FANDOM

Welcome, Hk 47! Edit

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:

General help

Site policies

Contribution help

Wookiees-Transparent

Wookieepedia aspires to be a reliable source for all Star Wars fans to read and draw information from, and as such, fan-created continuity and fan fiction are not allowed within our articles. All in-universe material must be attributable to a reliable, published source.

Please do not remove talk page and forum comments, as they are part of the public record. Remember that you should always sign your comments on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wookieepedian! If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the Senate Hall, visit our official IRC channel, or ask one of our administrators. May the Force be with you!

ArchiveEdit

User talk:Hk 47/Archive


Removing content Edit

Please do not remove content from Wookieepedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 18:23, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

  • Ok but I have explicated my modifications in talk page. I'm sure for taris but perhaps I made a mistake for the kalast page. Hk 47 19:29, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

I have corrected the page of kalast. There was a mistake in the class of the isd. Hk 47 19:33, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

Image caching issuesEdit

Tag the image with {{WISS}} if it doesn't appear to update properly. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 21:18, May 24, 2011 (UTC)

  • Ok, thanks for the deletion. Hk 47 21:20, May 24, 2011 (UTC)

Invasion of Kashyyyk (Galactic Civil War)Edit

As decided on the GAN page, the invasion and the battle are to be considered two separate events as the the battle took place well after the invasion. The Imperials had already built a base and enslaved most of the local Wookiees before the Rebels even found out. MasterFredCommerce Guild(Whatever) 14:10, May 25, 2011 (UTC)

  • Yes but the invasion took place just after the clone wars. The wookies are already enslaved in all sources of the galactic civil war. And they were freed in galactic battleground.Hk 47 14:54, May 25, 2011 (UTC)

Cookie Edit

Wookieecookie
—Tommy 9281 Saturday, July 9, 2011, 11:36 UTC has awarded you a Wookiee Cookie!
For the addition and referencing of countless astrographical articles.

Yavin 4 battles Edit

Hello there,

I was just checking in to see why you had removed the "merge" template from Second Battle of Yavin 4 and Fourth Battle of Yavin 4. Corellian PremierRobotechAll along the watchtower 16:07, December 3, 2011 (UTC)

  • Hello. Yes I know there is too much battles of Yavin 4 there is not link between these two. The second (I have found a picture !) is a small mission to recover the survivors of the death star and the fourth is a large assault with Vader and the 501st.Hk 47 16:13, December 3, 2011 (UTC)
    • Well, the link is the timing (immediately after the destruction of the Death Star). Is it okay if I place the merge templates back on the articles, and we can continue this discussion on the article talk pages? Corellian PremierRobotechAll along the watchtower 16:26, December 3, 2011 (UTC)
      • Yes if you want.Hk 47 18:47, December 3, 2011 (UTC)

Inexorable Edit

Hey, Hk. I archived Inexorable (Imperial II-class), so whenever you feel its ready to be nominated for Good status, feel free to nominate it. Also, for future reference, please do not remove the {{CAnom}} template from an article unless you are going to archive it. Removing it before it is archived makes the archiving process more complicated. Thank you.—Cal JediInfinite Empire (Personal Comm Channel) 21:17, January 6, 2012 (UTC)

  • Ok, thanks it's done. Hk 47 21:41, January 6, 2012 (UTC)

Congratulations! Edit

Hk 47! Congratulations on being elected February's Wookieepedian of the Month. Your hard work here hasn't gone unnoticed, and you definitely deserve the honour! :)

On the front page of Wookieepedia, you've probably seen the Wookieepedia newsnet over on the right side. There's currently an attempt to revive it, and in the past, the Wookieepedian of the Month was always interviewed. If you're up for it, I was hoping I could interview you! The questions would be pretty basic ones; you can see some past interviews here. I could ask you the questions here on your talk page, or if you prefer e-mail, shoot me one at gradualferguson@hotmail.com . Let me know. A link to the interview would appear in the newsnet feed, and consequently on Wookieepedia's main page. Congratulations again! Menkooroo 06:37, February 6, 2012 (UTC)

  • Thanks Menkooroo. For this interview, we can do it if you want, although I'm not sure people could be very interested for my answers! You can ask me the questions on this talk page. I'm french so excuse me if my english is not perfect. Hk 47 12:25, February 6, 2012 (UTC)

Second Battle of Mon Calamari Edit

Not really sure why you reverted my edits since I sourced them and have the books directly in front of me and can see they're accurate, and you didn't give any justification for the edits...174.78.141.147 17:08, April 4, 2012 (UTC)

Warfare Edit

Hey, Hk 47, I noticed you've been doing a lot of work with articles from The Essential Guide to Warfare recently. Would you like to join WookieeProject Warfare?

Just add your name to the Participants section of the project page with #~~~. Thanks! —Cade Calrayn StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit 18:13, April 8, 2012 (UTC)

  • Ok, it's done. Hk 47 18:37, April 8, 2012 (UTC)

WP:Warfare Edit

Essential Guide to Warfare-cover
"War is ruin, predicted, and then remembered as glory."
Hello <insert name here>! Thanks for joining WookieeProject: Warfare! As you can probably guess, our purpose is to get all of the information from The Essential Guide to Warfare into the wiki.

If you have the Guide, you can tell there's a great deal of work to be done. The Guide has introduced a great deal of new characters, events, ships, and other information, and it's gonna take some work to get it all in the wiki. A major issue that we have to resolve is the new exact dates for all of the conflicts that the Guide has introduced. Many of these conflicts had approximate dates before the Guide was released, and we have to remedy these articles to reflect the new information. If you have any questions or comments, head on over to the forums or let me know on my talk page. Take a look around the project page, and good luck editing!
Cade Calrayn StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit

Comic imagesEdit

Your comic images are good, but please be advised that according to the image policy, text should only be removed from speech bubbles if the bubble is cut off by cropping. If the bubble is intact, the text should remain. Thanks! -- Darth Culator (Talk) 00:46, June 3, 2012 (UTC) Oh, I didn't knwow, sorry for those ones. Hk 47 00:54, June 3, 2012 (UTC)

Mon Cal Edit

Unfortunately, the Ambush at Mon Calamari precedes the Defense of Mon Calamari, and the Ambush has to follow the Liberation because two Mon Cal cruisers were present. The Ambush occurs in the Imperial storyline, before the cross-campaign mission Liberation of Kashyyyk, and the Defense occurs post-Kashyyyk. I don't know where you're getting that the Defense occurred right after the Liberation, but it's fairly unlikely. Cade Calrayn StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit 16:37, July 16, 2012 (UTC)

  • Hello, I agree with you about the ambush, it's clearly a diffrent battle. But in the rebel campaign, there is a galactic interlude that makes the transition between the missions "smuggler's raid" and "defense of mon calamari". During this transition, the Empire loses the control of the planet and Mon calamari joins the alliance. Mon Mothma says : "The Mon Calamari have thrown off Imperial control..." The liberation of the planet is the reason why the Imperial fleet attacks the planet in the following mission "defense of mon calamari".Hk 47 (talk) 16:51, July 16, 2012 (UTC)
    • That is most likely the Mon Calamari "throwing off" the Imperial control that results from the Ambush. The reason the Imps attack in the Ambush is because they suspect Dac is seceding, and they're right. They reconquer the planet, destroying some Mon Cal cruisers in the process, and then the Mon Calamari must overthrow them again between the Ambush and the Defense. As the Second Battle on Mon Calamari's BTS states, the game contrasts with several other sourcebooks. Ackbar's entry in the New Essential Guide to Characters confirms that the Second Battle of Mon Calamari - the first time Ackbar frees his planet after being rescued - happens before the Battle of Turkana, which precedes the Star Wars: X-Wing series of missions, and the X-wing battle series precedes the Corellia, Vergesso, and Corulag missions in Empire at War (and therefore the Carida raid and the Defense of Mon Calamari). Oh, and that brings up another point—the Ambush at Mon Calamari has to follow the Second Battle of Mon Calamari. X-wings are present at the Ambush, which means that the ambush follows the Fresian campaign (a Rebel series of missions early in the Rebel campaign in Empire at War), since that's how the Rebels got ahold of the X-wings in the first place. And the Battle of Turkana is the first time the X-wings are used, so it has to precede the Ambush, and also Mon Cal cruisers are present at the battle. Basically, I'm saying that the Mon Cal must have freed their planet a second time sometime between the Ambush and the Defense, because every other source points to the Second Battle of Mon Calamari being before the Empire at War campaigns. Cade Calrayn StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit 17:22, July 16, 2012 (UTC)
      • Il's very difficult to compare the timelines of Eaw and the x-wng game. In fact, both begin approximately with the appearance of the x-wing and end with the battle of Yavin. In empire at war, the liberation of dac mentionned in the rebel campaign follows directly the liberation of ackbar. More important, we learn that this liberation led for the first time mon cal cruisers to join the rebellion. I think the liberation mentionned in EaW is The liberation and the battle of Turkana and the Defense of Mon Calamari are soon after (I think the defense is before turkana). The x-wing game follows those events. Hk 47 (talk) 18:58, July 16, 2012 (UTC)

But here's a better explanation for why the Liberation preceded the Ambush, and how Turkana can't be before the Defense:

  • The Second Battle of Mon Calamari is Ackbar's first liberation of the planet, resulting in the contribution of several Mon Cal cruisers to the Rebels. Then we have the start of the Rebel campaign in EaW with the First Battle of Kashyyyk, which is followed by the Fresian campaign. The placement of the Empire campaign is iffy until the Subjugation of Geonosis, which includes X-wings. Therefore, it must follow the Battle of Turkana, which is the first time that the X-wings are used, and the Battle of Turkana follows the Fresian campaign because that's how the Rebels get the X-wings.
  • Then, X-wing and the two Empire at War campaigns run their paths until the Liberation of Kashyyyk, which is concurrent for both sides in Empire at War. And Kashyyyk is preceded by the Ambush at Mon Calamari, which places Dac back under Imperial control.
  • The Rebel campaign and the X-wing battles converge at the Battle of the Circarpous system and the Subjugation of Ralltiir. Ralltiir has to come before the Raid above Corellia, the Scanning in the Vergesso Asteroids, and the Raid over Corulag because Raymus Antilles has not yet been assigned to the Tantive IV at Ralltiir. At Corellia, Vergesso, and Corulag, he commands the Sundered Heart, and after Corulag he is assigned by Mon Mothma to the Tantive on Leia's mission to mission to Kattada. As for the Circarpous system, the Intrepid was the first Star Destroyer to be destroyed by the Rebellion (it's not a game mechanics thing). Since Han Solo is rescued from a Star Destroyer (which is destroyed) at Corellia, it has to follow the Circarpous system conflict.
  • From there, it's a straight line in terms of Empire at War to the Defense of Mon Calamari. Therefore, the Imperials had to be forced of off Mon Calamari sometime between the Ambush at Mon Calamari (where they recapture the planet after it is freed in the Second Battle of Mon Calamari) and the Defense of Mon Calamari (where Ackbar is defending the Rebel-controlled planet from Imperial aggressors.
  • The Liberation/Second Battle also had to precede the Imperial Ambush in Empire at War, because the Battle of Turkana has Mon Cal cruisers (which the Rebels only got after the Liberation) and is the first time X-wings are used after the Fresian campaign.

The Liberation might have happened during the Fresian campaign (There isn't any more info on that), but it had to precede the Ambush. Sorry if that's rather complicated. Cade Calrayn StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit 19:28, July 16, 2012 (UTC)

  • There is too much contradictions. I was even completly agreeing with you at a moment but with more thinking it's impossible. I think we have to forget the fact X-wing were first used in the battle of turkana. It's a massive change but it is the most logical. Like the first destroyer destroyed at Circarpous, these informations were made completly obsolete by all the more recent sources (see all the ISDs destroyed at Kamino in TFU 2). The liberation in the rebel campaign is clearly the first liberation. It was clearly explained in the story that Ackbar and the Mon Calamari has not joined the rebellion until the liberation mentionned in the Rebel campaign and this liberation of dac directly follows the liberation of ackbar. The story also explains that this was the smuggler's mission that allowed the mon calamari to arm their ship for the first time and liberate their world. It doesn't conflict with previous sources excepted the Xwings use at turkana. There is of course a problem with this ambush but this battle seems ambiguously canon. I think the correct timeline is: battle of kamino, fresian campaign, beginning of EaW, liberation of Dac, defense of Dac, battle of turkana and all the X-wing game. In fact, all this discussion raises the issue of the inconsistencies between the too many sources. Hk 47 (talk) 21:05, July 16, 2012 (UTC)
    • We cannot throw out sources just because you think they don't match up with your own views. The X-wing was first used at Turkana, a point that is sourced to Empire at War, and you can't call the Imperial campaign ambiguously canon and the Rebel campaign canon—they're both canon, though they didn't occur exactly concurrently. I'm sorry, but you're really not arguing your point well. I noticed while creating my sourced timeline that you have attempted to linearize the course of the Galactic Civil War by connecting random events into some sort of a straight timeline without any sources to back you up, so you're really on shaky ground when it comes to claiming that the Liberation happened between Carida and the Defense. Multiple sources back me up and disprove your claims, and it's perfectly reasonable that the Mon Calamari or the Rebels would defeat the Imperial forces that recaptured the planet during the Ambush. Cade Calrayn StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit 21:33, July 16, 2012 (UTC)
  • While you did bring up a valid point about the Star Destroyer thing being rendered moot, my point still stands. Circarpous is directly followed by a mission where Keyan Farlander delivers the information on the Death Star that was recovered in the Cron Drift to Princess Leia aboard the Tantive, and Mon Mothma sends Raymus Antilles to rescue Han in the Raid above Corellia because she needs Han's help in investigating the rumors that Leia has gathered. . Turkana precedes the Ambush and Defense of Mon Calamari (because it's the first time X-wings are used), so the Ambush and Defense have to follow the Liberation/Second Battle of Mon Calamari. Cade Calrayn StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit 21:10, July 16, 2012 (UTC)
    • I think we must take other people opinion about Dac. Anyway I just noticed a mistake about another point. You say, Han was rescued (Raid above Corellia) to investigate about Leia's information. In EaW, this was the pirates from Atzerri's informations (First Battle of Atzerri) that led to the Raid over Corulag, Leia was not involved at this point. After Corulag, Antilles was transfered to the Tantive IV for Leia's final mission. This indicate that the Battle of Kattada took place after those events. The Essential Atlas recently better clarified the last events of operation Skyhook. It stated that Leia's missions to Ralltiir and Kattada is more or less concurent with the theft of the plans at danuta (Kyle katarn's mission) and that Leia directly flew from Kattada to recover the plans at Toprawa. Hk 47 (talk) 22:05, July 16, 2012 (UTC)
      • Yes, I might have confused the reasoning behind the Corulag mission, but my point is still perfectly valid. If you had bothered to look at the timeline, you would have seen that Kattada is accurately placed post-Corulag, for the reasons I stated above and you restated. The Atzerri pirates/Kalast, the Cron Drift mission, and Leia's conversation with Lord Tion between the Subjugation of Ralltiir and the Battle of Kattada are all reasons that Mon Mothma recruits Han. The three different sources of info directly contributed to her decision, as Leia's conversation with Tion brought up the words Death Star, and Mothma (secretly) knew what that was. But my point about Dac still stands, and is backed up by multiple sources. Cade Calrayn StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit 22:40, July 16, 2012 (UTC)
        • Actually, looking though the Atzerri info, it appears that Atzerri had nothing to do with the Death Star. A pirate tried to sell info on the Alliance, not the Death Star. Cade Calrayn StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit 22:43, July 16, 2012 (UTC)
        • I have updated the Battle at Atzerri page with the quotes and the missing informations. Hk 47 (talk) 00:13, July 17, 2012 (UTC)

Biggs Edit

As stated on Biggs' own page, in the Behind the Scenes: "Years later, in a retcon that helped explain these inconsistencies, the comic story Star Wars: Empire: Darklighter revealed through Biggs' narration that he had already joined the Rebellion, and kept the whole truth from Luke in that deleted scene to protect him."

File:For Cade Calrayn2.jpg

Also, another section from that article, sourced to that comic arc, states that Darklighter came and visited his father on Tatooine before Episode IV, after he joined the Rebellion. Don't try to change the chronology unless you can actually prove that there is a flaw. Where does it say in Darklighter that it happened after Tatooine? Don't re-add the info until you can prove it, please. Cade Calrayn StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit 16:07, July 18, 2012 (UTC)

  • In Empire: Darklighter, the mutiny on the Rand Ecliptic takes place after Biggs return from Tatooine. The battle of tatooine is featured during this trip on tatooine. Which source change the chronology ? Hk 47 (talk) 16:16, July 18, 2012 (UTC)
    • The Complete Star Wars Encyclopedia comfirms the mutiny took place after his trip on Yavin (Biggs entry). Hk 47 (talk) 16:26, July 18, 2012 (UTC)
      • What are you talking about? What trip to Yavin? No other source even remotely suggests what you're saying, so I suggest you upload images of the comic in question you say this info comes from. Cade Calrayn StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit 16:28, July 18, 2012 (UTC)
        • Besides the fact that the image is improperly sourced and will be deleted, that doesn't prove anything. What is the context for that? The preceding or following pages, maybe? Cade Calrayn StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit 16:36, July 18, 2012 (UTC)
          • To resume Datlighter... After being promoted at the academyn, Biggs returns to Tattoine where he says to Luke he will join the Rebellion. Luke has just seen the battle in space earlier with his binoculars (see picture). Biggs later leaves Tatooine and go to the rand ecliptic for the first time. The mutiny takes place later. The second picture is from the complete encyclopedia.Hk 47 (talk) 16:56, July 18, 2012 (UTC)
            • And as the BTS quote I gave you above states, Darklighter was already a member of the Alliance at that point. I can see how you got confused - Empire 9 is a flashback to events that happened before his visit to Tatooine in Empire 8. The Rand Ecliptic, Incom, and convoy missions can't happen after the Battle of Tatooine, since Darklighter participates in the Ambush in the Cron Drift during Operation Skyhook, before the movie starts. Despite any inconsistencies, we have to go with that, because we can't through out X-wing as a source. Also, in Empire 8, Darklighter narrates that "several eventful months have passed" between when he left Tatooine and when he returned at the beginning of ANH. Cade Calrayn StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit 17:03, July 18, 2012 (UTC)
              • Oh, and sorry, but that Encyclopedia entry must be flawed, because ANH happened over the course of one or two weeks (Alderaan was between 35:3:5 and 35:3:12). It couldn't have been "within weeks" that he accomplished all of that. Plus the reasons I stated above about Biggs' mission in the Cron Drift. Cade Calrayn StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit 17:12, July 18, 2012 (UTC)
                • Hey you are right about the flashback I have downlodad the different issues of the comics because I have the tpb version. And it was more clear like this. The tpb is quite different in the organisation. Sorry!! Anyway, it seems the encyclopedia made the same mistake! Hk 47 (talk) 18:52, July 18, 2012 (UTC)

Copy-and-paste warning Edit

This is a general warning to you regarding the way in which you attempt to "write" articles. One does not write an article on Wookieepedia by directly copy-and-pasting enormous amounts of text from another article, as you have attempted to do with the Infiltration of the Tarkin article. I have removed these additions from that article. You are welcome to try and repopulate the article again with writing in your own words, but if I see you try to do this again, I will once more remove it, and you may be issued a block from editing. Thank you. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 18:39, September 28, 2012 (UTC)

  • Tope, there has been no policy resolution about this, so a warning is inappropriate. If he was copying someone else's words, that would be a problem, but otherwise, it's fine. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 18:45, September 28, 2012 (UTC)
    • First of all, NaruHina, you can mind your own business. I'm not debating the legitimacy of an administrative warning with you, of all people, on this talk page. If you have a question of administrative procedure, you can bring it up on the noticeboard or seek me out on IRC. Moreover, this warning stands. I suggest neither of you try and push the matter further. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 18:49, September 28, 2012 (UTC)
      • I have every right to point out something is mistaken in any conversation on the Wook, like anyone else. It's not an administrative warning if you're not enforcing policy, of which there is precisely nothing on this matter; it's you pushing your opinion on the matter off onto someone else. That's all I'm saying on the matter, and it's the truth. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 18:54, September 28, 2012 (UTC)
        • If I may interject, but Toprawa's right about this. Not that he needs any support from me on the matter, but you may want to review this policy which directly states that the creative expression of other authors' material not formulated in your own words is plagiarism... and not tolerated. This is why he is an admin—he can quickly act on content that threatens the legal standing and legitimacy of the wiki. —GethralkinHyperwave 20:49, September 28, 2012 (UTC)
          • I appreciate the effort to clarify the matter, Gethralkin. However, I would like to reiterate the point, as I expressed to Naru, that I feel any further discussion on this talk page is inappropriate, and worse, extremely annoying at this point to Hk 47. While I am under no certain obligation to explain my administrative decisions to anyone outside of the administration, I am prepared to give an explanation confidentially to both Naru and Hk 47 if they so request it. Rest assured, that it is not simply me "pushing my opinion." Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 21:06, September 28, 2012 (UTC)

DubrillionEdit

No, without direct confirmation, we can't assume affiliations through the maps—in this case Dubrillion and this is what CC7567 told me.--Darth Pythonis (talk) 15:33, October 28, 2012 (UTC)

  • This discussion had already taken place. It's is accepted that planets specificaly mentioned on the maps can have their affiliations assumed and planets located in a faction area but not mentioned not. Hk 47 (talk) 15:46, October 28, 2012 (UTC)
    • Look at Taral's comments at these forums; you can't base a world's affiliation through the maps alone, like Dubrillion and a few others, without verification from a source stating that it "was aligned" with that group.--71.80.172.90 22:49, October 29, 2012 (UTC)
      • So he is wrong, please stop trying modify this article. Hk 47 (talk) 22:56, October 29, 2012 (UTC)

DeleteEdit

hey why do you want to remove that page hk47

but where do i put my thing for discussion

Cracken's Rebel Operatives/Small Favors/ExecutorEdit

I finally got a copy of The Essential Reader's Companion and found the discrepancy regarding Small Favors' timeline placement. I noticed you haven't made any edits to the Executor article reflecting this information. How do you propose to reconcile the conflicting information on the events surrounding the Executor?--Matthias777 (talk) 16:39, November 8, 2012 (UTC)

  • Hello. In fact there is not any problen. It's known from years that the executor was officialy commissioned in 2 ABY despite it was finished in 0 ABY. Hk 47 (talk) 17:36, November 8, 2012 (UTC)
    • Well, that's just the problem; The Essential Reader's Companion now states that it was officially commissioned at Kuat in 0 ABY, not 2 ABY. Personally I feel that the authors just didn't do extensive enough research (understandable, considering the scope of the book), but I don't think that I get to make that call...--Matthias777 (talk) 17:42, November 8, 2012 (UTC)
      • The Essential Reader's Companion don't contradict the old timeline. It just confirms the first use in 0 ABY. Hk 47 (talk) 17:55, November 8, 2012 (UTC)
        • The Essential Reader's Companion states that the events of Small Favors occurred in 0 ABY, when the Adventure Journal itself depicts the events at the beginning of Small Favors (specifically, the Executor's commissioning ceremony at Kuat) as occurring in 37:10 (2 ABY) in the news bulletins preceding the story. Hence, the Companion is contradicting the existing timeline.--Matthias777 (talk) 18:18, November 8, 2012 (UTC)
          • Yes The Essential Reader's Companion mentions Small Favors but this story was not dated in Adventure Journal. The commisioning mentioned in 2 ABY in GalaxyNewsNet is something different, even if it could have intended to be the same. Hk 47 (talk) 18:26, November 8, 2012 (UTC)

Cilare Edit

Dude, read Fry's blog again. He's talking on creating Vonak system for EGTW when mentioning Cilare - surely he wouldn't be meaning the species, when the context of the sentence is that of systems and planets. Why do you have to make things so complicated? --LOST-Malachi (talk) 17:37, November 11, 2012 (UTC)

  • You have found a retcon I didn't have seen but you are wrong. Fry just mentions the Cilare species not the planet (Cilare is a ice planet). So Vonak is the new name of the planet in invasion. Hk 47 (talk) 17:42, November 11, 2012 (UTC)

About revert Edit

This happened a while ago now, but I edited the Star Wars: Galactic Battlegrounds article and removed several names from the cast list that were only from the expansion pack. I happened to go back on the page today and found that you'd reverted this edit and in your summary said it was reverting vandalism. I wanted to ask you here why you said it was vandalism instead of reverting it myself and possibly starting an edit war. Thanks. Commander Code-8 To say hi, press 42 06:07, November 13, 2012 (UTC)

  • You can't delete this content like this. You must before add it on the Clone Campaigns page. Hk 47 (talk) 22:30, November 13, 2012 (UTC)

Former CA Edit

Hey, Hk. I was curious about your edit here. I don't recall Ebenmal going through any process of CA removal. If it did, I would appreciate it if you would link me to the page. If not, please notice that there is a page for that. An article does not get stripped of status simply because a user thinks it should be. There's an official process it must go through. Like I said, if it did indeed go through this process, please show me. If not, please revert it to its status. Thank you for your cooperation.—Cal JediInfinite Empire (Personal Comm Channel) 23:16, November 13, 2012 (UTC)

  • Hello. Sorry, it was just because my edit made the status obsolete. I had the intention to ask the official process but i forget ! Hk 47 (talk) 23:23, November 13, 2012 (UTC)
    • Okay, thank you for rectifying it. If there is still a particular issue with it that you believe warrants review, please let me know, since I'm the original nominator.—Cal JediInfinite Empire (Personal Comm Channel) 23:46, November 13, 2012 (UTC)

Mitth'raw'nuruodo Edit

Hi there, Hk 47! I've been following with great interest in your work with Mitth'raw'nuruodo's article. Great work. I was wondering if you would like a hand, particularly on the section dealing with Choices of One. Currently there seems to be only two sentences about it, and that is not nearly enough to cover all that greatness which is the fore mentioned novel.--Dionne Jinn (Something to say?) 20:36, November 19, 2012 (UTC)

  • Hello. Yes you can help me expand it, I don't have read this book. Thanks Hk 47 (talk) 21:06, November 19, 2012 (UTC)
    • Ooo! You have no idea what you are missing. That books is brilliant! Anyway, now the couple of sentences have grown into three paragraphs. I'm obsessed with Thrawn, so if there is anything else I can help you with on the article, just let me know.--Dionne Jinn (Something to say?) 18:11, November 20, 2012 (UTC)
      • Thank you. I will continue to expand and improove this page but you can also do everything you want with it, it's a free encyclopedia ! Hk 47 (talk) 18:53, November 20, 2012 (UTC)
        • That it is. Which reminds me, there is one issue I've been wanting to discuss with another Thrawn-fan. And that is the relative age of Thrawn and Thrass. I know it has been talked before on the talk page, but as another recent editor for the article I'd like to hear your opinion. Currently Thrawn's article says he is the younger one and it is sourced to Outbound Flight. But OF never states which one of them is older—if anything it makes it sound as if Thrass was the younger of them. I believe the current statement that Thrass is the older was is based on the title Syndic, which is held by Thrass in OF, but is attached to Thrawn's name in Vision of the Future, and it is thus assumed that Thrawn inherited that title from his brother.--Dionne Jinn (Something to say?) 19:04, November 20, 2012 (UTC)
          • I'm pretty sure there is no exact indications of thrawn's age but i don't remember very well the point where thrawn and thrass discuss of their family. So if you are sure there is no precise indication that Thrass is older, this must be remove from the article. Hk 47 (talk) 13:54, November 21, 2012 (UTC)
            • Their relative age is never mentioned, when Thrawn and Thrass talk about their family. Only reference to topic, in fact, is in a scene when Jorj Car'das first meets Thrass. He refers to him as a "young Chiss male".--Dionne Jinn (Something to say?) 15:19, November 21, 2012 (UTC)
              • Ok, well. Don't hesitate to correct it if you find other mistakes. Hk 47 (talk) 16:00, November 21, 2012 (UTC)
                • Oh, I won't. I've noticed couple of other things that need checking, but not much.--Dionne Jinn (Something to say?) 16:03, November 21, 2012 (UTC)

Second Battle of Kuat numbers. Edit

Okay, I added in those numbers based on a Youtube playthrough for the mission. Also, I also based it on the Rebel forces amounts. In fact, at the beginning of the mission, they explicitly listed the amount of ships in the mission for Zann's Consortium. Here's what I'm referring to:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJJCfQC9YNM

Now, if I made a big mistake, then my mistake. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 23:53, November 27, 2012 (UTC)

  • So he isn't very good. Last time I did this mission I had less than five cruisers... Anyway, it's better to limit your edits to the games you have played. The consortium forces depend of the player and the ennemies are unlimited. Hk 47 (talk) 00:01, November 28, 2012 (UTC)

Lexi Degarienne Edit

Can you explain to me your reasons for removing this information from two separate articles? If there's a fanon discussion about this, it's not on this character's page, nor his daughters. I understand that you think it's fanon, and it may well be, but I don't see the discussion you speak of, so I'd love to know exactly why you think this needs to be removed.--Demos Traxen (talk) 18:02, December 4, 2012 (UTC)

  • Sorry, grand-daughter's page.--Demos Traxen (talk) 18:03, December 4, 2012 (UTC)
    • Nevermind - I found the trash compactor page you were referring to and double-checked with my copy of Adventure Journal #12. Compact that trash.--Demos Traxen (talk) 18:05, December 4, 2012 (UTC)

Re: CalendarEdit

Apologies Hk_47, yeah User:Menkooroo has explained this further and I've conceded that I should resist changing anymore dates until people understand fully what I'm trying to convey. Rokkur Shen (talk) 14:29, December 11, 2012 (UTC)

GemDiver Station Starship changed to a YT-2000 light freighter Edit

The Corellian starship I made for the GemDiver Station picture wasn't intended to be a YT-2000 (since it preceded it by a couple of years), but one could say that it was heavily modified! :) Bantha68 (talk) 03:10, December 21, 2012 (UTC)

  • Ok it looks very similar. So you're free to revert my edit if you decide it is not a YT-2000. Hk 47 (talk) 03:17, December 21, 2012 (UTC)

Happy New YearEdit

Hey, I wanna wish you a happy new year, sorry for being little late! :) --XXLVenom998 (talk) 19:50, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

  • thank you too! Hk 47 (talk) 19:54, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

Planet systemsEdit

Please see Forum:CT Archive/Atlas and systems some names in the online companion are conjectural. If they have not been mentioned in any other sources then a {{conjecture}} tag is to be placed until they are confirmed in a published source other than the online companion. Rokkur Shen (talk) 01:36, January 26, 2013 (UTC)

Hakartha Space StationEdit

Hi there Hk 47. The Essential Atlas Online Companion lists this as "Hakartha Space Station". Which source explictly states "Hakartha Station"? Rokkur Shen (talk) 12:12, January 26, 2013 (UTC)

  • The others sources mentioned on the page. Hk 47 (talk) 12:15, January 26, 2013 (UTC)
  • I'm not interested in participating in an edit war with you. Have you confirmed that for yourself? If so, can you please kindly add a {{1stID}} confirming the specific source. Rokkur Shen (talk) 12:25, January 26, 2013 (UTC)
    • Yes I verified it. When there is multiple sources in a page, you have to verify all of them before adding these kinds of templates. According to my Beetle Nebula edit, people have already said you that systems and other objects were created from previous mentions in the EU. And Javin (Anoat) means anoat sector in the greater javin, this was explained in the essentail atlas. Hk 47 (talk) 12:35, January 26, 2013 (UTC)
      • Thankyou, for correcting the Hakartha Space Station page. That's all I was asking for. As for your addition to Beetle Nebula, it's still speculation on your behalf sorry. Rokkur Shen (talk) 12:49, January 26, 2013 (UTC)
        • You can modify my sentence about the Beetle Nebula to make it less speculative but you must keep the relation between the ship and the nebula.
        • The template 1stID is very few used so it's not a good idea to add confirmation templates in any cases. Use it only when you are sure the names are wrong. Hk 47 (talk) 12:54, January 26, 2013 (UTC)
        • No I still don't think you understand. There is no connection. The designer of the transport may simply have liked beetles and nebulae. Unless it is specified in a printed source it is speculation. Non-canon. Fanon. However, you want to term it. I've already reported this to a higher authority. It is now in their hands and for them to decide I will not be goaded into constant reverting. Rokkur Shen (talk) 12:59, January 26, 2013 (UTC)

Re: Skaross system battleEdit

The battle title itself is conjectural.

  • Ok but the battle exists, so why do you remove it from ths system page? Hk 47 (talk) 14:16, January 26, 2013 (UTC)
    • Fixed. But please don't remove {{Conjecture}} and {{Stub}} tags when it clearly is still a stub. Rokkur Shen (talk) 14:20, January 26, 2013 (UTC)
      • Ok. If the name is conjectural, where does "Skaross" come, a planet name ?

Caridan systemEdit

Hi Hk 47, I appreciate your efforts to rectify the "Caridan system" debate however I was waiting for an administrator to step in and move the page correctly. Unfortunately, a few other users see it differently. Rokkur Shen (talk) 23:20, February 1, 2013 (UTC)

Forso Edit

Hi Hk 47. What was the reason for reverting my edit on Nebula Forso? Stake black msg 23:15, February 12, 2013 (UTC)

  • Hello, you can't place this image in the infobox since it don't depict the page's topic. But you can add the picture anywhere else in the article if you explain the relation. Like there. Hk 47 (talk) 00:12, February 13, 2013 (UTC)

Unidentified jungle moon Edit

Hi Hk. You may want to crop a little more or at least indicate which moon is the moon you want to focus on this image. It's not very clear from this crop. Cheers. Stake black msg 14:00, February 19, 2013 (UTC)

  • Hello, there is no way of knowing which one was the inhabited moon on the picture from space. That's way I left both. Hk 47 (talk) 21:51, February 19, 2013 (UTC)

Re:Tatooine Edit

Yes, I have, and it completely contradicts a number of sources that came out both before and after the book. I don't remember the exact details, but the novel's placement is incorrect on several notes. Cade Calrayn StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit 00:28, March 2, 2013 (UTC)

Skirmish in the Ithorian Compound Edit

Hi, I would say that Skirmish in the Ithorian Compound isn't "important event of First Jedi Purge" and is meaningful only in the context of the Exile's story. (: – Tm_T@Wookieepedia:~$ 19:01, April 7, 2013 (UTC)

  • Hello, are you mentioning the template ? I agree with you completely about this event, it doesn't deserve its own page according to me. I add it in the template until the article was merged in a larger page about all the firefights and skirmishes involving the Exile on Telos. Hk 47 (talk) 20:20, April 7, 2013 (UTC)
    • What I meant is that it doesn't deserve to be in the timeline of "important events of First Jedi Purge", including the template. But I do think it being individual event it does deserve its own article. (: – Tm_T@Wookieepedia:~$ 15:23, April 9, 2013 (UTC)

Wookiepédia, version en français Edit

Bonjour Hk 47, je te contacte car tu semble être l'un des contributeurs francophones de Wookieepedia. Je voulais te faire part de l'existence de Wookiepédia_fr, la "version en français" de ce wiki et par la même occasion t'inviter à venir nous donner un coup de main si le cœur t'en dit :) (création, traduction, organisation...) Ton expérience sur Wookieepedia nous serait d'un grand secours ! A bientôt j'espère Trazeris (talk) 14:40, July 3, 2013 (UTC)

  • Salut, je suis bien un contributeur francophone de Wookieepedia. Mais pour aller droit au but, je me suis inscrit à la version anglaise de wookieepedia car c'est la seule à ma connaissance à se vouloir vraiment exaustive. Du coup, ça ne m'intéresse pas vraiment de participer à une nième encyclopédie française. Il y en existe des tas qui sont affreusement incomplètes et qui auraient énormément gagné à se réunir... Mais merci pour la proposition ! Hk 47 (talk) 15:37, July 3, 2013 (UTC)
    • Oui nous aimerions aussi être exhaustifs, et je suis bien d'accord sur le fait que les encyclos "françaises gagneraient à se réunir", mais sans être sous la forme d'un wiki, on assiste qu'à des petites luttes d'ego. Nous n'y pouvons rien à l'échelle de Wookiepédia... Néanmoins je comprends ta frustration Trazeris (talk) 16:00, July 3, 2013 (UTC)

Article renaming Edit

Articles are not renamed by copy-pasting content as you did with Siege of Coruscant/Third Battle of Coruscant. They are renamed via a move button to preserve the article's edit history. - Sir Cavalier of OneFarStar(Squadron channel) 18:57, July 5, 2013 (UTC)

  • The article can't be moved due to a redirect conflict. Can you do it ? Hk 47 (talk) 19:02, July 5, 2013 (UTC)
    • What's your source that this is the correct name for it? - Sir Cavalier of OneFarStar(Squadron channel) 20:15, July 5, 2013 (UTC)
      • I put it in the sources. Hk 47 (talk) 20:37, July 5, 2013 (UTC)
        • Firstly, you could have just told me the source rather than make me go back and find the article. Secondly - where exactly in the sourcebook, and is it capitalised as "Siege of Coruscant" or parsed as "the siege of Coruscant"? - Sir Cavalier of OneFarStar(Squadron channel) 20:52, July 5, 2013 (UTC)
          • p.46: there is several mentions of "the Siege of Coruscant" with capitalised S. Hk 47 (talk) 22:41, July 5, 2013 (UTC)

Missing systems Edit

This page is amazing. Fantastic research right there on your part. Great work. Have you ever considered showing it to Jason Fry at the Jedi Council Forums? There's a thread where he essentially takes "requests" for future updates to the Atlas appendix. Menkooroo (talk) 23:05, July 8, 2013 (UTC)

  • Thank you. I know the thread on the Jedi Council Forums. I just wanted to complete this page and verify each source before sending it. Hk 47 (talk) 23:18, July 8, 2013 (UTC)

Film screenshots Edit

Hey there, could you post future film screenshots in .png? I will end up replacing them for the Blu-ray version and it would make it easier. Thanks in advance. Alexrd (talk) 15:11, July 9, 2013 (UTC)

  • Ok, thanks for the quality. Hk 47 (talk) 18:25, July 9, 2013 (UTC)

Yavin Edit

May I ask where in The Essential Chronology that battle is named as "Battle of Yavin 4"? Thanks. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 23:47, July 26, 2013 (UTC)

  • Hello, this is in the index of the batlles, p. 87 Hk 47 (talk) 23:50, July 26, 2013 (UTC)
    • Thank you. I assume you're using a foreign language version of the book, because page 87 does not match up in my English version. I also assume you mean in the book's subsection titles when you say "index." My book does not call this battle the "Battle of Yavin 4" in the corresponding subsection title; rather, it calls it the "Assault on Yavin 4." Am I just totally missing something here, or are we dealing with different wording in different language versions of this book? Might you be able to upload a picture of what you're looking at?
      • Sorry p. 181 !!!! There are oficial capitalized names for several battles.Hk 47 (talk) 00:12, July 27, 2013 (UTC)

Battle of Tralus date Edit

(Regarding your post on Toprawa's talk page.) Hk, could you direct me to the page in Warfare that says the Battle of Tralus takes place in 5 ABY? I can't seem to find it. Grand Moff Tranner Imperial Department of Military Research (Comlink) 02:02, July 27, 2013 (UTC)

  • Hello, this is p. 166, Aggressor's section Hk 47 (talk) 02:04, July 27, 2013 (UTC)

Steadfast moveEdit

Hey, if you're gonna move the page for Steadfast can you fix the redirects that were left behind. Trip391 (talk) 21:11, July 29, 2013 (UTC)

Mission to Dominus III image glitch. Edit

Hi.

Just so you are aware, the description for the image you uploaded seemed to have experienced technical difficulties, as its not being displayed. I tried to add it in, but I noticed it was there. You might want to notify some staffers about the glitch. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 23:53, July 30, 2013 (UTC)

Linking and the # sign Edit

Hey. Just want to let you know that if you encounter a title that appears to have the # sign in it, such as Star Wars #1: In the Shadow of Yavin, Part One, you cannot form a link to that article via a straight copy and paste of that title. The # sign is added in by JavaScript and is not part of the actual page name because it is reserved by MediaWiki for section linking. Attempting to create a link with the # sign such as ''[[Star Wars #1: In the Shadow of Yavin, Part One]]'' produces Star Wars #1: In the Shadow of Yavin, Part One, which links not to the comic article but to the non-existent "1: In the Shadow of Yavin, Part One" anchor in the main Star Wars article. There is a discussion going on here over whether it is appropriate to include the # sign in comic titles; you may want to voice your opinion there. —MJ— Jedi Council Chambers 01:04, July 31, 2013 (UTC)

  • I didn't know, thanks Hk 47 (talk) 01:06, July 31, 2013 (UTC)

Cadomai Edit

Just noticed you have an objection on my Cadomai Prime nom that I responded to about a month and a half ago that you haven't looked at. Just a reminder. IFYLOFD (Enter the Floydome) 01:13, July 31, 2013 (UTC)

Merge doublebladed Edit

Just to let you know, the Vibro Double-Blade was accepted to be kept through a Tc discussion. The Doublebladed vibrosword is concerning a distinctly different (although similar in name and overall appearance) article subject. —GethralkinHyperwave 22:52, August 29, 2013 (UTC)

Nyriss Edit

Hk, I'm not quite sure where you get the idea that the attempts on Nyriss's life were in 3950 BBY, but they most certainly were in the first part of the novel in 3954 BBY. Also, it's common courtesy to not make changes to a status article without consulting the author. Cade StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 15:06, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

  • I didn't wrote the article neither choose this date, I just added the infobox. I didn't modify the date already written in the article, you can do it if it's wrong. Hk 47 (talk) 15:12, December 27, 2013 (UTC)
    • What do you mean? The operation supernova page clearly says 3950, while the Nyriss page says 3954 BBY. Cade StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 15:32, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

Battles Edit

There is absolutely no reason to add (First identified as Hk 47) to the same source/appearance that a battle first appeared, and also, please make sure that the current battle title is valid - if it isn't, then move the article. Also, per CC's reasoning because of TCW, the Galaxy at War name is overridden. Cade StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 23:15, January 27, 2014 (UTC)

Battle of Kuat (Yuuzhan Vong War) Edit

Hey, Hk 47. A while back, you added "Battle of Kuat (Yuuzhan Vong War)" to the Battle of Kuat disambig page, but it still remains a redlink. I'm going through and cleaning up these Kuat battles and was hoping you could point me in the direction of what source this event might be found in so I can create the article. Thanks. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 20:50, March 27, 2014 (UTC)

  • Hello, Toprawa and Ralltiir. The Essential Atlas (p. 220, last map of the yuuzhan vong war) shows that the Vong attacked Kuat near the end of the war. Hk 47 (talk) 21:38, March 27, 2014 (UTC)

Hi-Rez Expansion Region Map Edit

Hey Hk 47, I see you're the one who loaded the Expansion Region sectors map. I have a hi-rez version of the map that never got posted to the official site because of a software glitch -- it's much nicer, with more readable text. If you get in touch with me at essential.atlas@gmail.com, I'd be happy to send it to you to post here. I'd do it myself but don't want to screw anything up. Best, Jason (Essential Atlas co-author) Jasonfry (talk) 20:43, May 20, 2014 (UTC)

Images and TOR Edit

Hk, your attempts to upload images lately have been very poor. It's unacceptable for a user with your experience to be uploading images without putting in the information, and almost-copying from the Codex as well. Please clean up your act. Thank you. Cade StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 22:18, July 25, 2014 (UTC)

What do you prefer Legacy or canon.? --Alex star wars fan (talk) 18:17, September 10, 2014 (UTC)Alex star wars fan

Article Edit

Hey, HK. I was just wondering why the article I made was deleted. A reason was never provided.

Darth Ravigious (talk) 17:40, November 17, 2014 (UTC)

  • The reason was actually stated as: "This is not his apartment. It's simply where he meets with Surik" Trip391 (talk) 17:45, November 17, 2014 (UTC)

Ah, okay. I always figured it was his apartment (given his "it's still home statement). Darth Ravigious (talk) 17:50, November 17, 2014 (UTC)

Planets/systems missing Edit

Hello Hk 47. Since you're listing the elements missing from the Atlas, let me inform you of two planets that were mentioned (and actually seen, reusing old footage from the EPCOT ride "Horizons") in the Tourscan feature of the original Japanese Star Tours: Bar Neth and Praya. To a lesser extent, there is also the planet Hyperion, which was mentioned in the Acme Jedi Mickey Character Key. Although the existence of "Jedi Mickey" is obviously out of continuity even in the Legends universe, that doesn't preclude a planet Hyperion from actually existing. --Lelal Mekha Old Republic military symbol (Audience Room) 14:29, November 28, 2014 (UTC)

The Crossguard Saber IS IN THE 7TH FILM! Edit

I was looking at the history of the edits of a page earlier and saw a user made a logical move, and that user got undone. ANY EXPLANATION?!?!? --TheCrookedGamer (talk) 02:41, November 29, 2014 (UTC)

TOR systems/planets Edit

Hey, Hk, as you're in contact with Jason Fry and keep track of the systems missing from the Appendix, here's a list of systems that are missing, along with a bunch of planets that have no info as to their location that were added in TOR. Feel free to add them to your subpage and/or pass them on. Cade StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 21:38, December 13, 2014 (UTC)

TIE/AG Aggressor updates Edit

Hi.

Can either you, Corellian Premier, or Ayrehead update the TIE/AG Aggressor starfighter article? It's sorely in need of an update relating to Stay on Target, and in fact is probably the only one of the various TIEs to not even have many updates besides moving the page (I added in Stay on Target as one of its appearances, but beyond that, that's all I could do). Weedle McHairybug (talk) 21:16, April 5, 2015 (UTC)

Re:Companion Edit

That's awesome, and thanks. My username will be fine, and great work. Cade StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 12:28, June 11, 2015 (UTC)

Orchard vine Edit

Hey Hk. Regarding your recent additions to Orchard vine as well as the placement of a {{Delete}} tag there: Since the article is a current CA, I would strongly encourage you to bring any areas of concern to the attention of any members of the EduCorps, or at least begin a discussion on the article's talk page regarding any areas that require expansion or revision. Seeing as the article has already undergone the CA review process, it's not proper to merge another page (e.g. D'ian orchid vine) into the article without at least initiating a community discussion to ensure that such a move is proper and warranted; anything less would unnecessarily subvert the review process that the article passed. Thanks. CC7567 (talk) 02:33, July 5, 2015 (UTC)

Recent cut content editsEdit

Just because these articles are no longer official legends does not mean that these articles are cut content. Please add back anything you have removed and just note the Atlas stuff in the BTS of these articles. Thank you.--Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings)

  • Also, you need to be able to point to a viewable discussion of the topic and not just a link to the acknowledgements. Everything needs to be verifiable.--Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 14:44, July 5, 2015 (UTC)

MergeEdit

Hi Hk, I removed your merge on the Shadow Trooper page as no Legends source ever confirmed that they were the same as Blackhole stormtroopers. Despite having cloaking tech, the similarities end there. The Force Unleashed troopers have gray and blue-lit armor while shadow/blackhole troopers always have black. Even the material that the two are made from a completely different one armor set is made from durasteel while the other is made from stygian-triprismatic polymer. Not to mention that most sources implying that Shadow stormtroopers started with Blackhole. Also I can't find any evidence of Blackhole stormtroopers ever being labeled specifically as "Shadow Troopers". I think the confusion stems from Star Wars: The Force Unleashed (video game) page incorrectly linking to Shadow stormtrooper where in-game they are specifically referred to as "Shadow Troopers" as well as on all The Force Unleashed merchandise. All other The Force Unleashed pages link specifically to the Shadow Trooper page. 124.186.216.120 11:43, December 16, 2015 (UTC)

Thanos system Edit

Hi Hk 47 - I am currently reverting your edits removing reference to the Thanos system as the name is explicitly mentioned on page 73 of the original 1st Edition Galaxy Guide 4: Alien Races, second paragraph. - Sir Cavalier of OneFarStar(Squadron channel) 23:54, February 22, 2017 (UTC)

  • Ah, I see you are already in the process of reverting yourself. I will not cross edit in case something is missed :) Sir Cavalier of OneFarStar(Squadron channel) 23:57, February 22, 2017 (UTC)

Noting image modifications Edit

Hello. When uploading images such as this one, please note what modifications you have applied to the original source image (i.e., removed background, removed text/graphics, etc.). Thank you. Imperators II(Talk) 20:30, March 25, 2018 (UTC)

Captain of the Line Edit

Hi Hk 47, I saw you had tagged Captain of the Line/Legends with a delete tag and I'm a bit confused. If it needs to be redirected, just replace the page contents with #REDIRECT [[Captain of the Line/Legends]]. Plenty of pages still link to it, so it wouldn't be a good move to just delete the page. Thanks. 1358 (Talk) 21:00, March 29, 2018 (UTC)

HelloEdit

I noticed you only edit legends articles. Why?--203.160.80.142 13:00, April 7, 2018 (UTC)

Noolian TC Edit

Hey Hk. I'd like to invite you to reconsider your vote on the Noolian TC. Cheers, Imperators II(Talk) 23:15, November 7, 2018 (UTC)

Expansion Region map e-mail Edit

Hey Hk! Would it be possible for you to upload a screenshot of the e-mail mentioned here? I.e., the one where Fry says the map of the Expansion Region sectors is a gift to Wookieepedia? Thanks! Imperators II(Talk) 14:51, January 29, 2019 (UTC)

  • Hi, you can find the beginning of our conversation above on this same page. See the "Hi-Rez Expansion Region Map" message. And this is the next mail, he sent me. Best, Hk 47 (talk) 16:10, January 29, 2019 (UTC)

File:JasonFry_&_Hk47.jpg

    • Ooh, thanks! Imperators II(Talk) 16:16, January 29, 2019 (UTC)
      • You're welcome. Hk 47 (talk) 16:43, January 29, 2019 (UTC)

Jedi Under Siege QuotesEdit

Hey, thanks for adding those quotes to Jedi Under Siege articles! Since neither choice of faction takes canonical precedence, and there hasn't been a decision here yet on how to deal with the new status quo with one character/diverging storylines, most conversations can only be quoted in the BtS for the time being. Thanks! Fan26 (Talk) 14:35, February 25, 2019 (UTC)

Kath subjugation Edit

You had put added the navbox Template:GCW Unknown 3 to Kath subjugation, but the template that actually linked to the article was Template:GCW Unknown 5. I edited the templates to reflect the details that you had added. --Nostalgia of Iran (talk) 14:41, March 7, 2019 (UTC)

Heinsnake plot Edit

I left a message for you on Talk:Heinsnake plot. --Nostalgia of Iran (talk) 14:26, July 17, 2019 (UTC)

Mod SIEdit

Salut Hk 47! J'ai temporairement mis mon adresse mail en haut de ma page d'utilisateur. Peux-tu m'envoyer un mail s'il te plaît ? Le forum du Mod SI est inaccessible depuis un moment maintenant.--DKS MaXoO (talk) 20:23, October 12, 2019 (UTC)

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

Build A Star Wars Movie Collection