Talk: 501st Journal

Back to page
Wiki-shrinkable

This is the talk page for the article "501st Journal."

This space is used for discussion relating to changes to the article, not for discussing the topic in question. For general questions about the article's topic, please visit Wookieepedia Discussions. Please remember to stay civil and sign all of your comments with four tildes (~~~~). Click here to start a new topic.

Inferno squad

501st Journal is within the scope of WookieeProject: Battlefront, an effort to develop comprehensive and detailed articles with topics originating in or related to the Star Wars Battlefront video game series.
If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this notice or visit our project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

Article milestones
Date Process Result
December 12, 2007 Article has undergone Trash compactor Article kept
Current status: Article kept after Trash compactor

What is this?

What is this? Kuralyov 00:46, 10 Dec 2005 (UTC)

  • Apparently a summary of all of the intro scenes in Battlefront II. Doesn't seem particularly necessary to me. --MarcK [talk] 00:54, 10 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • I don't know. I can see how something like this would be useful. I'll probably work on it, but it needs to be finished up first, since I don't have the game myself.TIEPilot051999 00:56, 10 Dec 2005 (UTC)
      • While it isn't really necissary, I think it should stay for some reason. I don't know why, but it seems almost... interesting. Admiral J. Nebulax 01:02, 10 Dec 2005 (UTC)
        • yeah it's so strange, i really think it should stay, but i dont know why.--75.60.181.121 18:11, February 13, 2010 (UTC)

Point of View

  • I doubt the same clone reported all of these entries. How could he have participated at the Battles of Mygeeto, Felucia, Coruscant, and Kashyyyk, when all of them were practically simultaneous? And their age would have accelerated too fast so they wouldn't have still been serving by the time of the Battle of Hoth. I'm going to change it so that it was a Journal compiled from entries of various 501st members. DarthMaul431 03:44, 1 Jan 2006 (UTC)
    • You never know. The way the game has it, the 501st only participates in parts of the battle, not the whole thing. Admiral J. Nebulax 12:16, 1 Jan 2006 (UTC)
      • Age is doubled right? So there is 25 years between the battles of geo and hoth. Plus the ten years of training so that would put him around 60 years of age. Factor in improved health conditions of the time and it is possible that it could be the same trooper. That or we have to say that the 501st got a treatment that slowed their growth rate. A-118 15:35, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Move

I believe the game calls the journal the Journals of the 501st. Move? Oh, and, journals would prove that multiple memberes wrote it.--Bly1993 13:26, 2 Jan 2006 (UTC)

  • It really doesn't matter. It's a journal of some of the battles the 501st were in, even if it was written by different members. There's no need for a move. Admiral J. Nebulax 15:56, 2 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Copyright

I am removing the verbatim text, as it is a copyright violation. --SparqMan 19:40, 2 Jan 2006 (UTC)

The game material is protected by copyright, including all forms of media contained within. --SparqMan 21:24, 2 Jan 2006 (UTC)

  • It looks better this way, at any rate.TIEPilot051999 21:34, 2 Jan 2006 (UTC)
    • Actually, it doesn't look better. Admiral J. Nebulax 22:37, 2 Jan 2006 (UTC)
      • I have restored the text from the journals, as it is being used for illustative purposes in this article. We aren't trying to claim it is ours, or that it is our creation. I even added a copyright note at the top of the page. General Kenobi 22:40, 2 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • I don't think you should have done that. Admiral J. Nebulax 22:43, 2 Jan 2006 (UTC)
    • I'm fully aware that all of this can still be taken down at any moment, but as long as it's up it should at least have all of the entries so I'm going to add a few more of them. I agree with General Kenobi -- We're not trying to say that we made up this information. Is it no different from all of the images we have that Lucasfilm holds a copyright on? DarthMaul431 02:08, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • No, it is very different. Lucasfilm has been very lenient with non-commercial use of images on the Internet. It is not so lenient with written copy. I have reverted your changes. Feel free to host it offsite. --SparqMan 03:14, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • So then we should remove all verbatim text? Like the speech from the Declaration of a New Order? -- SFH 03:25, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
    • I was just about to say that. Why remove one, if not all, but I don't hear LFL complaining (yet). -- Riffsyphon1024 03:26, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • After thinking about it, we probably should for two reasons. First, as I said above, Lucasfilm has been lenient in the use of images (excluding those found exclusively on Hyperspace) online, particularly where fair use applies (comparative work like SWTC, for example). Second, it is does not fit with the encyclopedic style. Take a look at Declaration of Independence (United States). It offers history, context, annotation and relevant analysis, while it links to the WikiSource for the full text. While our verbatim text do not apply for something like WikiSource, we should strive for this encyclopedic style while linking to an offsite copy of the text. If one of you feels secure against a lawsuit from Lucasfilm, upload the text to your personal website and place it in the External links. Why put all of Wookieepedia at risk? --SparqMan 03:35, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
      • And what about all of the quotes we have scattered across the site? Should those be taken away too? DarthMaul431 03:31, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
    • Quotations are treated differently than full verbatim text. If we want to summarize each entry, that would be acceptable. --SparqMan 03:35, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
      • I'm not sure. Summarizing wouldn't seem to do anything. I guess we should just leave it as it currently is. DarthMaul431 03:37, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
        • Actually, if all of this stuff would go, the quotes would probably go along with it. Admiral J. Nebulax 20:58, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • As of the current moment, the quoted entries are available in the article. Since they are up, should I update with more. The only reason why I am asking this is because the Mustafar entries and all of the entries after Kamino are not up, while the rest are. Is there a reason for this or can I update? DarthMaul431 21:23, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
    • Yes, please add them in. Admiral J. Nebulax 21:28, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
    • Shouldn't the journal entry for the Attack of the Clones mission be on the Journal of the 501st? User:Grievous7318 05:58 1 Jan 2006
      • Was there even a journal entry for that? Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 23:01, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
        • Yeah there was. I was thinking of adding that one but I haven't gotten around to doing it yet. DarthMaul431 04:00, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
          • Funny, I don't remember it. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 21:35, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
            • It wasn't in the story mode with the other levels and entries. It was under the training mode. DarthMaul431 22:38, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
  • I hate to bring up a dead issue, but I have a good point. If the journal is copywritten why aren't the opening crawls copied verbatum on each movie's article page? korydvandyke 16:04, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Copyright

Why are we arguing about copyright? We don't argue about it on the battle pages where most of these entries can be found anyway.

Narrator?

Do we have an idea of who is actually speaking in the BFII intro scenes? It would be an important thing to address in this article. Totema1 02:15, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

  • I was watching the credits to story mode, and one of the voices is "retired Clone Trooper", so I'm assuming that whoever wrote/narrated all those entries was one guy who somehow managed to survive the entire Clone and Galactic Civil wars.

Non-Canon?

As I see, Star Wars Battlefront II is the only source for this. So I want to warn you to see this as canon. And I have good reasons for that:

Battlefront 1+2 can not be canon because of the very special gameplay. Let me explain. In many games you have to play a part of the game again if you (your Avatar) or an important character dies, or an important object is destroyed. You then have to play a whole Level again, to start from the last checkpoint or load a saved game. Examples for this type of game are: Republic Commando, the X-Wing and Tie-Fighter series, Republic Commando, the Dark Forces/Jedi Knight series, Force Commander, Rebel Assault 1+2. I'll call these 'DEATH-INTERRUPTED games'. Because if you would film your playing and cut the parts of the movie out where you died and had to reload, then you have a continuous, uninterrupted storyline. You can then say that the story happened this way, and if you want you can say that this story is canon.

In the second type of games you can die multiple times, but still win. You don't have to load a saved game, you go on where you died or at a checkpoint, but killed enemies are still death and everything is like you had really died a moment ago and were 'reborn' to go on fighting. So I'll call these games 'REBIRTH games'. Examples: LEGO Star Wars, Battlefront 1+2, Shadows of the Empire (only some levels). You will have severe problems if you say that the story of these games is canon. Because canon underlies logic. A illogical story can not be a canon story. And a normal person that dies and reappears again and again is very illogical.

There is a third cathegory. Games that are highly unrealistic ('UNREALISTIC games'). Examples: Galactic Battlegrounds, Battlefront. For several reasons one can say that it could never have happened in the way you see it in the game. Galactic Battlegrounds for example is a Real-Time-Strategy game. Fights are shown in Real-Time, vehicles are moving in matching speed. But troopers are trained within seconds, vehicles and buildings are built within minutes. It's also strange that you don't see how the building material is transported to the construction site. This is what I mean when I say 'unrealistic'.

As you can see, Battlefront 1+2 are REBIRTH games as well as UNREALISTIC games. To the REBIRTH aspect: Well, you can say that the troopers you are playing are nameless and nobody cares if they die or not, and every new trooper is a new individual. However this is not completely right, as they actually have names, and even the number of their multiple deaths in battle is recorded! Even more astounding is that they are changing their face, gender or even become aliens! The whole problem is even worse in Battlefront 2. Here, well-known characters (heros and villains) are dying and reappearing. To the UNREALISTIC aspect: I think I don't have to explain this. People and Vehicles that simply 'appear' on the battlefield; troopers boarding and leaving a vehicle instantly; the list is endless.

So finally I think that saying "the campain mode of Battlefront is canon, the rest is not" is waayy to simple. What of the things that happen in Battlefront campaign can we really say have happened? We can just say that there was a battle on a planet at a specific time. But Battlefront can NOT give us a proper image of that battle. I wouldn't even go this far to say that the two factions deployed the troopers we see fighting in Battlefront. Nobody can draw a line between canon and game mechanics.

My suggestion is not to use Battlefront as a primary source for canon. Even if other sources are relating to events from Battlefront, I would recommend to use the other sources. The information from Battlefront is too vague. And my second suggestion is to mark this article as maybe-non-canon or something like that.--TeakHoken91.7.24.121 20:22, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

  • It's called game mechanics. Battlefront is canon. -- I need a name (Complain here) 22:50, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
    • I know what game mechanics is. But I think there should be a limit. Do you know the games Yoda Stories or the Super Star Wars series? You can say that they are canon. Yes they are. There are just some minor things that don't fit into star wars history or natural law. So these things are simply not canon. Good? I say no. By doing so you will never really know which parts of the game are canon and which are not. For example: How many Jedi did Darth Vader kill during Operation Knightfall? 4, because he had to kill at least 4 to accomplish the objectives in the single player campaign of Battlefront 2? 32 (fictional number), because you could kill 32 at most? None, because you can choose to play without him? Or how often did he die during the battle? Once, twice, unlimited times? What exactly was the equipment of the 501st during that battle? Can Battlefront 2 tell you? Maybe everything is game mechanics. Maybe some of the battles in Battlefront 2 never happened and are just game mechanics? Who knows? And why is LEGO Star Wars not canon? What is the difference that makes Battlefront canon and LEGO Star Wars not?--TeakHoken91.7.50.153 18:44, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Well, the story in Battlefront doesn't conflict with canon. LEGO Star Wars have the characters as LEGOS! Zakor1138 03:13, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
    • Relax, TeakHoken! In each SW game that gives you some choice, most of the time there's a canon choice (like the sex choices in KOTOR). So your example with the account of killed Jedi is irrelevant. You have to consider games as "adaptations" of "real" events, that's why game mechanics create all these inconsistencies. Just don't rely too much on games like BF. After all, this universe is fictitious, this debate won't change anything. And perhaps read again the canon page. Klow 21:15, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
    • I haven't played all the way through either Battlefront game, myself, but here's my impression on this issue. Essentially, LEGO Star Wars depicts the overall story from the films, however there are several events that occur in LEGO Star Wars that clearly didn't happen in the films (Cutscene depicting Luke placing his hand on Leia's shoulder, then moving his arm, detatching his hand, only to have it bounce around the scene). In Battlefront, however, most of the events depicted are from battles that take place between (or before) the films. The purpose of these games is to allow you to take part in these battles. I would venture to say that, since every person playing these games can play through the levels differently, that actual gameplay elements would not be considered canon. However descriptions of the battles, the various cutscenes, and any other non-changeable information (provided it doesn't contradict the films), WOULD be considered canon. Of course you could ask this on the official site's message boards, but I'm guessing any VIP's answer would be very similar to this. -- 69.213.252.254 00:15, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I dont think it is because at the battle of hoth the rebles wernt destroyed. 

        Why do so many wookiepedians hate Star Wars Battlefront 2? Obiwan3000 00:38, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't. 

                     I know! Battlefront 2 is cool! I own it. I wouldn't have bought if I didn't like it.Obiwan3000 22:38, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Survivor's Quest?

What's the basis for having this be there? Kuralyov 21:22, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Removing the copyvio text again

For the reasons given above by various people last year. —Silly Dan (talk) 12:21, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

The Fifth Battle of tatooine

How could The Fifth Battle of Tatooine be in the Journal of the 501st, but not appear in Battlefront II? I say it can't , so someone needs to remove it! Etan O'Hara 14:59, 7 December 2008

maybe it was outside of battlefront two?--75.60.181.121 18:19, February 13, 2010 (UTC)