Talk: Stacy

How is this going to work?

I honestly cannot believe she is now a canon character. Not that it's a bad thing. Just makes this article difficult to write. Do we write it from the fan film or just based on what's revealed in Allegiance? --Redemption^Talk 00:48, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

• Can we please separate the two with a link to the fan character on the book character's article? Cull Tremayne 01:09, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
  • I don't see why we don't follow our basic policy: Canon things get an article, notable fanon gets lumped into a single article about its source. Thus, all canon facts about Stacey go in this article, everything about the fanfilm goes in the Pink Five article, with this article linking to that. jSarek 02:56, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
• I don't see why we shouldn't include Pink Five et al in her appearance list and stuff about what happens to her in there. Kuralyov 02:35, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Because it's not canon, or even official noncanon like Infinities? jSarek 02:44, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
    • Perhaps a little visit to Mr. Leeland Chan would be in order to determine what can be considered "official". From any info to if Amy Earhart is the "official" Stacey. --Redemption^Talk 02:59, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
      • Why in the seven Corellian hells do we need to go to Leland Chee and ask him if a *fan film* is official? We shouldn't be wasting his time with half the questions we ask him, let alone one about the canon status of fan films. jSarek 03:12, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
        • Because obviously these are things that need answering. Worried that he just might declare something canon that you don't like? (which usually happens...a necessary evil) It's made clear that this Stacey is the one who was in the fan films but just how far does that go? Was she really at the BOY? --Redemption^Talk 03:19, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
          • Though fanfilms are obviously and inherently noncanon, that doesn't mean a short summary of Stacy's adventures can't go in the BtS section. —Silly Dan _(talk) 03:25, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
          • No, Redemption, my worry is that constantly asking him questions designed to settle debates, especially ones that have very clear answers already, will make him less inclined to answer questions in general. Lately, there's been a kneejerk impulse that every disagreement we have here should be taken to him as if he's some kind of holy arbitrator, even in things he has no special knowledge of like style and usage. He's already indicated he's going to be cutting back on answering some questions as it is; we shouldn't push him even farther away. jSarek 03:44, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
            • A valid concern, jsarek. On the other hand, maybe it'll induce him to say, "Y'know what? Fine, you guys can see the Holocron! Here it is! Now leave me alone!" :D Gonk 00:10, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
              • Only if he's feeling a really strong urge to lose his job and get sued for a LOT of money for violating Lucasfilm's non-disclosure agreements. jSarek 03:31, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
• Wow, what did I miss? -- Riffsyphon1024 07:07, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
• The info from the fanfilms has been added again, which I think is fine, but I think we should call the section "notable fanon" rather than "Non-canon". And we'll probably need to put strict guidelines in place as to what constitutes "notable fanon", to avoid setting an ugly precedent. --Azizlight 03:15, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Spelling?

According to the Pink Five article, her name is spelled Stacey. I would correct it but I have no idea which one is correct (having not yet experienced Pink Five or Allegiance). Perhaps Stacey with an E is the fanon spelling and Stacy is Zahn's spelling. Gonk 00:10, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

• We always spelled her with the "E", as that's the more traditional female spelling, "Stacy" being more often the male form of the name. However, it's never actually spelled in the films, not even in the credits, so it's not like there was any reference for Tim to work from. But for the record, we spell her name "StacEy". Trey Stokes 02:16, 6 February 2007 (UTC),
  • Thanks for the info Trey :-) --Azizlight 03:11, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

deleted article

Some time ago, I started a non-canon article of Stacy, judging that she would deserve it because of her popularity. However it was, of course, deleted. What do you know, I was prophetic! My old version of this article can be found in this revision MoffRebus 10:56, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Species?

Although the fan films show that she is human, does the book 'Allegiance specify her species? If not, then the human category needs to be removed from the article. Adamwankenobi 03:07, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

• The book doesn't specify it explicitly. But it does make clear that Han talks to her (and "flick[s] a finger through the edge of [her] hair") to make Leia jealous, which strongly implies she's human. And the author's statement that she's an homage to the Pink Five star shows his intent about her species. To me, the weight of this evidence meets our agreed-upon criteria for presuming the species of someone not expressly classified. Asithol (talk) 04:04, November 21, 2016 (UTC)

Regarding the Dark Side Cave

Since she's officially C-Canon, does that make the "Vader" in the Dark Side cave Stacey-in-costume? --School of Thrawn 101 10:00, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

• No. The only canon elements are exactly those in Alliegance - there's a rebel named Stacy. That's it. QuentinGeorge 10:05, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Oh good. Thanks. --School of Thrawn 101 10:07, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

n-canon

Zhan putting a character named stacy into his book

does not make stacy a canon character it was a tribute its not the same charcter.

Its just a woman named stacy its not stacy from the pink five "movies".

he borrowered the name cause he thought

the movies were funny it's an homage it's not the same character . damn  .

Xion1212 16:31, 22 July 2008 (UTC)xion

• It's a good thing the article says nothing about the Pink Five fan movies being canon then, otherwise we'd look silly. -- I need a name (Complain here) 16:41, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Pink Five bio

I think this particular article (even its BTS) is not the appropriate place for that kind of thing. Our various Pink Five fanfilm articles would probably be more appropriate, and in my view even that might be stretching it.Muuuuuurgh 04:12, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Easy way to solve this issue

What if Stacy were a fighter in the Rebellion, who was also assigned to the morale section of the rebellion, making movies to chear up the troops (like the USO). The Pink Five movies could all have been made after the events of Return of the Jedi. That would let her (and even the films as New Republic mockumentaries) be in canon. —Unsigned comment by 208.67.132.5 (talk • contribs).

• If you can provide a canon source specifying those facts, add that info. Skippy Farlstendoiro 07:23, February 17, 2010 (UTC)

obsolete URL

One of this article's references was http://www.atom.com/funny_videos/pink5, a URL that now redirects to another site and has nothing to do with Pink Five.

From the URL alone, I'd presume that this used to be the Pink Five film. However, in the article, it was used as a reference to the claim that Pink Five "was George Lucas's favorite in the 2003 Fan Film Awards," which suggests that it was either commentary about Pink Five, or included such commentary in addition to the film.

But whatever it used to be, it's gone now, so the claim about Lucas and the 2003 awards will have to be re-sourced. For now, I've just stuck a {{Fact}} marker on this statement; I'll poke around for a source unless someone else gets to it first. Asithol (talk) 03:25, November 21, 2016 (UTC)