This is the talk page for the article "Aqualish/Legends."
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.
I'am 110 percent sure that this species appeared in the StarWars Bounty Hunter video game. please add this game to the Aqualish apperances... thanks.BobafettH23 02:59, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
Ualaq: three fingers or five?
According to the New Essential Guide to Alien Species, Ualaq have five fingers, but I believe every film appearance shows them with three. From what we know, I guess G-canon wins out. There is no evidence to support this, but I think it could be an abnormality. In real life, there are people who have three fingers due to birth defect. Anyway, should we mention this apparent inconsistency?--Lord OblivionSith holocron 04:45, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Arachnids
Where did this notion of Aqualish having aspects of walrus and spiders come from? Sochwa 00:44, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
From the databank entry (look under "external links.") —Silly Dan(talk) 01:40, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
And those are just comparative descriptors regarding their overall appearance, having little to do with the species' actual traits.Tocneppil 02:15, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
And that's how the article is worded - ". . . whose appearance combined aspects of arachnids and aquatic mammals." jSarek 02:16, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
4 eyes
I've never understood this: do we know why Lucas decided to give the prequel Aqualish 4 eyes? it was bad enough for there to be finned ones and fingered ones, why did he do something this strange and continuity-frustrating?Darth Ceratis 03:39, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
The 4 eyes makes them look cooler. George also changed the tusks (if you hadn't noticed) for the prequel. He may have done this to go with the tusks. Darth Shohet 21:16, June 18, 2008
Perhaps the prequel Aqualish were not meant to be Aqualish but some other a race. The real question to ask is, "when was the four-eyed variants first officially called "Aqualish"??? I'll wager the producer of the product-in-question saw parallels where there were none and misnamed them "Aqualish" because they simply looked similar and there is an annoying habit of linking things in the Expanded Universe that don't necessarily need to be linked. Thus instead of 3 different alien species, we are stuck with 3 very different variants of the same species. -- Frank V Bonura 13:18, September 1, 2009 (UTC)
Odd Resemblence?
This is really odd, and tell me if you agree. Ualaq faces look like Tusken Raider masks! Here are the two best pics on the site that work well as proof.
I agree and this supports my position these creatures may have been incorrectly named. Something is not right about this particular alien's classification. -- Frank V Bonura 13:20, September 1, 2009 (UTC)
Blood
Somewhere it should say that they have blue-green blood due to the hemocyanin (per Jedi Twilight 280) but I don't know where to put it since there's no Biology section. Paging anyone who has done a lot of work on this article and wants to add it...--Valin Kenobi 02:50, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Ponda Baba's severed arm.
Ponda Baba had red blood not blue-green blood when Obi-Wan Kenobi cut off his arm. The original source (STAR WARS 1977) and original reason we are all STAR WARS fans should take precedence over "Jedi Twilight 280". It might make much more sense to put this topic in the "Behind the Scenes" section and then describe it as a typo or mistake in "Jedi Twilight 280". Aqualish clearly have red blood. -- Frank V Bonura 13:30, September 1, 2009 (UTC)
Aqualish Species Category
Considering that the Aqualish and the Harch share a common ancestor (see the profile for Admiral Trench in The Essential Guide to Warfare), shouldn't they (the Aqualish) be added to the category of arachnoid sentient species? I don't necessarily mean that we remove the mammalian categorization, just add to it (although I would argue that, for the sake of clarity, the arachnoid categorization is more appropriate) --Null Raptor 23:32, April 6, 2012 (UTC)
It's possible a future source will make that designation as arachnoids, but so far none has. As such, to add it would be speculation, which we don't allow. Stay tuned, though. ~Savage 00:33, April 7, 2012 (UTC)
04:45, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
[[File:Tusken Raider2.jpg|100px]]
