Mirlen, 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! - QuentinGeorge 11:16, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Book lists and explanation for revert[]

Hi Mirlen,

It's currently the standard practice here to list each novel a character appears in individually, even if it is part of a series.

If you wish to argue that the Manual of Style and Layout Guide should be changed, and that articles listing every installment in a series should just list the series instead, that's OK: I have no preference one way or the other, myself. Thanks, — Silly Dan 16:34, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I am sorry, I did not know about that. For now, I will abide by the rules (but since I disagree, I will argue :P). Thank you for telling me so. —Mirlen 16:38, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Wookieepedia talk:Layout Guide would probably be the best place to argue about it. There's already an old discussion there. — Silly Dan 16:40, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
I've already done it :P. Thanks though :). —Mirlen 16:48, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Question about policy[]

Are to list all the books in the series, like the Young Jedi Knights or Junior Jedi Knights as well in a character's page? —Mirlen 19:09, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Only if the character actually appears in them. (This is one reason I can think of for insisting on making sure each novel in a series is individually listed — say a character appears in book 1, 2, and 3, is absent in book 4, and reappears only to be killed in book 5 and appear in flashback in book 6. You wouldn't want to just list the name of the six-book series.) — Silly Dan 19:48, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

New infoboxes[]

Hi, I noticed that you've been updating some of the characters with the new infoboxes—good work and thanks for the help. However, I noticed in your edit on Tenel Ka that you put "None" for date of death. While technically true, what we have been doing is leaving unknown fields blank, which the new templates simply ignore. Sorry if I didn't mention that on the project page—I know it's a little sparse on instructions, which I plan to remedy tomorrow (it's really getting late here and I have to get up at 6:30). Thanks. RMF 05:59, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

  • Also, if the height (or any other field is unknown), also leave it blank (but included)—e.g.
birth=[[2000 BBY/Legends|2000 BBY]]

In the example above, death and height are unknown. You must still include these fields though, otherwise the wikiformatting gets all messed up. Thanks. RMF 06:03, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

    • Sorry, I posted it right before I got your message. RMF 06:04, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Regarding Danni Quee, I would probably go with Jedi. Whenever there's a conflict, just use your best judgement; or, that failing, use the neutral template. You can find the list here. RMF 06:10, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Ani Solo[]

  • Vector Prime ebook / The Unifying Force Paperback. At least those 2 versions have that interview, there maybe more, but I am not sure. Darth Kevinmhk 15:06, 21 May 2006 (UTC)


She's mentioned once as getting taught by Kam Solusar and Tionne as Luke walks by. Kuralyov 16:00, 28 May 2006 (UTC)


Thanks for the valuable info. JainaSolo32

FA revamp[]

Basically I want a more clean and less confusing FA system. So I propose we revamp our system to resemble Wikipedia's (although with a few adjustments). I propose we change the Good article system into a strict peer review. "Good article" would be the new mark of quality. Featured Articles, which in this system means only that the article was featured on the Main Page at some point, will be nominated from the pool of Good articles. See also my sandbox if I failed to explain this properly (it's horribly early). --Imp 06:11, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Tahiri's BTS[]

I noticed you removed Tahiri's BTS on the ground that it was original research and "fanon". Being the author of maybe a half of the deleted text, I must say I don't quite agree with you, and I wish you would have brought the issue up on the talk page first before deleting the whole section outright. When I look at the text now, I must admit there are elements there that can be considered original research for a good reason, but how are name etymologies fanon? And mind you, I didn't make the meanings up at the top of my head, I've got name books to back me up ;)

From what I've seen, quite a many BTS's have info on the origin of the character names, even though it may not be that relevant. Are you against name etymologies in general, or just the way the whole thing was formatted in the Tahiri article? I could easily rewrite the section if formatting is the problem. Surely we can put together something that will please both of us :) --Tinwe 21:31, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your long and thorough reply. And thanks for explaining the concept of original research, I must admit it was a bit unclear for me before, even though I knew in general what it meant. Don't feel bad about deleting the section, you only did what you felt was right, and we're encouraged to be bold when we edit ;) I agree with you about the sentences you felt implicated unpublished analysis, those were actually the lines I myself took note of when I read the section again.
I'm not offended that you took the section out, because I see now that there were things there that are against our policy; the only thing I object to is that the etymologies themselves could have easily been kept and the speculative content removed without the whole section being deleted. That's why I wished you would have discussed this on the Tahiri talk page first. (Quite frankly, sometimes it seems people are a bit too fond of these talk page discussions on much smaller things than this, and more than once I've felt like screaming "Go out there and change the damn thing, dammit, we don't need a committee for every punctuation change!" But deleting sections is something I feel should always be discussed, unless the sections are clearly fanon or something like that. You get the picture. :)
Thanks for letting me know that you value my work here, even though this is something I do for my own enjoyment and don't clamor for attention, it's frustrating sometimes when it feels like nobody even notices if I'm here or not. And as for you being grateful to me about me not attacking you — we're civilized people, right? ;) Attacking doesn't help anyone, it just angers people and gets them on the defensive. Besides, aggression leads to the dark side (in which I don't actually believe, but that's another story. ;)
That all being said, here's my proposal for the new, non-speculative BTS:
Tahiri was created by the author Nancy Richardson for the Junior Jedi Knights series.
Tahiri's name closely resembles the Arabic Tahira (the variant Táhirih being used in Iran) that means "virtuous, pure, chaste".
Riina, the name of Tahiri's Yuuzhan Vong persona Riina Kwaad, is a short form of Katariina, a variant of the Greek name Katherine (or Aikaterine) used in Finland and Estonia. The Romans associated the name with the Greek word katharos, "pure, chaste". Katherine could also derive from the name Hekateros, meaning "each of the two", or the Greek word aikia, "torture". In Dutch, kwaad means "angry, evil".
If you have any proposals for improvement, don't hesitate to bring them up on my talk page. Harya vanima aurë! --Tinwe 08:56, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Hi again. I'm glad you think the above text is a good compromise, and I'll happily leave the transition smoothing to you. As for the civilized thing, I meant the two of us. ;) From what I've seen, you're not the kind of person to attack anyone, and so am I, so I guess that makes us civilized then... :P On a related note, do you think we should also add a "Prophecies" section to the BTS, like the one (which, if I've understood correctly, you have written) in Tahiri's article over at Wikipedia? --Tinwe 13:56, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Mari Amithest[]

Hi. I liked the changes you had made to it, but I removed the reference from the IU section of the article, as that practice seemed to be the consensus over at the consensus track page for the issue. Most who voted for a reference section wanted only the BTS section to be referenced in the format you have used, while the rest of the article would use the standard "Appearances/Sources" referencing system. As for the BTS bullet points, I have no problem with your removal of the bullet points if that helps THE article's encyclopedic quality. I'm glad you like my user page, BTW! :) Adamwankenobi 09:49, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Anakin image[]

Hey. Just so you know, the vote isn't about changing the Anakin image - it's about having one of Vader too. The pictures used on the CT are just for illustration purposes. Green Tentacle (Talk) 14:06, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

  • We were always going to keep the current image in the infobox, changing that is a whole different matter. I've changed the pictures used on the CT to the ones that were used on the two separate articles, since I admit it might not have been very clear. Anyway, the vote is on the principle of allowing two pictures to be used in an infobox, not on what those specific pictures may be. Green Tentacle (Talk) 14:16, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Jaina Solo FA[]

  • Please check up on your objection- could you provide examples? Thanks. Atarumaster88 20px (Audience Chamber) 05:30, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
    • I think that I've resolved your objection, if you wouldn't mind looking. Atarumaster88 20px (Audience Chamber) 16:06, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
      • Further work on the article has been done. Lack of response may result in the objection being struck by the Inquisitorius. Atarumaster88 20px (Audience Chamber) 02:44, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
        • Mmmmm, cookiees! (sic on purpose). Yes, and the long on the Inquisitorius can be found at WP:INQ. The short is: The Inquisitorius is a team of Wookieepedians, users and admins, who review FAs as a quality control measure and help keep past FAs up to par. Also, they help reduce gridlock on the FA nom page by removing irrelevant objections and striking valid ones from users that have been fully addressed, but the user has been idle. All of these things are done by an internal vote, though IRC seems to be a more popular medium. Cheers. Atarumaster88 20px (Audience Chamber) 04:42, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
          • I can work on condensing some more information on the article, btw, although I tend to have the opposite perspective and prefer a little more data. Atarumaster88 20px (Audience Chamber) 04:43, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
            • No problem. I fully intend on seeing Jaina through to FA this month, so hopefully we can find the happy medium! Atarumaster88 20px (Audience Chamber) 04:52, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Anakin is up for review this weekend in the Inquisitorius meeting. I can tell you know: If any images are not properly sourced, that will be a problem. Sourcing with the footnotes is obviously needed. Another thing: It could use a Personality section and a Relationships section (Tahiri). The intro is a hair long. Well, I'm off for today! Atarumaster88 20px (Audience Chamber) 05:00, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Well, if it is marked for removal of FA status, then it will have a two-week period to get it up to par. Atarumaster88 20px (Audience Chamber) 15:40, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank You[]

Oh wow, thanks Mirlen! Jaina Solo(Goddess Stuff) 00:02, 9 March 2007 (UTC)


  • Mirlen, first of all, I've been working in trying to save Anakin from removal, but I could use some help on sourcing. Also, I think your objection to Ysanne Isard has been addressed as the quote was removed form the article. Thanks. Atarumaster88 20px (Audience Chamber) 03:33, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
    • You're most welcome! Jaina was a great help to me in sourcing it- and I'm glad to see you return. Atarumaster88 20px (Talk page) 15:35, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Your objection to Callista has been addressed, I believe. Atarumaster88 20px (Talk page) 17:39, 6 July 2007 (UTC)