mentioned in the article of the hammerhead corvette. We could then link that one to the legends cruiser. I think we should also reference that Hammerhead ships were used in the Old Republic era in TOR's canon article. Darth Ravigious (talk) 19:03, October 18, 2016 (UTC)
            • That would be nice, however we unfortunately do not yet know if the Hammerhead design dates back to the Old Republic period in canon. The OR was founded a thousand years before the main SW saga, while the Hammerhead corvette Databank entry only says the design "stretches back centuries," which would put it 200 years before the saga at the earliest, 800 years into the Galactic Republic's reign. It is possible that the design has existed in the OR period and they're just playing it safe for now by calling it a centuries-old design, however that's just speculation at this point so we can't make and article or add that into existing articles. Cevan IMPpress (talk) 19:16, October 18, 2016 (UTC)
              • Wait, you mean Galactic Republic was founded a thousand years before the movies right? The Old Republic was reorganized into the Galactic Republic then. But still, 1000 years is still technically centuries. I agree with the whole playing it safe thing though. It seems that they want to avoid touching the Old Republic era, probably due to the MMO's popularity and not wanting to confuse people with ongoing contradictory continuity that may confuse the more casual fans. Darth Ravigious (talk) 19:22, October 18, 2016 (UTC)
                • Whoops, my bad. Yeah, meant to say the Galactic Republic. You're probably right about them not fleshing out the canon OR era yet due to SWTOR still running, and they probably want to flesh out the time period of the films in canon first before delving that far back. Cevan IMPpress (talk) 19:38, October 18, 2016 (UTC)
                  • Or a netflix series. Lately there's been a surprisingly succesful series of petitions specifically referring to the production of an Old Republic show for Netflix, and chances are that it would include many elements from the games if it were true. I could honestly see most Old Republic era material becoming canon again, save maybe for Malachor V, due to Rebels' unnecessary use of that particular planet. Darth Ravigious (talk) 20:11, October 18, 2016 (UTC)

That is getting of topic^, I believe adding the {{Youmay}} template to the top of the respective is the best thing to do in this situation for the reasons Cevan stated (so I won't repeat them), previously there was a {{Youmay}} template on the Hammerhead class cruiser so it seems that the intention to have that template was already there --Lewisr (talk) 20:36, October 18, 2016 (UTC)

  • Indeed. I'll go ahead and add the template on to this page, and re-add it to the Hammerhead-class cruiser page. Cevan IMPpress (talk) 20:37, October 18, 2016 (UTC)
    • I think that that is the most appropriate solution. Darth Ravigious (talk) 20:42, October 18, 2016 (UTC)

The problem with simply have the "You may" template is that the "You may" template implies that the two aren't connected, but just so happen to have a similar name. However, I would be willing to agree to this if an article is created for the original Hammerhead ship, as Darth Ravigious suggested (albeit without references to the exact era, because we don't know if it's from the Old Republic era in canon). Does anyone object to me creating such an article? DarkKnight2149 20:52, October 18, 2016 (UTC)

  • What is this original hammerhead ship page that would be created? --Lewisr (talk) 20:59, October 18, 2016 (UTC)
    • As mentioned earlier in the discussion, the citations to the Star Wars site in the article state that Hammerhead corvette is based on a design that dates back centuries and that it was inspired by the Knights of the Old Republic ship. Creating an article on said design (or the original ship) should solve the canonisation argument. DarkKnight2149 21:05, October 18, 2016 (UTC)
      • Okay that makes sense, go ahead --Lewisr (talk) 21:11, October 18, 2016 (UTC)
  • The connection between the two ships is stated in the behind the scenes section of the page. As for "the original Hammerhead ship," I don't think there's enough set in stone about this thing to make an article about it. The Databank entry just says "design;" we don't know if this design is for a ship, or a repulsorcraft, or even an architectural design. Cevan IMPpress (talk) 21:17, October 18, 2016 (UTC)
    • I mean, I know we can't speculate, but it is pretty darn clear that they meant ship design. Blatantly, especially given the obvious nod to KOTOR. Darth Ravigious (talk) 21:20, October 18, 2016 (UTC)
      • @Cevan The full sentence says "Receiving its name thanks to a time-honored design that stretches back centuries, the Hammerhead Corvette is a powerful transport", which implies that the design was for a transport (at the very least), given the context within the sentence. DarkKnight2149 21:24, October 18, 2016 (UTC)
        • Not necessarily. It just says that the Hammerhead Corvette is a transport. For all we know the design could be based on a much larger ship used in the past. Unsigned comment by Darth Ravagious (talk • contribs).
        • Not exactly. All that says is the Hammerhead corvette is a transport—it doesn't imply that the other ship(s) is/are. I've gone ahead and edited the {{Youmay}} templates on both pages to better show the connection between the two ships to those who just begin viewing the pages. Cevan IMPpress (talk) 21:34, October 18, 2016 (UTC)
      • Yeah, I was probably being a bit too technical there. Still though, I don't think we know enough about this old thing (or things) to make a whole page for it/them. That info can be covered in a history section on this page. Cevan IMPpress (talk) 21:34, October 18, 2016 (UTC)

I'd also think it is better to, instead of calling the article "Hammerhead (design)", just call it "Hammerhead". Darth Ravigious (talk) 22:12, October 18, 2016 (UTC)

Those are only canonical in Legends continuity, though I could create a "See also" section. Hammerhead exists as an article about Ithorian, but we can change it if there's a community consensus. DarkKnight2149 22:19, October 18, 2016 (UTC)
Here is the current draft. It's in my namespace at the moment, but since it's a draft to an article, anyone can edit it. DarkKnight2149 22:23, October 18, 2016 (UTC)
I still think that it is incredibly obvious that when Filoni stated that the ship was based on an ancient design, that he meant an ancient ship design. We could ask Pablo about this, since I bet he would clarify this. Darth Ravigious (talk) 22:33, October 18, 2016 (UTC)
I agree that it's technically obvious, but getting clarification would probably be the wisest choice. DarkKnight2149 22:37, October 18, 2016 (UTC)

@Darth Ravigious When you said link it to those articles, did you mean with tabs or within the article with wiki-links? DarkKnight2149 22:45, October 18, 2016 (UTC)

Hidago Clarification Edit

Pablo Hidalgo just confirmed that Hammerhead vessels are a style of ship dating back 4,000 years, but that the ships in Rebels were not 4000 years old. It is an "antiquated design", in his own words. I say we make an article called "Hammerhead ship" and talk about how it is a type of ship that saw multiple variants over 4,000 years. Darth Ravigious (talk) 00:51, October 19, 2016 (UTC)

Got a link to where he said that? Jkirk8907 (talk) 01:11, October 19, 2016 (UTC)

I've already started a draft of the article here. Per the discussion above, we're waiting for more information about the ship before turning it into a full article. DarkKnight2149 02:50, October 19, 2016 (UTC)

I archived the tweet [3]. DarkKnight2149 02:51, October 19, 2016 (UTC)

Just want to recommend that maybe, in your draft, you clarify that it is a ship. Darth Ravigious (talk) 03:21, October 19, 2016 (UTC)

Got it. Also keep in mind that anyone can edit the draft, because it's intended to become an article eventually. If anything comes of the rumoured Old Republic television series, I would imagine we will learn all about the original Hammerheads then.DarkKnight2149 03:31, October 19, 2016 (UTC)

  • He also said "I hope no one would take anything I tweet as reason to ever edit a wiki entry." I think it's clear "deliberate throwback to an antiquated style" was an OOU statement, not an IU one. These tweets should not be taken as a reason to create new pages. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 21:01, October 19, 2016 (UTC)
    • I agree. Hidalgo is really only to be used as a resource to clarify certain things, which is why I asked if by "based on an early design" referred to older ship designs specifically. But a tweet by Hidalgo is not enough information to justify the creation of a new article, by any means. But DarkKnight, from what I understand, is not planning on publishing it until maybe we have more information on the probable existence of previous ships built in that particular hammerhead style. Additionally, Hidalgo, I assume, meant IU, as I clarified that myt inquiry was itself referring to in universe information. 21:06, October 19, 2016 (UTC)
      • That is correct. I won't be publishing the draft until after we officially learn more about it. All we really know is from this databank entry, stating that the Hammerhead design originated several centuries before the creation of the Hammerhead corvette. DarkKnight2149 23:22, October 19, 2016 (UTC)
        • Well, Hidalgo implicated more like 4,000 years in the response to my tweet, but you get the picture. By the way, the anonymous user was me. I was not logged in for some reason. Darth Ravigious (talk) 03:17, October 20, 2016 (UTC)

Capital ships? Edit

Rogue one capital ships? there was one other capital ship that had the same color scheme as the hammerhead in the space battle...what the hek was it? Beamonde 13:37, December 17, 2016 (UTC)

The Hammerheads in Rogue One have some design changes from Rebels, they have 4 engines instead of 3, and they also have 'wedges' sticking out the sides of the ship similar to the ones seen on the Blockade runners.-- 04:26, December 18, 2016 (UTC)

Laser CannonsEdit

Does any source explicitly call them out as laser cannons? They have a lot more in common with scale of the turbolasers we see on other ships in the series. Philmandalorian (talk) 15:06, December 24, 2016 (UTC)


So, are we considering the Lego content canon?? Shouldnt we wait until a more official or serious content is released?--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 21:42, January 22, 2017 (UTC)

  • Rather than remove it all together, if the Lego isn't fully Canon then it can go in a non-canon part in the behind the scenes or something --Lewisr (talk) 21:50, January 22, 2017 (UTC)
    • I agree it could go to the Behiend the scenes section, is just that I have seen many pages stating that is canon even the battle page has all the ships with references to the Lego game. --DarthRuiz30 (talk) 21:52, January 22, 2017 (UTC)

Version / refitEdit

Pablo Hildalgo also said that the ships seen in Rogue One ..and more exactly the one that crashes the Star Destroyers (The Lightmaker) are the same as the ones seen in Rebels (2 of them at least).. the slighty diferent look (2 weapon pods on the sides and extra engine) was confirmed by him to be a refit later before Scarif.. so they are the same type/variant as the ones seen in Rebels.. This is to clarify the part of the article wich says they could be 2 diferent models..


As these links state, and and there may be two submodels, the Hammerhead Scout Corvette and the Hammerhead Torpedo Corvette. I was about to create the articles but then I thought of the possibility that it may just be for gameplay, although in the Star Wars Armada wiki it lists them under ships and not any other gameplay-oriented section.--Vitus Infinitus (talk) 18:38, December 9, 2017 (UTC)

  • I wouldn't say that those are "models" I think those are roles that the corvette has since they look the same. I would go and add the information here saying that the corvette could be modified to be used as a scout or torpedo launcher ship--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 18:46, December 9, 2017 (UTC)
    • That's a good idea. I'll go ahead and add it.--Vitus Infinitus (talk) 18:48, December 9, 2017 (UTC)

Cold warEdit

Hammerhead corvette did not appear in Star Wars 26: Yoda's Secret War, Part I. That was another ship. So it is non-canonical appearance. Proof of this:, second picture. NikitaChampion (talk) 18:13, January 7, 2018 (UTC)

  • Sorry but how is this proof of anything? --Lewisr (talk) 18:15, January 7, 2018 (UTC)


In Star Wars: The Rebel Files, is it only stated in Leia's letter to the Lothal sector moff about the Hammerheads and 650,000 credits? If so then we shouldn't put that down as the cost as that's just Leia's demands as compensation --Lewisr (talk) 01:53, January 21, 2018 (UTC)

  • Agreed, that's her demand not the real price for a Hammerhead--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 01:56, January 21, 2018 (UTC)

Two PagesEdit

Why do we need two canon pages for both the Sphyrna-class corvette and Hammerhead-class corvette if they are basically the same vessel?Jkirk8907 (talk) 22:09, April 7, 2018 (UTC)

  • There's not a direct confirmation that they're the same, Dawn of Rebellion Hammerhead-class corvette is manufactured by Rendili StarDrive while this one is by Corellian Engineering Corporation. It could be a mistake, but DoR doesn't mention any known Hammerhead corvette to confirm that the Hammerhead and the Sphyrna could be the same --DarthRuiz30 (talk) 22:12, April 7, 2018 (UTC)
    • In my opinion, Hammerhead-class corvette is better name than Sphyrna-class corvette --Staszhel (talk) 18:15, April 9, 2018 (UTC)
      • The book also says that Phoenix Squadron was reinforced with Hammerhead-class corvettes "stolen" from Leia Organa. Its possible for ships to be manufactured by more than one manufacturer, see Lambda-class T-4a shuttle for example --Lewisr (talk) 01:59, July 16, 2018 (UTC)

315 meters?!Edit

This is ridiculous! Every visual evidence in Rebels und Rogue One suggests a length of circa 100 meters, about the size of a Braha'tok-class gunship or a GR-75 transport. It is a bit smaller than a CR90 (an not twice its length!) an definitely smaller than a Nebulon-B frigate. Are you sure this isn't a formal mistake and it means 135 meters or something like that? Unsigned comment by (talk • contribs).

  • I also find that number dubious. It simply doesn't look that large on screen, and comparison with the ISD in Rogue One (the shot just before the destruction of the shield gate is best) does give an estimate of ~100 m. Either a mistake of odd retcon in the source, or some error in getting the info on the wiki. Could be mixed-up numbers or unit confusion: The book apparently gives Metric and Imperial dimensions, would be a far more reasonable 96 m. Commander Rob (talk) 23:17, April 15, 2018 (UTC)
    • I agree, but that's what the source says. Unless someone reaches out to the Story Group or a new source gives the correct length there's not much we can do. I think the most probable reason was a typo, where the person meant 135 meters and not 315 meters.--Vitus InfinitusTalk 23:35, April 15, 2018 (UTC)
      • I think it should be reverted. Its obviously a mistake and contradicts a movie, which is generally treated as the highest cannon. Disney or Other. Same argument I make for the Home One. Nolanstar (talk)
        • Leland Chee stated when asked that the movie dimensions are the accurate ones. Here's the tweet. I suppose that gives reason to remove the length, though I'm not sure what others think--Vitus InfinitusTalk 04:35, April 24, 2018 (UTC)
          • Best bet is to contact the author an ask if it was a typo, that way the author can warn the editorial and change the lenght in future editions--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 04:45, April 24, 2018 (UTC)
            • 315m is the length of the KOTOR Hammerhead, so that might be where the confusion came from. There are shots in Rebels which have a Hammerhead parked next to a CR90 that clearly show it isn't 315 meters long.--Tuskin38 (talk) 01:26, September 23, 2018 (UTC)
              • may i suggest that we remove the length entry from the tech specifications block? 315m is obviously inaccurate, and since we have a note to that effect at the bottom of the page, i don;t see why inaccurate information should be in the stat block. it might also be a good idea to have an image from Rebels showing both the Sphyrna class and the CR-90 in the same shot, as a visual reference in the section about the inaccurate size. this concept art could be used: alternately this screenshot: Mithril (talk) 04:32, October 12, 2018 (UTC)
                • The problem is that this page considers the Encyclopedia of Starfighters that was released earlier this year a superior source than the Fantasy Flight Games Canon roleplaying guide which provides accurate information for the Sphyrna-Class Corvette. The Encyclopedia of Starfighters is mired with inaccuracies and shouldn't be considered a superior or more reliable source at all. The Fantasy Flight Games roleplaying guide should be considered the more accurate version for this ship until something else is released that can replace both. Eudoxia (talk) 02:03, November 21, 2018 (UTC)
                  • Here is great consensus that the obviously wrong length should be removed. Why was my edit reverted then? The Encyclopedia has so many errors, are we to repeat all of them?! Also it is a relevant problem that many unexperienced users take this information seriously: I saw a discussion why such a "big" ship has such a small armament - that's because it's no big ship! It's about two times the Ghost's length and a bit smaller than a CR90, so about 100 meters or somewhat above. I'm not suggesting to put these calculations on the page, just to remove the wrong data! Onicle (talk) 16:00, December 15, 2018 (UTC)

Sourcebook errors (Hammerhead-class cruiser, 315 meter length, etc.) Edit

Multiple canon sourcebooks have numerous errors regarding this ship, and equating it with other Legends vessels. In the past the ship has been depicted as a Thranta-class corvette, and now in new sourcebooks has been incorrectly identified with the Hammerhead-class cruiser's length of 315 meters and had that name added to it.

The question that has to be worked out here is should these be considered errors on the part of inexperienced authors which were missed by lucasfilm story group's revision system? Inconsistency between length and model is nothing new to Star Wars - there's no way the Arquitens is 300 meters, and the Lancer and Carrack-classes would have bridge windows the size of 10 story apartment complexes. But although I don't have the new A-Z Geektionary, I have read the Encyclopedia of Starfighters which is mired with other clear errors and inaccuracies.

Although I personally disagree with the use of Hammerhead-class cruiser on this page and the use of a 315m length, (the latter of which has been previously discussed) as they are clear errors, I will defer to the group consensus.

Also, considering the lack of contradicting information from other sources, it seems logical to continue using figures from "Dawn of Rebellion" (such as the make and number of ion engines) for areas where that has not been contradicted. Eudoxia (talk) 00:53, December 15, 2018 (UTC)

  • I agree that there is no reason not to take the information from Dawn of Rebellion. Engines, crew, hyperdrive class etc. don't contradict other reports. (But I don't see your Arquitens problem.) Onicle (talk) 16:00, December 15, 2018 (UTC)
I was just using the Arquitens as an example. You can tell by the model scaling that the ship is much smaller than 300m, it's actually about 150-200m. But the canon sourcebooks differ from the in-game scaling. This is nothing new though, as legends had several examples of this inconsistency (Lancer, Carrack-classes, also pretty much any ship from SWTOR). Eudoxia (talk) 21:48, December 15, 2018 (UTC)
If you're referring to battlefront 2 in regards to the Arquitens, I've measured the game's model, it is very close the size as mentioned in it's article.--Tuskin38 (talk) 21:02, January 13, 2019 (UTC)
It actually has more to do with things like the windows, etc. Remember the windows on ships like the Carrack-class end up huge. Also it's the Rebels Model which is actually smaller than its stated size. But I digress we're here talking about he Hammerhead Corvette, which as universally agreed above, is not 315m. That number is an error, along with its labelling as a Hammerhead-class cruiser or depiction as a Thranta-class corvette in one instance, due to author confusion with the EU ship. The number should be removed, along with the link to the Hammerhead-class cruiser page.Eudoxia (talk) 01:47, January 19, 2019 (UTC)
The link has been removed --Lewisr (talk) 01:49, January 19, 2019 (UTC)
for the length the 315 meters should stay until overwritten by a newer source. - Red Duel 04:52, April 9, 2019 (UTC)
No, it really, really should not. It's an obvious error and you're perpetuating misinformation which will somehow then end up in other sourcebooks or novels because Authors actually use Wookieepedia for this information. Instead what needs to be done is it needs to be removed and put in the "Behind the Scenes" with something like "Although the Encyclopedia of Starfighters states the vessel is 315 meters, this is clearly an error recycling information from the Hammerhead-class cruiser. All other sources depict the vessel to be much smaller, as confirmed by Leeland Chee." We also need to add back in the info from the Fantasy Flight RPG guide which is clearly more accurate. Because all New Canon sources are considered equal it gives us more ability to pick and choose and the Encyclopedia of Starfighters is literally a mess when it comes to this kind of information, it is riddled with errors not just for the Sphyrna but for multiple other ships as well.Eudoxia (talk) 13:17, May 15, 2019 (UTC)
I completely agree with Eudoxia! Many people, fans and authors likewise, will consider the 315 correct because it is here, so we're just manifesting the wrong data at the moment. Do I have to ask again: are we to repeat all of the Encyclopedia mistakes?! Also Dawn of Rebellion gives information that don't contradict other sources, so there is no reason to hold them back, no matter which name is used for the (clearly identified) ship model in the book: engines, crew, price, weapon variants ... Onicle (talk) 13:31, May 15, 2019 (UTC)
That’s only done when a newer reference book comes out and contradicts what is said before as what is done with other sources. - Red Duel 14:12, May 15, 2019 (UTC)
No... that's not the only way it's done. Reference books are treated basically in a purely opinionated manner on this site especially considering unlike the Expanded Universe there's no tiered system that allows certain ones to override others, and it's already the consensus on this talk page (literally just scroll up) that the Fantasy Flight Games Dawn of Rebellion source book is more accurate from multiple users.Eudoxia (talk) 16:33, May 15, 2019 (UTC)
And besides, we literally already link on the page where Leeland Chee explicitly states the on-screen version in Rogue One/Rebels is more accurate (which has its own disparities as the Rebels model is about 60-75 meters while the Rogue One Model is about 135 meters but I digress). What should be done is that the 315 meters should be removed from the infobox and put in behind the scenes were we clearly already state it is an error. 16:42, May 15, 2019 (UTC)
EDIT: Okay I'll admit I can't find that citation where Leland states on-screen lengths are more accurate, I could have sworn it was on this page. Hold on, let me find it because I know it exists. It may have been from Pablo back before he started deleting stuff. Eudoxia (talk) 16:53, May 15, 2019 (UTC)
I agree with changing this, since it's probably an error caused by someone googling "Star Wars Hammerhead" for stats and not bothering to do more extensive research, something commonly popping up in official material these days. Having it here just perpetuates an error that goes against the intent of the design. Nolanstar (talk) 23:58, May 23, 2019 (UTC)

erroneous "Hammerhead-class cruiser" name Edit

It was previously agreed that the Geektionary naming it the "Hammerhead-class cruiser" was an error like the image of a Thranta-class corvette, the 315m length, and several other notorious issues with the rather low quality of Lucasfilm's encyclopedia sourcebooks with this craft (and others, notably). Why has it been re-added? Eudoxia (talk) 17:02, June 18, 2019 (UTC)

  • My guess is that it was mistakenly added by someone who didn't see what came before --Lewisr (talk) 17:13, June 18, 2019 (UTC)
    • If you see what came here before: Is it now allowed to but the length in the BtS and add the data from Dawn of Rebellion that don't contradict any other source (crew, technologies etc.)? We accepted even the Hammerhead-class cruiser as an alternative name - why should the Hammerheady-class corvette (with all its data), that proves multiple times to be this model in Dawn of Rebellion, be excluded instead of writing that there is this name next to Sphyrna-class? Onicle (talk) 20:13, July 8, 2019 (UTC)
      • As it was decided, the information from FFG Dawn of Rebellion contradicts certain information from the Encyclopedia, since the Encyclopedia is the most recent source and as it isn't a FFG source we're going to use it as the primary source of information.--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 20:18, July 8, 2019 (UTC)
        • Tell me: Which information are contradicting?! The name (or the weapons)? Since when are we only accepting one name or one armarment configuration? And even if the name is another - why are we excluding all the other information then? Onicle (talk) 20:21, July 8, 2019 (UTC)
          • Name, manufacturer, the fact that both books name different stuff for the same three ships seen on Rebels. As I said, the newer source is going to be the primary source for information, If we get a new book that contradicts once again the information or explains the conflict between sources then its going to be changed.--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 20:24, July 8, 2019 (UTC)
          • Ok, the Rendili/CIG conflict is a point. But when there is a primary source that is preferred to use in contradiction cases: Why does this rule out the use of the other source in non-critical contexts? We have the hyperdrive, engines, the crew, the passengers, the prize, the consumables, an official "classification"/role as "armed medium transport" - nothing of this would cause any problem when included. Also, the name isn't a point - this model was called "Hammerhead corvette" first, so there is no reason to say that "Hammerhead-class corvette" is no fitting name even if there is another one (expecially in this context: Wookieepedia:Manual_of_Style#Starship_and_vehicle_classes). Onicle (talk) 20:33, July 8, 2019 (UTC)
          • Because we don't know what other points are incorrect. As I said, if a newer source confirms certain information from DoR then its going to be added. It the meantime we're going to be keeping that info on the BTS. Also saying that its a Hammerhead corvette doesn't mean that its supposed to be a Hammerhead-class corvette, that's speculation from your part. Those examples exists given that there's multiple sources using both. Hammerhead corvette could be just a nickname, etc. The information is and will be there for the time being, until we know more about this ships. --DarthRuiz30 (talk) 20:42, July 8, 2019 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.