Talk: Alliance to Restore the Republic/Legends

Article milestones Date Process Result September 21, 2006 Featured article nomination Failure October 31, 2006 Failed Featured article nominee
Current status: Failed Featured article nominee

Force Sensitives in the RA previous to Episode V

Reading over the article and questioning a line at the end of "A New Hope" paragraph:

"they [The Rebel Alliance] gained their only loyal member with training in the use of the Force and the skills of the purged Jedi Knights."

Wouldn't Rahm Kota qualify as atleast one Jedi who is still alive as of 0 BBY/1 ABY? Because I would like to change the sentance so it incorporates him and Luke. Kenzo V 23:27, February 7, 2010 (UTC)

Image weirdness

I uploaded the symbol of the Alliance just as it is on Wikipedia; same name, same image. When I look at this article, I still see the Missing Image message. I've cleared my cache and restarted my browser and everything, but it still won't show up. If I come to the article via the Rebel redirect, I see the image. If, while viewing "Rebel Alliance", I click on the edit link, then I see the image in the preview. But looking at the article itself without following a redirect I still can't see the image. Anyone have a clue what's going on? -- Aidje 13:21, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• It works now. So weird. I guess I just need more patience. -- Aidje 13:22, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Do we know what the symbol is supposed to repersent? IF yes, such a reference should be included here 62.74.50.200 21:28, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)
  • A "terrestrial" explanation would be that it represents a phoenix rising from the ashes of the fallen Galactic Republic. Surely there is an IU equivalent, but I do not know if it has ever been named. --SparqMan 20:18, 13 Oct 2005 (UTC)
    • Well, knowing how some Earthly animals have been called "Space (animal name)", we could always say it is a "Space Pheonix" or "(some planet name) Pheonix". Cmdr. J. Nebulax 20:20, 13 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Hey, the "Remember Alderaan" poster is in our alphabet. Why not in Aurabesh? Just a thought. Θ 20:25, 30 Nov 2005 (UTC)

• Whoever made it obviously didn't care. Plus, someone from Earth made it, not someone in the Alliance. Admiral J. Nebulax 20:27, 30 Nov 2005 (UTC)

I see. Where is the image from anyways? Θ 02:11, 1 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• I've seen it on a fan site once, but I don't know whether it's fan art or not. Admiral J. Nebulax 21:23, 1 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Its from a RPG sourcrbook... like the Empire Propaganda Poster and the CSA Propaganda Poster. Cant remember if it was the galactic campaign guide or the Hero's guide Razzy1319 03:09, 2 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• CSA? Don't you mean "CIS"? Admiral J. Nebulax 20:59, 2 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Corporate Sector Authority propaganda poster, so is the Empire Propaganda poster --Razzy1319 21:48, 25 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • Oops. Admiral J. Nebulax 22:33, 25 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Padmé Amidala

While Padmé Amidala was an outspoken opponent to Palpatine, and a sympathetic ally to Mon Mothma and Bail Organa, I have not seen a source that indicates she was directly involved in the foundation of the formal Alliance that was created by Mon Mothma, Organa and Garm Bel Iblis with the Corellian Treaty. What sources say otherwise? --SparqMan 23:42, 17 Aug 2005 (UTC)

• She was part of the Delegation of 2000 (which contained Organa and Mothma, but not Bel Iblis), which was the Alliance forerunner, but not the actual Alliance itself. Her databank entry on the OS site should explain this further. QuentinGeorge 05:55, 18 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Acturally, Garm Bel Iblis was part of the Delegation of 2000. -- SFH 21:21, 11 Oct 2005 (UTC)

• What about the Deleted Scenes on the ROTS dvd? I thought those were pretty clear. GMo

Who Created It?

If it wasn't Bail and it wasn't Mon than who created The Alliance? Dylankidwell 01:23, 17 Sep 2005 (UTC)

• Well, really, Bail Organa, Mon Mothma, and Garm Bel Iblis were the founders of the Alliance. There were other Senators that also helped in the formation of the Rebel Alliance, but those three are the key founders. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 12:41, 17 Sep 2005 (UTC)
• I read somewhere, that in theory, that Amidala was the de facto founder of the Alliance. But if the canonicity lies with the Corellian Treaty, I'm willing to go with that. Θ 20:29, 30 Nov 2005 (UTC)
  • Well, that idea is completely wrong. Amidala wasn't even a member of the Alliance. Admiral J. Nebulax 20:55, 30 Nov 2005 (UTC)
    • Regardless, she helped form it. Finis Valorum, was infact the man considered to be the de facto founder of the Republic.
      • No, she did not. She had nothing to do with the Rebel Allaince itself. Admiral J. Nebulax 13:23, 16 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • How can Valorum be considered the founder of the Republic? He was alive a thousand or more years after the foundation, so by your argument, it still doesn't work...

• I believe mention should be made now that the TFU narration has been released about how the formal alliance was precipitated by an Imperial plot to expose enemies of the Empire. The events are shown, but not the genesis of those events. The TFU graphic novel makes it appear that the formalization of the rebellion came about because of that botched scheme. Medleystudios72 20:59, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Members?

I see a 'members' section on Alliance of Free Planets, but not here. Do we have any clear member planets/systems to add to such a section? Or at least planets with a Rebel presence/internal conflict. VT-16 15:33, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• I don't think a planet with a Rebel presence counts. Admiral J. Nebulax 19:43, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• Most planets that declared support for the Alliance (and even some that were simply suspected of doing so) usually got an Imperial Star Destroyer in orbit. Said ISD usually blasted the populace back to the stone age. Thus, only a few planets actually declared support openly. So it would be a relatively small number. -- SFH 19:51, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • True. Admiral J. Nebulax 19:55, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Ralltiir, Gerrard V, Mon Calamari, Abridon, Averam, Alderaan, Virgillia, Togoria, etc. Many former CIS worlds joined the Alliance. Anyway, by the time of the Battle of Yavin, the Rebels could challene the Empire in open conflict -SWF Shouldn't Romm and Delantine be added? Certainly Delantine, as it had an Alliance Governor76.182.247.74 23:57, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Should Sullust and Virgillia 7 be on the list of Alliance worlds? They were members of the Alliance of Free Planets, but I'm not sure whether or not they were actually controlled by the Alliance to Restore the Republic before that.--DKS MaXoO (talk) 17:48, March 7, 2014 (UTC)

Alliance redirect

Alliance redirects here. Should we turn Alliance into a disambig page for the other Alliance's, such as the Galactic Alliance, the Alliance of Free Planets, and the Corporate Alliance? -- SFH 19:02, 11 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• I think so. Alliance is too broad a word to be limited to one article. --AdmThrawn 19:05, 11 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • Agreed. Admiral J. Nebulax 19:12, 11 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Name?

Why insisting on naming it Alliance to Restore the Republic and not Rebel Alliance?
Almost everybody refers to it like that and it is also the name used in the databank. --UVnet 15:22, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

• Alliance to Restore the Republic is the offical name of the Rebel Alliance. Admiral J. Nebulax 21:18, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
  • What source specifically first used the term "Alliance to Restore the Republic"??? As far as I know, it has been called the "Rebel Alliance" since the beginning in 1977. What source specifically makes this new title any more "official" than the old one we have been using without any problems or confusion for decades??? -- Frank V Bonura 16:32, October 19, 2009 (UTC)
  • I was wondering about this, too. I only remember it ever being referred to as the Rebel Alliance. Where is it first referred to as the "Alliance to Restore the Republic"? -- Caswin 18:04, April 17, 2010 (UTC)

• • The title was used in the old "New Hope" novelization. Princess Leia uses the title in her message to Ben Kenobi. However (obviously) the movie's version overwrites the novel's version of the message, so the canonicity is debatable.

67.41.67.192 19:48, March 16, 2013 (UTC)

Major Edit

I have been adding a great deal of information to this page, namely under the history and government sections. It is a shame that such an important article is so short and lacking in detail. Lets all try to pitch in and fix this article! :-) AdmiralNick22 18:03, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

• Well, this isn't the only article, then. Galactic Federation of Free Alliances still needs a lot of work, too. Admiral J. Nebulax ^(talk) 19:37, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
  • And we are working on it. :-) AdmiralNick22 22:11, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
    • Thank God. Admiral J. Nebulax ^(talk) 00:15, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Also, why was it reverted when I changed it

• Because it screwed up everything. Admiral J. Nebulax ^(talk) 00:31, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Oh. I was still working on it, you did it pretty quickly -SWF

• I can tell you right away, it screwed up just about everything. The text box, the article itself... Admiral J. Nebulax ^(talk) 13:05, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

size?

any good estimates or sources on the alliance's size at it's height before endor? any breakdown on numbers regarding infantry, crew, pilots, ect and the size and breakdown of the fleet?

Featured article

Who here thinks this is featured article material? Jacen Solo^{(Request Audience )}

• I disagree, I think it needs more content... it just seems like there's something missing...Sanzerai 18:26, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

First Battle Won

In the opening scrawl of Ep. IV, it said that the Alliance just won its first major victory, what was it? —Unsigned comment by 70.232.32.221 (talk • contribs)

• I think it meant that they had captured the Death Star plans, rather than winnig a specific battle. See timeline of the Galactic Civil War, especially Operation Skyhook. Chack Jadson 13:15, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

New Plympto

• On the New Plympto page, it says the Empire controlled the planet. Yet, here it says the Alliance did. Which is it? Chack Jadson 13:15, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
  • I guess no one knows. Chack Jadson 20:34, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Dantooine?

• how do we know Dantooine was a real Rebel Base? GMo
• "Our scout ships have reached Dantooine. They found the remains of a Rebel base, but they estimate that it has been deserted for some time." - Lord Hydronium 23:28, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Expansion...

I think this article is somewhat sparse compared to, say, the Galactic Empire article. It only really says what happened to the Alliance in the films and little besides that. Unit 8311 12:49, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Loss of Hoth section

Somebody please clean it up. It talks about Lando joining before it mentions the loss of Han, and it fails to mention that Lando 'betrayed' Han. It also starts talking about "the fleet at Vergesso Astroids" abruptly thereafter. Everything up to this point in the article is good (I haven't read beyond this section yet), but this section needs revision and greater clarity, because if I didn't already know what they were talking about, I'd be pretty confused.129.107.81.12 16:17, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

image colour

the colour is red not blue from dark forces and many other sorces —Unsigned comment by Ryal (talk • contribs).

• Sources like, you know, them movies.--MaGnUs 02:36, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Name

Its called the Rebel Alliance who said its called the Alliance to Restore the Galactic Republic? WHO? WHO?(Gabriel Mckain 07:11, 27 September 2008 (UTC))

• Um, the StarWars.com Databank, for one. -- I need a name (Complain here) 10:50, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Um, the actual title of the SW Databank article is Rebel Alliance. And that term is used repeatedly throughout the article. This "long form" name (Alliance to Restore the Republic) does appear in the article and is suggested as the "formal" name, but it's clearly not the common name. It's never called that in the films, and indeed "Rebel Alliance" is the only thing, other than "Rebellion", that it's ever called. I'd challenge you to find examples in the EU of it being called this. Think about it. It couldn't have been the Alliance to Restore the Republic until after the completion of Episode III. The Rebel Alliance of the original trilogy isn't ever shown to be trying to restore the old order—just to get rid of the current regime. Remember, the old order wasn't that popular anyway; that's the whole reason Palpatine was able to use perfectly ordinary politics to bring it down—not the brute use of the Dark SIde.

Indeed, I think the SW Databank article uses the ARGR name when talking about what the founders of the Rebellion might have formally called themselves. DId Mon Mothma and Bail Organa want to Restore the GR? Sure, cause they were huge beneficiaries of it. But as they moved forward and to get help from all peoples opposed to the Empire, it really just became the more general Rebel Alliance. In other words, I think that the Alliance to Restore and the Rebel Alliance are in fact two different things, one having grown out of the other.

Should this article make note of this quite new LucasFilm appellation? Of course. But should this article take on board this new name, when it has virtually no presence in any canon to this point? No.

This article's name should be changed to Rebel Alliance, simply on the basis of the general Wiki guideline that articles should have the most commonly recognized name, anyway.CzechOut ☎ | ✍ 00:16, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

• I agree Alexsau1991 09:15, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
  • "Quite new Lucasfilm appellation"? Hardly. This goes back a LONG way in Expanded Universe sources, at least as far as the Heir to the Empire Sourcebook in 1992, and probably further; and it has had a regular presence in works since then, from the Dark Empire Sourcebook (1993) to A Guide to the Star Wars Universe (Second Edition) (1994) to The Far Orbit Project (1998) to The Essential Chronology (2000) to the Rebellion Era Sourcebook (2001) to the Databank entry you've already discovered - and that's by no means exhaustive. Make no mistake, this term has both deep and wide roots, and it was always used as a more formal synonym for the Rebel Alliance. jSarek 13:39, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
    • I believe it actually originated in the Star Wars novelization in 1976. -- AdmirableAckbar ^(Talk) 13:53, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
      • I don't suppose you have a chapter and page number? -- Frank V Bonura 16:36, October 19, 2009 (UTC)
        • Chapter V, Page 75 of my '83 edition. It goes back even further, to Lucas' fourth draft of the script. Leia mentions it in her holo-message to Kenobi. Dangerdan97 06:56, November 6, 2009 (UTC)
          • Aaaand? Isn't it called "Rebel Alliance" or "Rebellion" in any other source than those you all listed here? And isn't the whole case again one of these "it is not called like all the spare-time-star-wars-fans think, only we star-wars-nerds(-and-we-are-proud-to-call-us-so) know the real name"-thing, like Jabba the Hutt's name is not Jabba the Hutt and Admiral Thrawn's name is not Admiral Thrawn? Don't you think it is totally dumb if you type in "Rebel Alliance" because you search for the Rebel Alliance, and the first thing you see is in principle saying "Hey you thickie, it is not called the Rebel Alliance!"? Please just think about that a moment.--ThanksForReadingMyName--91.33.31.58 20:35, September 28, 2010 (UTC)
            • You should give up. This Wiki decided a long time ago that where something has a formal name and a common name, the formal name is the one we use for article titles. I argued many years ago agains the Jabba Desilijic Tiure (for Jabba the Hutt) and Mith'rhawhiogdio'dioiefildj'dd thing (for Thrawn), and was soundly defeated by the majority of other users. I've made peace with the decision, and I don't think your histrionics are going to get people to change their minds anytime soon. ~ SavageBob 21:13, September 28, 2010 (UTC)

Eh? What? Come Again?

Didn't Marek go to Cloud City to find Kota???--JuiceStain Rock on! 20:53, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

• Yes, but another version of the game (for the PSP, PS2, and Wii) has Marek find Kota on Nar Shaddaa. I think we're going with the book on this issue (which would mean Cloud City). Grand Moff Tranner ^(Comlink) 20:55, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Why?

Why did we redirect Rebel Marksman and turn it into this one article?----Supersonicman

Rahm Kota's mention..

Shouldn't Kota be mentioned on the section of member of the Alliance? all the members of the Alliance are there, but Kota [one of the founders and the man who gave the initial army to the Alliance] is missing, we could just add him "Rahm Kota - Jedi General (founder)" or something like that... - Dayo Okat. —Unsigned comment by 189.89.68.236 (talk • contribs)

Holo memorial

"A holo memorial honored Rebel pilots who were killed during the Battle of Hoth."

This is, unfortunately, untruth. It's a picture from "Biggs Darklighter, Hero of the Rebellion" and it show's pilots who died during the attack on first Death Star. It is a backroom that the actions pans too from the medal giving ceremony at the end of "New Hope". Something like three years before the destruction of Echo base.

Just for the record.

godai

Alliance Logo Color

The Rebel Alliance's logo is red, not blue. This has been confirmed in the movies and several other sources. As a sidenote, a simple Google search of "Rebel Alliance" turns up several images of the Alliance logo. 99% of them are red, while there are a couple blue ones thrown in every few pages. It's pretty obvious that the red logo is official. I request that the logo be changed to reflect true movie canon. Iteachvader (talk) 23:44, March 3, 2013 (UTC)

They used both colors. 174.111.248.121 23:48, March 3, 2013 (UTC)

I admit. That may be true, but the official logo most widely used is red. Iteachvader (talk) 23:49, March 3, 2013 (UTC)

The red logo may be used the most, but I don't think we should use a entirely new picture.174.111.248.121 23:53, March 3, 2013 (UTC)

Is it really an entirely new picture? It's just a recolor, exact same image. Nothing much changed except recognizability, which will be improved. Iteachvader (talk) 23:55, March 3, 2013 (UTC)

I guess, but you might want to ask a admin or somebody, just to get it approved. You also may want to have red AND blue. 174.111.248.121 23:57, March 3, 2013 (UTC)

• Whichever kind of images Google has to offer is not the way we should be handling the question. We should look at sources. And I can tell you that all West End Games RPG guide had the "official" Alliance Starbird blue. --LelalMekha (talk) 00:01, March 4, 2013 (UTC)

Well, a good source would be the movies themselves, for one. Another good source is the Star Wars games produced by LucasArts. The X-wing Series, the Rogue Squadron series and several others. I don't know a thing about West End Games, but I'm certain that LucasArts is as close to official as we can get. Iteachvader (talk) 00:04, March 4, 2013 (UTC)

• The fact that you see red starbirds in the movies doesn't necessarily mean it's the most official or "default" form of that crest. It could be a common variation for all we know. We do have, however, sources that mention the blue starbird explicitely. See Heir to the Empire Sourcebook page 11: "The blue crest of the Alliance to Restore the Republic, which was taken from the seal of the Old Republic, was the closest thing to an identifying symbol for the Rebellion." Also, the Star Wars Miniatures Battles Companion clearly shows the default starbird as blue on page 54. Clear cut statements trump assumptions, even when those assumptions are based on observation of the highest canon. --LelalMekha (talk) 00:14, March 4, 2013 (UTC)

• • Anyway, which of the two colors dominates in the movies really depends on what you observe. See that picture from Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back? Five blue crests, one red crest. Fundamentally, the abundancy of a color against the other is irrelevant. What really counts is knowing whether one is more official from an in-universe point of view or not. While I know of no source that mentions the official starbird as red, I just cited some of them clearly stating that the Alliance's crest is blue by default. This doesn't exclude the possibility that, on a daily basis, the Rebels favored the red one. But if you're going to write an article on a foreign country, you're going to use the official flag, even if a slightly different one is used more commonly. This is why the article is called "Alliance to Restore the Republic" and not "Rebel Alliance." While the latter is much more common and well-known in the fandom, the former is the most official name. --LelalMekha (talk) 00:57, March 4, 2013 (UTC)
    • I have a question though? Forgive me if wrong but isn't the official flag have the red crest. I see the flag all over the internet and don't know if it came from reliable source so ya...--TheBatman121 (talk) 05:44, November 23, 2017 (UTC)

Lucas's Vesion

"George Lucas's alternate explanation of the for the roots of the Rebel Alliance appeared in 'Star Wars: The Clone Wars' tv series fifth season in the episodes 'A War on Two Fronts,' ;Front Runners,' 'The Soft War,' and 'Tipping Points.'"

How so?

67.41.67.192 19:57, March 16, 2013 (UTC)

Apparently, it was meant to imply that the Galactic Republic inadvertently created the Rebel Alliance in the same way America inadvertently created al Qaida after driving the Soviets out of Afghanistan via the Mujahideen. We're probably going to need to update the info, though, as it's definitely outdated. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 20:08, March 16, 2013 (UTC)

But how could the Onderonian rebellion be the origin of the Rebel Alliance? That rebellion was formed to make Onderon independent from the Confederacy of Independent Systems, not to free the galaxy. The goal of the Confederacy (at least to it's people) was to overthrow the Galactic Republic, they had planets who willfully joined their cause out of desire to be free of the Republic which they viewed as corrupt, and in some ways they were right. Essentially the Onderon rebellion is just a rag tag group of rebels with few volunteers and equipment who just want to gain control of one planet, the CIS is a massive and well organized rebellion who have massive armies and powerful equipment with a desire of galactic conquest. How could Lucus think the smaller rebellion would be the predecessor to the Rebel Alliance, when the CIS who had many remnants after it was disbanded would be much more inclined to continue it's fight against the Republic, now the Galactic Empire. User:Godzillavkk August 20th, 9:38, 2013.

• In the video commentary on the blu-ray, they explain that the Onderon Rebellion established a well-trained and motivated planetary militia. Onderon was a test to see if such militias can help combat the CIS on other planets. Presumably, with Onderon's success, other militias were trained by GAR and Jedi advisors on other planets. Those many militias eventually evolved into the separate cells of Rebellion on individual planets. The Rebel Alliance constitutes an inter-planetary organization joining these separate militias into a single armed force eventually. This would explain some of where the Alliance was able to amass the personnel in great enough numbers to stand a chance against the Empire.

It is also discussed how the Onderon rebels have an emblem that resembles part of the crest used for the Rebel Alliance. Suggesting that the crest represented a melding of different militia emblems into one. 66.87.115.232 03:27, March 19, 2014 (UTC)

That doesn't make any sense. Why would Palpatine want to create so many militias in the CLone Wars that would eventually join the Rebel Alliance? Wouldn't most pro-Republic worlds in the Clone Wars be supportive of the Empire when it's founded and overtime start devolving into civil war between those loyal to the empire and those who start opposing it due to the Empire's tyranny? Those militias the GAR would have founded would most likely be absorbed into the Imperial Military and would fight for their new Empire against those who opposed who they fought for in the Clone Wars And wouldn't most former pro-CIS planets be strongly subjugated for opposing the government during the Clone Wars, it would make a lot more sense of that they have their own illegal militias and CIS remnants that would strike the Empire wherever and whenever they can. What I'm saying is that most Republic planets would be pro-imperial with some big names in their governments opposing it and eventually forming the Rebel Alliance while planets that succeeded to the CIS would fiercely oppose the Empire and would likely want to eventually band together to keep fighting the Republic, now the empire. I'd say groups like those would eventually found the Rebel Alliance, which they do according to The Force Unleashed. User:Godzillavkk June 4th, 7:11 AM, 2014.

Shouldn't the logo be red, instead of blue? 50.174.193.189 03:16, August 27, 2015 (UTC)

Terrorists?

The two sources in the BTS section are not sufficient enough evidence for the Rebel Alliance to be in the terrorist/anarchist category in canon AND legends.Titillated Tarkin (talk)

If George Lucas said they were terrorists, that's what they are ultimately, since his word is law, even regarding Disney (after all, this was the same guy who had a mere JOKE told on the Jon Stewart Show made into automatic highest-level canon purely because it was him who said it). And for what it's worth, even though I made those edits, I genuinely hated that George Lucas modeled the heroes after them, or that he made clear he knowingly modeled them after terrorists. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 01:25, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

• George Lucas is not the highest tier of canon anymore—he gave that up when he sold. Disney decided to use the visual media he was involved in as the baseline, but that was Disney’s choice. So we need to find sources besides BTS stuff for the main article parts. To be fair, if GL or any other relevant creator said that that is valid for BTS, and if some rebels are explicitly stated to use such tactics then those units should be noted as such.SaintSirNicholas (talk) 11:47, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Even if we were to somehow ignore Lucas in regards to Disney's current run, they still conducted actions that did qualify as terrorism going by Rogue One and even Aftermath (possibly also Star Wars Rebels due to their slaughter of a civilian mining guild for their fuel in the pilot episode). And that's not getting into stuff like Legends where, even ignoring word of god (ie, Lucas's own statements), we had stuff like Children of the Jedi where in Leia's flashback to the Liberation of Coruscant, the Rebels basically went all September Massacres/Red October on the Imperial Palace staff, even those explicitly innocent of the Empire's crimes. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 12:00, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Lucas also stated that there were other inspirations for the rebels. The "Viet-cong" inspiration was only ever stated to be for the Ewoks, and it's widely known that he made Star Wars as a direct result of not being able to obtain the Flash Gordon license, not as a protest of the Vietnam war. There are also quotes of him stating directly that the whole point of it included general rebellions throughout history, including the American revolution, as he points out that "We're (Americans) just a bunch of hay seeds in coonskin hats," referring to the guerilla tactics of the American revolutionaries. I think specific mention of this in the Behind the Scenes section should be included. There is no reason not to include it, other than pushing a very specific agenda.Kullkikk (talk) 16:38, 15 June 2023 (UTC)