Erik Pflueger, welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wookieepedia. I hope you like the place and choose to join our work. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wookieepedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the Community Portal talk page or ask me on my Talk page. May the Force be with you! MarcK 01:27, 8 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Citing Wookieepedia[edit source]

I agree with your statement on the writers checking with us, but only after all problems with continuity and POV have been dealt with. Wikipedia (our parent wiki) is cited now in various papers and news reports, even as it is editable by the masses, and disinformation could leak into an article, but they've gotten their checking procedures down good, and usually catch that stuff and delete it or revert it. As for Wookieepedia, its still a long ways from completion, hell, it will never actually be completed due to all the new stuff created almost daily. But we'll see down the road. ;) -- Riffsyphon1024 02:33, 8 Sep 2005 (UTC)

  • Yes, Steve (do I have your name right?), I have demonstrated myself that POV is a problem (I have become used to defending my in-universe entries by including out-universe names and sources).

But at least I can confidently include entries that I know are directly from the source material - my book collection ensures that. And the plus of this format is that, if you're data's shown to be good, i.e. accurate, your article stays, and if it isn't, it is replaced by an accurate one. It is ironic that a format this democratic leads to statements that are more and more authoritarian as the facts are firmed, but there you go.

If there is a continuity problem, it would probably be good of me to note it in the article, perhaps in a "Behind the Scenes" afterword. If the writers ARE checking with us, it would be a great help to them, unless you're Abel Pena, in which case you already know it all.

As for Wookieepedia not being finished, I agree, that's a tall order. But you'll have my best efforts, and as I hope you'll discover, that can amount to a lot of help.

Write again soon!

Erik Pflueger 02:47, 8 Sep 2005 (UTC)

  • Steve or Steven will work, but they usually call me Riff around here. :) -- Riffsyphon1024

OOU[edit source]

  • You're doing some good work, but be careful to make sure your article is in "Out of Universe" perspective. That means you shouldn't refer to any "real-world" source (ie book, movie or comic names or anything else labelling a character as fictional) unless it's in a section labelled "Behind the Scenes". QuentinGeorge 06:19, 8 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Resynchronization Dates[edit source]

I would recommend that instead of placing them in the article next to the BBY/ABY format, that you instead place them on the respective year's timeline page. For example, you would go to 30 BBY, and place the Resynchronization time above. However I believe I've already placed the alternate dates from 35 BBY forward, from earlier on. -- Riffsyphon1024 01:28, 23 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Even More Moffs![edit source]

Please, I don't think it's necessary to keep adding more and more moffs onto the moff page. There a whole separate article for that. Kuralyov 21:38, 24 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Griff's given name[edit source]

What is your source for Admiral Griff's given name of "Amise"? --SparqMan 18:44, 4 Oct 2005 (UTC)

  • Thanks for the response. Please be sure to comment on user's discussion pages, rather than the user page itself. --SparqMan 04:58, 5 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Chaniotiko boureki and other Cretan recipes[edit source]

Here are some recipes from Chania, my mother's hometown. The ingredients may prove to be troublesome but if you want the REAL DEAL, it's worth it. May the Force be with us in the case of the Palpatine article. I'd be really saddened if your wonderful writing was molested down to a simplistic, dry recounting. And I once believed in that simplicity, and saw the article cut down... It isn't pretty... --Master Starkeiller 12:26, 2 Jan 2006 (UTC)

  • If you want the REAL DEAL, it's gonna cost you. Let's start with the boureki. I think you can get olive oil. Delicatessen shops should have mizithra. If you can't or you don't want to pay for it, try feta, which I think can be found everywhere. As for the anthogalo, forget it. It's hard to find in Greece, it'd be easier to find juma juice than anthogalo in Florida! --Master Starkeiller 16:35, 4 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Alderaan WMDs[edit source]

Hey, man... thanks for coming to bat for Bush. I actually have tweaked the "Behind the Scenes" part myself - what people don't realize is how much closer Palpatine is to Lincoln than Bush. Oh, well - people see what they want to see. Cutch 23:08, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Palpatine's Force Abilities[edit source]

Hi Erik, if you would kindly follow this link and respond it would be a great help. Thanks! (If you've already seen this conversation, which I imagine you probably have, then please disregard this message).--DannyBoy7783 23:39, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Palpatine's Languages[edit source]

Erik, I was wondering - being the repository of all things Palpatine - if you'd add a mention to his article about what languages he spoke/understood. In addition to his knowledge of Huttese (vis-avis AotC), he also seems to have a working knowledge of Talz and Ithorian (as represented in the Clone Wars cartoon series). The Talz is a bit odd, as technically Foul Moudama was one of the only Talz in the Republic (they were largely discovered by the Galactic Empire)... at any rate, I thought you'd be the go-to man on this matter, as you might know what other languages he's evidenced knowledge of. Cutch 03:42, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

  • The RPG gives him other languages as well. QuentinGeorge 07:36, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations[edit source]

  • Since no one else has said it yet (here), congratulations on Wookieepedian of the Month! *I trust your feelings on this matter are clear.* Atarumaster88 17:25, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
  • You've long since earned it. -- SFH 17:29, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Uhhhhh..... WOW! I'd like to thank the Academy...

Seriously, folks, believe it or not, I had no idea that there was even such a title, let alone that I was nominated for it more than once, let alone that I won or could win. To tell you the truth, I'm not even sure why I've won, because, as Eyrezer correctly pointed out, my work really has been limited to the Palpatine page. Sure, I've spread out some from there, but hardly enough, I would have assumed, to be nominated for a damned thing.

If I feel joy at anything, it's that so many people think my work has merit, including many with whom I've had some sharp discussions in the past. It validates me and makes me feel like I've made some small difference here in the almost-year that I've been a Wookieepedian. I thank all of you who voted, one way or the other (yes, selfishly, I'm glad for those who voted for me, but I'm just glad somebody gave two craps for me and had something to say at all, good or bad).

I want to thank Jack Nebulax, who continues to invent new naval ranks for himself to accomodate his meteoric rise to power, for being my proofreader, conscience, and both my ally and enemy, as the occasion warranted. But mostly, for always doing what most helped the article. After any large-scale work of construction, someone has to sweep up the leavings, clean up the mess, watch what the crew is doing, and I could ask for no better foreman than Jack. I've made many friends here, and of all those, Jack did not give his support to me easily or quickly, which is what makes it so valued to me now.

I also want to give a special note of praise for Kuralyov. Having learned about my previous nominations, I took the time to look at the voting records, and at no time has Kuralyov ever wavered from his convictions. He doesn't care for my work, and I'm genuinely sorry for that, but he understands why he doesn't (NPOV, non-encyclopedic formatting), and says so consistently, and he never wavers from that heartfelt conviction, which is guided by a love of Star Wars and the Wookieepedia that is the equal, if not the better, of mine. There aren't enough men of courage who stand firm in their beliefs, regardless of whether I agree with them or not. In this world, where, as Yeats wrote, "The best lack all conviction, and the worst are full of passionate intensity," people like Kuralyov make things better. We don't have to be in agreement for me to find him worthy of my respect and, if he will have it, friendship.

Once again, thank you all. Erik Pflueger 18:43, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Ah, man, I thought I was going to be first to say congratulations, but anyway, congratulations. ;) MC Otaku 07:54, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Hey Erik. I don't know if you even remember me, I've been gone so long. Congrats. - Angel Blue 451 00:02, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Of course I remember you, Matt. We last spoke circa Christmas or soon after, and you were quite the help in some crucial votes. Would I be here now without your help? Possibly not. And thank you. Erik Pflueger 00:34, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Congratulations, you deserve the Wookieepedian of the Month award for your contributions to Wookieepedia. I'm still a fan of your Palpatine article. I Hope you'll continue to add high quality work like that one. KEJ 11:14, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Well, I'm not really done with that one yet, but now that I've gotten my bearings here, don't worry: there's much more to come. Erik Pflueger 03:32, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Palpatine question[edit source]

  • Erik (if that's your preferred method of address), do you know what lightsaber combat form Palpatine uses? I have seen him listed under both Form IV: Ataru and Form VII: Juyo/Vaapad. Does he use a mixture of both? Atarumaster88 Jedi Order.svg (Audience Chamber) 16:29, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
    • Erik will do just fine, Atarumaster, but I regret to say that I have read little about just what style of lightsaber combat Palpatine uses. Part of the reason for this is that the awesome and informative "Fightsaber" article in Star Wars Insider magazine (which I'm sure you've read) didn't come out in time to cover Episode III. Its main focus at the time was to tap into the interest in Episode II, which had numerous saber fights and demonstrations - not to mention Yoda pulling his blade for the first time and wielding it like the only guy with a lighter at a crack house. As a result, all the combat styles of the major characters who had used sabers to that point - including Yoda, Kenobi, Anakin/Vader, Luke and Dooku - were covered, but at that point, Palpatine hadn't yet pulled that magnificent spinny-jump and sliced four Jedi Masters, so that didn't get covered. And of the material released since Episode III, few, if any, have touched on this topic. It's a crying shame, I know, but there it is.

Let me make a suggestion, based more on instinct than actual fact. It's been long established (Dark Empire Sourcebook, p. 64) that Palpatine ultimately acquired his knowledge of the Force from numerous different disciplines, not just Jedi ones, including the recovered teachings of the Krath and the Heresiarchs, the tales of the Tyia, and Jarvashqiine shamanism. After all, he was a Sith, trained first in Sith techniques. He was likely well trained in the Jedi arts as well, and beyond that, he could have learned fighting styles from many other sects, including the various Sith splinter cults he later brought under his heel. There may not be just one saber form that Palpatine uses, and whichever Jedi ones he knows (if in fact he doesn't know all of them), they may still be just the tip of the iceberg. For this reason, until someone from LFL says differently (and I encourage you to contact someone like Leland Chee, their continuity coordinator, on this matter), you will have to assume the worst, and believe that Palpatine has as many styles up his sleeve as he has extra blades. You could even imagine that this is one of the reasons he creamed four master swordsbeings: he kept changing styles on them, faster than they could keep up, and so they couldn't maintain a consistent defense. Will that do? Erik Pflueger 04:50, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

    • Thank you for the reply. It was very informative. It does make sense to me that Palpatine does know most/all of the forms. He was the Emperor, that has to count for something. Perhaps the upcoming book by Luceno about Plageuis will reveal more- Luceno did mention forms in Labyrinth of Evil. I note that interestingly enough, on Wookieepedia Palpatine is attributed to use both Juyo and Ataru (VII and IV respectively).

I am truly saddened to say that I have never read any Star Wars Insider, do not belong to Hyperspace and have no presence on the forums, so at this point it would be difficult for me to approach the problem that way. Fightsaber does sound fascinating though.

Thank you again for your reply. Would you mind taking a look at Luke Skywalker and seeing what features need to be added to it- not content- but formatting improvements, etc? It was recommended by a couple of people that Palps be used as a model for Luke's article, as far as layout, depth, etc. Luke is my big project right now, and I've added a lot,(about 8 new paras longer than 10 sentences) but I know compared to Palps, it's nothing. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order.svg (Audience Chamber) 02:43, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

      • I couldn't be more flattered if you tried, Atarumaster. But unfortunately, the Palpatine article alone occupies much of the time I have to spend on Wookieepedia. And that character, for all his complexity, is dead. Luke is just as complex and he's still alive and well in the EU, so material continues to pile up every day. I at least have an end to my labors in sight, distant though it may be. Besides, as well as I know the saga, I have to confess that I can't get into Luke's head the way I hope I get into Palpatine's. I know the Emperor back-to-front, and I can't say that about ol' Wormie.

As it is, I'm glad some are pushing to introduce my way of writing articles to Luke's. You may see my work on the Luke page eventually, and I will look at it for you. Frankly, I won't lie by being a little arrogant and saying that I feel the 'Pedia would best be served if all the articles were done with the level of detail and craft I try to bring to the table. But though I'll fight like hell to do that wherever I can, the director of quality control will probably not be me. I have a wedding in two months, a full-time day job in the architectural rendering business, and a large-scale fine arts project at night. When do I sleep? Dunno.

So here's my best advice: keep doing what you're doing on Luke's page. If you know what's good, keep doing it there. Always be willing to credit your own taste; if you're a good writer, no one will know - not even you - if you aren't brave enough to step up to the plate. Measure your work against writers you admire, wherever you find them, but also measure it against stuff you think is bad; sometimes a very great career begins when you say "Hell, I can do better than that, and they get paid for it." Finally - and this is the most important - always have your research material at hand, know what you're writing about, and be prepared to cite your source down to the page number at a moment's notice. If you slip up, there'll be legions of people - including me, probably - who will rip your work to shreds if they see you're data's not good. So make sure it is. ;) Erik Pflueger Republic Emblem.svg 04:44, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

  • Well, it's hard because I moved recently and have few sources readily available, but I do have an excellent memory- and I use other Wookieepedia articles and the databank as well. I think that all articles on the main characters should definitely have about as much depth as Palps, but I don't think that I can get Luke to that level. However, no one has told me to stop working on Luke and I've had a couple of compliments on it, so I can't be totally in the wrong. I'm always careful to make sure I'm putting in factual information though. Luke is my biggest project yet- my previous large one was Battle of Borleias (Yuuzhan Vong War; Second). Really, I'm making Luke more of a cooperative effort as I have asked several other people to contribute in their particular areas of knowledge. Thanks. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order.svg (Audience Chamber) 15:04, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

And wherever I can, I'll contribute as well. I wish you the best of luck. God bless! Erik Pflueger Republic Emblem.svg 18:29, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

  • Again, thank you for your help, it's been very informative. Would you sign the guest book on my user page? God bless as well and happy editing! Atarumaster88 Jedi Order.svg (Audience Chamber) 03:53, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Another Palpatine question[edit source]

  • Erik, what about Ysanne Isard? Should it be mentioned that she at least claimed to have a lover of the Emperor? Is that even relevant? Atarumaster88 Jedi Order.svg (Audience Chamber) 20:51, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
    • Yes, Atarumaster, it is relevant. Everything about the character is relevant, and should be included. If I haven't added it, it is because I haven't read the X-Wing novels recently; most of my focus lately, in any case, has been on material from Episode III. There's also some uncertainty I have about where to put it. Palpatine is said to have had several lovers, human and otherwise, and I will have to check the books to see just where Isard stands in that list.

My current instinct is to have this topic as a separate section, much like the "Abilities and Traits" subsection. Why? Because who he shared the sheets with had little impact on what he did as Emperor. It's a lot like his writings, or other such interests. They may not have been relevant to the main biographical part of the article, but if he did them, they have to be included somewhere in the article. That's my $0.02. Erik Pflueger Republic Emblem.svg 23:27, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

  • OK. I think I might make a romance section on the article and add Isard in. That's the only one I'm aware of. Although Palpatine having lovers . . . that's just not right. Romance sections seem to be the trend with other major characters, such as Luke, Han, Wedge, etc. As usual, you make good sense. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order.svg (Audience Chamber) 14:36, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
    • No, putting a mental picture to the whole idea of Sidious sex is... someone kissing that prune-faced cauliflower-headed... it's just not right. I think Henry Kissinger is believed to have said it best: "Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac." But if I were a chick, it would take a lot of power dangled in front of me to get me to put on beer-goggles that thick. Nyaaaaaagh... :) Erik Pflueger Republic Emblem.svg 03:09, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
      • Well, it is also said that love is blind, but hopefully not that blind. As the pirate said to the smuggler about the annual Hutt feast, "Let's not go there. It's just doesn't sit well with me." That was a little cheesy. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order.svg (Audience Chamber) 03:16, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Cheesy, Schmeesy... IT'S FUNNY! ;) Erik Pflueger Republic Emblem.svg 04:08, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

  • Happy to entertain. I did add a romance section on Palpatine. <shudder>. As of my last edit, Isard was the only one I knew about, so that's all I put. I'm sure you're more than capable of expanding it. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order.svg (Audience Chamber) 15:17, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Voting[edit source]

Birthdate[edit source]

Answered on my talk page, but I'm not so sure as I was when I wrote it, since it sounds like an editing/author/canon stuff up. Regardless it's not just Darth Bane's page that is affected so, rather than causing a massive flow-on inconsistency throughout the wiki, can you just hold off on the birthdate until the book's properly released and more people can put in their input. QuentinGeorge 06:37, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

  • Once that happens, and it can be properly verified, please make sure that you don't just update the Darth Bane article - there needs to be a flow on effect, especially on the pages of Battle of Phaseera, New Sith Wars, Hurst, and many, many others. QuentinGeorge 06:53, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
  • I have now corrected all the pages that needed to be corrected. Once again, this is something you should have done simultaneously with your original edit, but never mind now. Just remember for the next time. Moderators are likely to revert sole edits that seem to cause massive inconsistencies in the pedia, regardless over their accuracy (and the fact the book was only just released made that more likely). I'm especially surprised that you didn't even correct the dates on the New Sith Wars page, since you corrected those for the Ruusan battles on the same page. What's done is done, however, and just try to keep this in mind for next time. Makes the job of a administrator a lot easier, I have to spend my lunchtimes at work reverting vandals, I don't really want to do with respected users who aren't doing anything wrong. QuentinGeorge 21:15, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
  • On second reading, that seems a little terse and rude. Hmmm....Apologies, I've been feeling a bit off lately, and been snapping at people. Not your fault. QuentinGeorge 21:20, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
    • No problems. There is one final change that needs to be made. the entries for the novel Path of Destruction all still say it is set at 1020 BBY, and, given that this is not the case, they also need to be corrected. QuentinGeorge 06:13, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Diplomacy[edit source]

  • One day, I aspire to be as eloquent as Erik. But for now, all I can do is honor his spirit, enthusiasm, and commitment to keeping the peace. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order.svg (Audience Chamber) 19:14, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Honorable members of Wookieepedia, I present to you Erik Pflueger, in honor of his continued contributions to diplomacy.

WookieeProject Invitation[edit source]

  • As someone with interest and/or knowledge pertaining to the 2,000 - 1,000 BBY period of Star Wars, I'm inviting you to join the Wookieepedia:WookieeProject New Sith Wars, an attempt to get all article related to this period up to scratch. Please join! QuentinGeorge 03:15, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

The Great Palpatine Debate[edit source]

Are we still going on that? Or do you consider it officialy closed? I'm still good to talk, but if you think it's settled, that's fine. .... 22:15, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations[edit source]

This Wookieepedian was married on 19th of November.
Congratulations from all of us at Wookieepedia.
As always, MTFBWY and God bless.
  • You are most welcome, Eric. Best wishes for both of you! Atarumaster88 Jedi Order.svg (Audience Chamber) 04:56, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Congratulations! -Solus 02:57, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
      • I hadn't noticed until now. Good job! -- Riffsyphon1024 10:37, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

35:3[edit source]

I noticed this was noted as the month and year since the Great ReSynch that the Battle of Yavin took place in 0 BBY when referring to the death dates of some Imperials. You added one to Tajis Durmin earlier last year for example, however 35:3 doesn't appear on the Battle of Yavin page. Is this completely accurate and should I add it to the page? -- Riffsyphon1024 10:37, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

FYI[edit source]

Forum:Featured Article Reform Proposal[edit source]

  • Erik, a group of people (including Culator, myself, Fourdot, and other contributors to the FA process) are working on a proposal for a group of people who would review FA noms and maintain high quality articles like Palpatine (not that it needs it much ;-) ), and I thought it would be a good idea to get your opinion. Thanks. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order.svg (Audience Chamber) 00:24, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Reverted editions[edit source]

I have read you have problems with Jack Nebulax, he watches a lot of articles and when he connects he changes any little thing in each article to be the last who made modifications in every one. Don´t care, it´s an illness. --Palpatine81 02:55, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Source for date[edit source]

Hey there. Just wondering what your source is for the date you added to the Battle of Hoth? Not that I don't believe you, I'm just kinda interested in this whole new phenomena of exact dates in the continuity. (And the fact that if an anon had added that I would have thought it was fanon and reverted it, so to avoid somebody else doing it later I'd like to have it sourced in the article). :) Wildyoda 03:20, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Wow, that was incredibly in-depth. Much appreciated. Wildyoda 03:41, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Jack[edit source]

Palpatine[edit source]

  • I missed this part of our IRC meeting, but the Inquisitorius has marked Palpatine as needing improvement to keep FA status. I'm willing to work with you to help clean up some of these things. The biggest thing is the sourcing! Anyway, thought I'd let you know. Further updates can be seen at Inq:Palpatine. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order.svg (Audience Chamber) 17:18, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
    • I'm sure you noticed, but I just made a major edit to Palpatine, going through the entire article to cut some of the more unencyclopediac things and did some of the sourcing. On the history, you'll notice an anon editing it. I guess when you cruise through an article for two hours trimming things, it logs you out. Anyway, I just wanted to let you know, and see what you thought of the changes, especially since much of it was your work. As this is a wiki, feel free to change what I've done. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order.svg (Audience Chamber) 18:44, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
      • Oh, and I was curious: Why is there no mention of Xizor and his power struggle with Vader? It seemed out of character for your usual meticulous research! Cheers. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order.svg (Audience Chamber) 19:10, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Fourdot[edit source]

  • Erik, I sympathize with you. To clear up a few things, the role of the Inquisitorius is to review FAs and help ensure quality standards among them- make sure they follow all the rules and such. That being said, there are no specific mandates of the Inquisitorius for its users to perform specific actions to articles outside the Inq: namespace. In other words, the group does not order or request members to do anything at all to articles.

I personally applaud the actions you've made towards improving Palpatine up to par FA standards, and you'll notice my name in the history section as well. I think what you were doing was good work. Fact: Two weeks had indeed already passed, so Palpatine has lost its FA status. Fact: It can still be re-featured, and I and several others would support it.

To return to what I was saying about Fourdot: I—nor any other Inquisitor or any other user, admin, or bureaucrat— cannot tell him to stop editing an article in good faith. It's a wiki- right? It doesn't mean I support what he's doing (I don't)- and yes, he plans on doing the whole article. It's not a question of what I personally want, unfortunately- but perhaps it's better that way. If I was to use the power given to me by the community to stop a good-faith editor, I'd be violating the trust I was given. It's hard to understand or appreciate, but I hope you at least see where I am coming from.

So it seems there is a problem. Here's what I can do for you: I can state yet again that Fourdot's editing to the article is not sanctioned by the Inquisitorius. Look at all the meeting logs and pages, and no where will you find an official vote mandating the total rewrite of the article. Consider it said. Here's what I cannot do for you: Ban or threaten to ban Fourdot simply because he's re-writing an article. Simply put- there is no jurisdiction for me to do so.

Here's what I suggest you do: Using the history section, go back, take what existed before he started editing it, copy and paste it to a sub-page of yours, and maybe work on it some more. Then, on Talk:Palpatine, propose a community vote. Put it in the Senate Hall if you feel it's that important, though the talk page is the appropriate spot. Link to your version and obviously Fourdot's version for comparison. Then, let the community decide. In the past, these votes have gone your way, and I suspect will do so again. Once the vote has concluded- and these things take time- the matter should be largely settled. If you win, if Fourdot attempts to place his version back in again and again, that is an edit war, which is bad. Now, conversely, he could win, and so that would be that. Both of you would be expected to be reasonable adults about the situation. That's one option. It has a good chance for keeping your version more or less intact, but it's somewhat confrontational as options go.

The other option is to try and work it out with Fourdot- settle it out of court so to speak- but he's already told me that he wants no compromise in the IRC room. It's up to you, but this choice does employ more diplomacy.

There are a few more options, but they are more radical. One- you do nothing, which I don't expect from you. Two, you engage in an edit war. Hardly mature, and it gets you in trouble with admins. Three, you call for a public vote against Fourdot as an Inquisitor. There are issues with that option: 1) There's no precedent for it. 2) It's hardly diplomatic. It's barely civil. 3) You'd have to engage a bit of politicking. Nasty business, that. 4) It still doesn't stop him from editing Palpatine, just removes his ability to contribute to FA requirements. 5) There will be strong opposition. Fourdot, if you read this, note that I'm not advocating this option, as a matter of fact, I would oppose any attempt to remove you. I'm merely laying out all the options as I see it.

Even if you do succeed, there will be issues if you try and re-feature Palpatine. It will be objected to on any number of grounds by Fourdot, and the Inquisitorius has no power to strike those. I specifically designed it that way. My best guess is that a stalemate would be reached on that front.

And as much as he's annoyed you, give Fourdot some credit. He has stayed off the talk page in an effort to be more diplomatic. He's stopped insulting others, including Jack, and has shown that at least he's willing to put some action behind his words, even if you don't like that action, try and see his perspective. I bear him no ill will and wish him the best at Wookieepedia.

I've been monitoring the discussion and edits for about a week now, but to be honest, it would take a lot for me to keep doing so. I'm tired and stressed with RL, and monitoring this article all the time takes a lot out of the time I use for Wookieepedia, not to mention is not as fun as some other things. If you ask me to, I'll continue to observe, but I'm staying off Talk:Palpatine. The temptation for me to do something I shouldn't is much too great.

I hope this helps, and I do sympathize with your plight- I do like what you've done with the article. Drop by my talk page if I can be of any other assistance. Cheers. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order.svg (Audience Chamber) 02:57, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

  • You're most welcome Erik. Yes, you may ask me for help, and I will respond, though I'm not on the site as often as others (Jack, I'm looking at you ...). I hope both of you can civilly work out a compromise. I'm trying to be as neutral as possible while publicly saying that I like what you've done better- a neat trick if I can pull it off. I'll keep an eye on things and make sure they don't get out of hand. Don't abuse your hand too much- it will hurt and make your wife mad. Anyway, I must be off. Cheers. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order.svg (Audience Chamber) 03:21, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Palpatine Censorship[edit source]

Well, it seems I'm quite the topic of discussion on your talk page already. But we're past all that. This is the first part. Not many changes I had to make in this section, but, still. Those things I removed are future...sessions, there will be both things that have to go, and things that should go, but there' none of the latter here. If, when you're online, you could go on the IRC, it would be very helpful, and it could speed up the process. Also we could talk on a private channel, so as to not disrupt others. .... 03:42, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

  • I heard you might be coming to an Inquisitorius meeting tomorrow/Sunday. Times can be found here: Inq:Meeting No. 4. Note that you will need a registered nick to join. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order.svg (Audience Chamber) 05:18, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Well, if you can rewrite the C'boath thing to focus more on Palpatine, we'll put it back into the article. .... 23:55, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
      • Ok, reading over the C'boath thing, it's not that bad, but with the Triclops thing, we really need to avoid "weasel words", and we need to flat out say that he was his son. Unless, of course, there's a source which directly says it's ambiguous. .... 02:25, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
        • If there's any source at all which casts any degree of doubt over Triclops' hertiage, then we can be ambiguous. However, if there is none, and a source, IU, or OOU says that he was, then we cannot pass our own judgement and be ambiguous. That's the main problem with this article and this is why we have to do this - there is a lot of speculation and research, wheras what we should be doing is presenting the facts. Whether they're ridiculous or could be proven to be wrong in the future or from an unreliable IU source is beside the point. .... 20:59, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
            • Wow. Despite making it longer, I actually prefer this version, as it will allow us to slim things later. It's also far easier to digest, which is something that we should be striving to with these changes. Yes, you have my full support to make that change. And you think we're finished with that particular section? .... 05:22, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
                • We will go through everything, regardless. If it's already been stripped of fluff, then there's no issue. What I meant earlier was that by providing sufficient context here, we can, later on, just present the facts without the arduous exposition, which, in reality, should go. Hopefully, though we can reach an agreement on this section and move on. .... 05:54, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
                  • OK...if you're finished with it, you might as well put it back into the article, since you know what's what there. .... 22:32, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
                    • Not sure which talk page to put this on, but since it gets mentioned here, I'll put it here: Leland Chee very weaselly calls into question Triclops's heritage here. Later, he called his questioning into question, without outright *contradicting* it, here. Given this precedent, I don't think weaselly language is out of place. jSarek 03:26, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Ah, I see you're doing your own little thing with the Censor page. Which is fair enough, I mean...I haven't really done anything in the last week, and for that, I apologise, but I hope to get back to work soon. Speaking of which, I was curious as to whether or not you were able to get IRC registration sorted out last time you were on. If so, I think it would be beneficial if we could discuss things there. .... 02:30, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
    • As long as these new sections allow us to cut later on, I'm fine with them. But if they're just providing more exposition, I might take issue. But, the way I see it so far, it's fine. And I'm on the IRC now ;). .... 02:42, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Apologies[edit source]

I'm really sorry for the delay, since I've had a lot on my plate in terms of contibuting, Palpatine has really fallen by the wayside. But I promise to get back to work soon. .... 08:14, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Jorus Birthdate[edit source]

  • Where does the Jorus C'baoth birthdate you added come from? I ask because the Revised Core Rulebook of the Wizards of the Coast RPG, released in 2002, explictly labels him as being "28 during the Battle of Naboo", which gives a birthdate of 70. If your source is prior to this, then the later published date takes precedence. QuentinGeorge 08:44, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • No probs. I agree about the rest - the months of birth can be kept, its merely the exact year which was retconned. Still, the poor man seems to have gone prematurely grey.... QuentinGeorge 03:23, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Formatting[edit source]

Please use proper formatting when making articles. You've been here long enough to know what that should be. Kuralyov 06:27, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

ATTN[edit source]

LMAO[edit source]

  • I don't know if you realize this, but you've just made my day. I looked at your userpage and read the script drafts about Palpatine, and Lucas's math error cracks me up. "A thousand troops of the empire" is not 100 rows of 100 men- it can't be, because that's 10,000! :-P Atarumaster88 Jedi Order.svg (Talk page) 17:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
    • I wouldn't include the whole excerpt in its entirety, but it's definitely something worth exploring in the Behind the Scenes section. And yes, definitely that explains why Lucas became a movie producer instead of a chemist, math teacher, or engineer. :-P Atarumaster88 Jedi Order.svg (Talk page) 19:03, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
    • Kind of like what we do with articles such as Clone Wars? With a "main article" link by the section header? If so, I think that's an excellent idea, though I wouldn't use it on the biography section or P&T. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order.svg (Talk page) 19:44, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
      • A lot of things should be considered, but I disagree with this particular idea. Sikon proposed something like this awhile back and it was shot down. I like detail too, but there's a big difference between the war articles and character articles: Canonical section splits. We can have separate articles for all the battles because they are canonically separate. Each major battle gets its own article. There are no "hard and fast" rules for dividing our character articles, which would lead to hundreds of talk page arguments about how it should be sectioned. Plus, it interrupts the flow of the prose. I'd rather just have a big article, but that's just my two creds. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order.svg (Talk page) 14:05, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Allegiance[edit source]

  • Erik, I was looking at Palpatine the other day and noticed his article doesn't seem to have any information from Allegiance. Was that on your list of things to do? I have the book for another day or so. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order.svg (Talk page) 16:18, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
    • Thanks for the fast response. If you were going to do it, I wouldn't want to interrupt the flow and style of the prose that you have on the article currently. As for "exerting myself", Palpatine, as you said, doesn't have a major role- mostly he bosses Mara around, so it would not require a major effort on my part to add the information. *Shrugs*. Cheers. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order.svg (Talk page) 16:28, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: Voss Parck[edit source]

  • Erik, I'll be honest- I was in IRC and was informed of the edit by another admin. I was informed it was the same type of edit that had gotten him in trouble previously (it's worth noting that Jack did not break the 3RR this past incident anyway) and left a warning on his page, rather than have the other admin take more corrective measures. I did fail to closely examine the edits, but I seem to recall that Jack and the other admin are having a dispute over what should be "cleaned up".

Just as I appreciate your honesty and openness- I won't hide the fact that I'm sick of hearing about this whole issue. In my mind, the sooner it's over with, the better. I have no intention of trying to "restrict" or limit his contributions, but please try and understand my position- while I value Jack's contributions to this wiki more than some of my colleagues, repeated edit warring and personal attacks cannot be tolerated from anyone- myself included. I have been and will prevent injustices from occurring on this wiki, to the best of my ability, but I am human and do get fed up with the pettiness of the whole thing. The Galaxy thing- eh . . . I suppose the best thing to do in that case would be to set up a Consensus Track and re-examine the past decisions. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order.svg (Talk page) 15:36, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

    • Agreed, and I believe that within a week, we will have resolution on the issue- consensus seemed pretty possible as far as the sysop vote was looking. Most of them seem to be tired of the issue also, and very few want the most extreme punishments. And I'm perfectly fine with that. I do agree with your assessment on Jack's talk page in that very little will be tolerated from him from now on, and should that happen, "it may prove difficult to secure his release." I'm sure Jack is glad to have as firm as advocate as he does in you. Cheers. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order.svg (Talk page) 13:17, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Your signature[edit source]

The file File:Galactic_Republic.JPG has been superseded by File:Republic_Emblem.svg in all applications. You should update your signature accordingly, to avoid creating a redlink every time you use it. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 23:01, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Mara[edit source]

  • Hey Erik, just thought I'd show you this: Mara Jade Skywalker. It's the culmination of a couple month's labor of about six users and the second restored FA. Mara's article is not quite as in-depth as I think you plan Palpatine to be, but it can serve as a model for the "super-long" character FAs of over 100 KB. If anything, it's a little encouragement for you, as I know you've worked long and hard on Palpatine that it is possible to restore articles. Cheers. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order.svg (Talk page) 15:50, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Email[edit source]

By any chance is an email address of yours? --Eyrezer 09:06, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Insider Imperials[edit source]

Hi! Since I live in Belgium, it's very hard to get the Insider. As an Admin of Yodapedia I'd really like to know if there is more now info in the Insider about the Imperials except the names of Motti, Bast & Praji. Thank you --Sompeetalay 18:32, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

RE:Palps dialogue[edit source]

Sure thing. To sum it up: I feel that they are just too...un-Wiki like. I haven't seen any other article with such lines. They can just as easily be made proper quotes. They can be put in there, but not in the way they were. I appreciate the effort you must have put into the Palpatine article, but to me, the dialogue inside the actual text is unnecessary. I hope you understand. Thanks. Unit 8311 20:21, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

  • They're okay. I prefer the quote template, though. Gotta go now, by the way. Unit 8311 20:31, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Palpatine experiment article[edit source]

Hey Erik, just to give you the heads up, I moved your "very own Palpatine prototype article" to a subpage, so it can now be found and edited here. It's just that we don't put work page articles in the main space because it throws off the legitimate article count. Thanks. :D Cull Tremayne 05:42, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

  • No trouble at all man. We all have work pages you know (:-P), and that's perfectly fine if you want to play around with wikicode and edit a subpage article before you put it up in the main space. I knew what you were trying to do, so I just tried to lead you in the right direction. Cheers. :-D Cull Tremayne 05:58, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

What's up with good ol' Palpy?[edit source]

Erik, long time no see! Oh, wait, not see... write... uhm... read. But then, we use the eyes to... So it's not really... Eerh, whatever! What's up? I heard... uh, read you got married. Congratulations, that's the best thing that could have happened to you! Bravo! So, what's up with the Palpatine article? I hadn't been here for a year—more than that actually, been here seriously I mean—and I seem to have missed quite a few developments. I see you have created a subpage for some stuff in the article. Then why is the article proper lying gutted right there on the top of the list of the most visited pages in Wookieepedia? It's supposed to be undergoing a major sourcing rehaul, and that is good, but I don't see that many edits, there's nothing major about the effort apart from the tags seated on top of the poor thing, as far as I can see at least. What I'm trying to say is, if you've got more for the article, why isn't all that stuff in the real page but in some subpage of your userpage? (I said "page" many times, but that's just stating the obvious...) It doesn't make sense. --Master Starkeiller 23:23, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Re:User talk:Graestan[edit source]

I had nothing to do with it (you never bug me THAT much), but I'll ask some questions. Graestan(Talk) 22:58, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

  • I've also asked around in IRC, but have yet to find anything. It certainly wasn't me who delivered the ban. I'll let you know if I learn something new. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order.svg (Talk page) 23:00, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
    • No idea why or when you were banned. Sorry I can't help further. Cull Tremayne 23:51, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Anakin Skywalker's death[edit source]

Hey, Erik. I noticed you updated the Anakin Skywalker article by adding the month of his death. Your edit summary said you took this information from The Essential Atlas. If you look at the article, though, this information is still being referenced to Return of the Jedi, which makes no mention of the month. Would you mind updating the footnote to reflect that the source is the Atlas now? Thanks for your help! ~ SavageBob 06:18, November 28, 2010 (UTC)

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