Talk: Grievous/Legends

Article milestones Date Process Result October 12, 2005 Featured article nomination Failure January 8, 2006 Failed Featured article nominee March 9, 2006 Featured article nomination Success March 19, 2006 Featured article March 18, 2007 Featured article review Removed April 1, 2007 Former Featured article August 10, 2007 Featured article nomination Success October 21, 2007 Featured article by Chack Jadson May 18, 2008 Featured article review Kept June 28, 2008 Featured article February 28, 2010 Featured article review Removed April 25, 2010 Former Featured article

Current status: Former Featured article

Name

Shouldn't the page be titled with Grievous' original/true name? Grievous was just the name he gave himself later in life, but it wasn't his real birth name. --Mateo22 16:14, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

• The Manual of Style states that articles are named by the most commonly known one with later names preferred; so no. Nayayentalk 16:30, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

well then what about the death star? it's called DS-1 orbital batttle station. this should be his real name, and be redirected from grievous--70.253.77.133 19:22, February 7, 2010 (UTC)

• Please familiarize yourself with our Naming Policy - the article is named after the name he used at the latter period of his life. In the other case you mentioned, both DS-1 Orbital Battle Station and Death Star I were used simultaneously, but one name is more accurate than the other. Mauser^Comlink 19:26, February 7, 2010 (UTC)

Exactly, it's not common to think of "Greivous" and "Qymaen jai Sheelal" as same, as many doesn't know that it's one and the same, it's also smarter to use Greivous, as "Qymaen jai Sheelal" is a little hard to remember, I even used copy/paste to get it into these sentences, because of the difficulty. --H91 15:05, April 3, 2010 (UTC)

couldnt you just title the page that but redirect 'grievous'? i just noticed that we could do this because i typed in GENERAL grievous and it redirected it to just GRIEVOUS, so couldnt you just do the same but with his real name? 94.0.27.45 18:52, April 12, 2010 (UTC)

Is Visionaries canon?

On the Lair of Grievous' DVD commentary, Dave Filoni says that the Visionaries story regarding Grievous is not canon. And that's the reason for this new story about Grievous choosing to be like the way he is now. Will this affect the article? Alexrd 14:03, December 5, 2009 (UTC)

• His words are only true... from a certain point of view. Even though the Visionaries story itself may not be exactly accurate, the events surrounding the "creation" of Grievous were also described in a number of other sources, canonicity of which is without doubt. Also, note that while in Visionaries we see how Grievous is made a cyborg, in Lair of Grievous we only hear why it has happened. This would actually be pretty easy to retcon, just as "A young Jedi named Darth Vader... betrayed and murdered your father." Mauser^Comlink 14:16, December 5, 2009 (UTC)

Jedi killed by Grievous

Do we really need that list? It was deleted a long time ago... ShaakTi1138 15:34, December 28, 2009 (UTC)

• Lists are avoided here, especially when they have no proper significance and just look ugly. It's been removed. CC7567 ^(talk) 19:08, December 28, 2009 (UTC)
  • I disagree. I don't understand why you deleted the list of species and the list of planets, those made it easy to browse everything. Now you assume you know all of them so we can just look them up?--Mastergarrett9 18:24, February 3, 2010 (UTC)
    • Criticizing me won't solve the problem. If you can find a proper, non-list method of implementing the information, then you are very much welcome to do so. CC7567 ^(talk) 19:46, February 3, 2010 (UTC)
      • I disagree too. A list doesn't look ugly, it helps you browse the site better. Most of us come here to figure that sort of stuff out. Someone might not hear it and hear just the end of something (Cor in Rancor) and want to look at a list to figure it out. And I don't mean to criticize you. Eguy8 02:06, October 26, 2010 (UTC)
        • I agree with Eguy8 and Mastergarrett9. Lists are useful, and in my opinion, not ugly;a simple format that's easy to read (while providing valuable information) Korsa3 02:32, October 26, 2010 (UTC)
          • If there can be a list for Aurra Sing in her article then why can't there be one for Grievous?--Rune Haako 15:43, April 4, 2011 (UTC)
            • If you want to add one, why don't you? It's a good idea.Gen. Grievous1138 (talk) 20:14, June 2, 2014 (UTC)

Eeth Koth

It seems that Grievous was underestimated by Dooku. The count thought it a surprise that Grievous defeated a Jedi Master when he was under the impression he bested Kit Fisto. However, he seemed to best Eeth Koth with less effort (debatable, since he had droid assistance in both fights). Was this his first real Jedi Master (and a councilman, no less) victory, or were there others before Koth he eliminated? All of this would seem worthwhile to mention in the article, which currently describes him to not be too much of a match for a master at some points. I also don't find it necessary to mention that fans have argued he was beaten too easily by Kenobi. The obvious reason for his lesser fighting skills in Episode III was the fact that Mace Windu severely injured his primary pressure point (chest plating). --Mateo22 ^Contact 23:21, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Well, how should it be mentioned in the article? Eeth Koth is one of the only Jedi Masters to fall by Grievous' hand in combat. Yet, somewhere I read that Grievous was a match to all but a Jedi Master. Well?? --Mateo22 ^Contact 20:54, January 30, 2010 (UTC)

Fingers in Clone Wars

He had five fingers in Clone Wars for 'most' of the series? This would mean that he was suddenly given six fingers during the final chapters while he was chasing Palpatine. Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't he always have five fingers and then when he must split his arms into four, his middle finger splits in half? If I'm accurate on that, he would always have five finger when fighting with two hands. Should that be the case, that's an update for the article. --Mateo22 ^Contact 21:57, January 12, 2010 (UTC)

You are right from his introduction in Clone Wars he did have hands with five fingers. More interesting is that in The Clone Wars series he has four fingers. Then in the last chapters of Clone Wars and in Episode III he had six. My guess would be that he started with the five then switched to four; I say this because when they showed him with five fingers he only wielded three lightsaber. One in each hand and one held in one foot. He most likely had his arms switch so they could separate and those arms had four fingered hands. Then near the end of the war he may have switch again to the six finger version. I mean with four fingers on the hand and having it divide in half it would have to be two fingers and two thumbs. Which probably didn't help with gripping a lightsaber four fingers and two thumbs would give a better grip. --JMasterWor 23:37, February 20, 2010 (UTC)

• There's a little thing called artistic liscence. It pretty much means that even though the character model only has so many fingers, the creaters aren't saying thats how many fingers he has. --The Great and Grand Count Mall! 20:50, September 18, 2010 (UTC)

Grievous' Medical Droid

Should General Grievous' odd and suprisingly good relationship with his medical droid be mentioned under the personality and traits section of this page? --X859 01:10, March 3, 2010 (UTC)

Grievous killing Jedi

Should it be mentioned that, dispute the fact that 3 Jedi Masters and 2 Jedi Knights can't take or defeat Grievous, 1 Padawan can? Or is the new series not canon? (I hope it really isn't) —Unsigned comment by 70.64.21.162 (talk • contribs)

• It is canon, more so than other sources. And no, it shouldn't. Besides, Ahsoka doesn't "take or defeat" Grievous, she mostly just avoids his attacks and runs away.--Demos Traxen 03:47, April 8, 2010 (UTC)
  • She was defeated, but she mostly ran away from Grievous during that duel. For the article, that scene from Duel of the Droids is mentioned. However, as for the certain amount of Jedi can't take Grievous, but a Padawan can, that shouldn't be mentioned. It has no place in the article, other than speculation. JangFett ^(Talk) 04:46, April 8, 2010 (UTC)

Well, I appologize for upsetting anyone... Thought I'd ask, since is is discussion and not part of the article. From what I've seen of Ashoka, she is a Padawan who is just as, or more powerful then a lot of masters/knights in the whole of the mythos. She is just overpowered for her state of being, and has quite the connection to skywalker since she's never mentioned/factored into anything else. If they wanted strong female role models they has Tii, Unduli, Secura and Offee, and they probably would have been fine and since they are all Knight/Masters, the power that would be portayed would be more logical. :P —Unsigned comment by 70.64.6.147 (talk • contribs)

• Please take note of the {{Talkheader}} disclaimer policy; yes, this page is discussion, but it's for discussion relating to changes for the article, not analyzing canon per say. CC7567 ^(talk) 08:08, April 9, 2010 (UTC)

True killer of Sun Fac?

Is Grievous the true killer of Sun Fac? In Republic commando, right after Sun Fac's ship crashes, an unidentified ship that "doesn't look Geonosian" flies by. Could this necessarily mean that Grievous killed Fac for whatever motives he had?Xx19FallenFromGracexx 20:37, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

• No, 'cause Sev sniped it and you can watch him do it. VhettSkirata Mando'ade 20:52, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

number of lightsabers

In clone wars, he weilded three lightsabers, one in each hand, one in a foot. Since he could slipt his arms into four, isn't it possible that he could have weilded FIVE lightsabrs at a time? or did he use different feet later on. it doesn't look like his feet in the movie are jointed, but they ARE magnetic. magnetically holding a lightsaber?66.42.173.161 17:30, May 12, 2010 (UTC)

Greivous Fan Film

There is a Fan film of general grievous which is set to be released in fall 2010. It has the most notable battle of Hypori. -Zephspacer-

• That's not really relevant to Wookieepedia, at all. --Imperialles 17:49, May 12, 2010 (UTC)

Weak and injured?

I'm not a hundred percent sure if I'm correct on this or not but was Grievous really still weak and injured fighting Kenobi on Utapau? For one, he never had his smoker's cough after Obi-Wan arrived and I was pretty sure the novelization stated that he had had adequate time to repair himself. Plus, Obi-Wan has beaten him in lightsaber combat a many time before. Grievous just isn't able to penetrate Obi-Wan master of the Soresu defense. -HeartoftheForce

No, it was just Obi-Wan's "cheap" ability to use the force that killed Grievous. I say cheap because Grievous is my favorite character in the entire Star Wars universe, so therefore I don't like Obi-Wan for that. ZombiezuRFER 14:25, July 22, 2010 (UTC)

Anakins lightsaber?

I was watching ROTS and when he fought Obi Wan on Utapau, one of his lightsabers looked exactly like Anakins. —Unsigned comment by 24.119.216.131 (talk • contribs)

• They probably just reused the CGI model. --The Great and Grand Count Mall! 20:51, September 18, 2010 (UTC)
• But he had kenobi's lightsaber too and the colors were switched AND Grevious says something about taking kenobi's lightsaber he says "Not THIS TIME"--Darth Bal 18:34, June 22, 2011 (UTC)

As stated in the fingers paragraph, this is called "Artists' licence" and whatever said/shown can be untrue.--98.237.191.70 23:10, January 7, 2017 (UTC)

First Meeting?

Grievous mentions that he looks forward to meeting Ventress in the the new clone wars episode ARC Troopers, and Starwars.com says it's their first time meeting. So does that mean they just forgot about fighting one another in Rogue's Gallery? --Gideon Stryker 20:53, Sept 19, 2010 (UTC)

well, two people trying to kill each other hardly constitutes a meeting. the events beforehand in rouges gallery were more of a training exercise, and would not constitute a proper meeting. so really it all comes down to interpretation of the word "meeting" Swordsquirrel 20:12, November 5, 2010 (UTC)

Also the entire duel in Rogue's Gallery is in the Dark.--Rune Haako 08:36, March 30, 2011 (UTC)

Yet another discrepancy

I was nitpicking through the "Heroes on both sides" episode of The Clone Wars series, and I noticed Ahsoka, when asked how many non-droid Separatists she has met, replies as following: "Well, aside from military officers like Ventress and Grievous, none, I guess." This conflicts existing canon fact that Jedi were unaware that Grievous was a cyborg and not a droid. This had to be added to to the Behind the scenes. CC4361 22:28, December 2, 2010 (UTC)

• But Jedi were aware that he's a cyborg. For example, Yoda said in the Labyrinth of Evil: More machine than alive, Grievous is—though more dangerous for it. There is no need to change that. ShaakTi1138 08:20, December 5, 2010 (UTC)
• Interesting, I swear I read or heard somewhere they thought he was just a really advanced droid... Ah well, I can't source because I can't remember, so okay, no change. EDIT: I remembered it was something like clones calling him "head clanker" and the article deducted the rest from that.CC4361 17:10, December 5, 2010 (UTC)

Yet another SW/CW contradiction

I was recently watching Revenge of the Sith, Grivious says, to Anakin, "I was expecting someone with your reputation to be a bit... taller.", implying that he had never even seen Anakin before. Yet Anakin duels Grivious all of the time, in CW. -Rexpup 22:32, May 18, 2011 (UTC)

• No, he does not. If you're referring to any Lego sources, those are all non-canon. Any information about those may be in the bts section of the article. JangFett ^(Talk) 22:37, May 18, 2011 (UTC)
  • Yes, he does. It's in Episode III Revenge of the Sith. -Rexpup 00:58, May 19, 2011 (UTC)
    • He never does duel him one of the few things the writers of TWC cared about that was in preexistent canon GTQ^(Problems?) 01:11, May 19, 2011 (UTC)
      • I agree with rexpup It dosent make sense. In the Star Wars The Clone Wars he at least see's grevious and I'm almost sure he fought him--Darth Bal 18:41, June 22, 2011 (UTC)
        • No, Anakin has only seen Grievous in holograms. Nothing more in The Clone Wars.--Tetsu Aero 19:34, June 22, 2011 (UTC)
          • All of you above, please take a look at the {{Talkheader}} template at the top of this page. Talk pages are not forums, but places to discuss changes to the article. Yes, we all know TCW contradicts canon; it's nothing new. Thank you for your cooperation, JangFett ^(Talk) 19:54, June 22, 2011 (UTC)

Shouldn't this article be called Qymaen jal Sheelal? That was Grievous's original name. --Darkjedi55 22:20, February 10, 2012 (UTC)

Lightsabers

Can someone please verify for me which Jedi lightsabers Grievous uses in his battle against Obi-Wan in Revenge of the Sith?KitFisto19BBY 20:53, March 3, 2012 (UTC)

• This is a question for a discussion forum... not here. Gethralkin^Hyperwave 05:41, March 8, 2012 (UTC)

Ambiguous physical data

We all know Grievous is a cyborg. We also know he wasn't always a cyborg. What I'm worried about is that his physical specs undoubtedly changed after he became a cyborg. With this in mind, why does the article only have one set of physical specs? Not only is there information withheld, but we don't know whether the shows specs pertained to before or after his cyborg reconstruction. Would someone provide information about his physical data before and/or after Grievous became a cyborg and add it to Grievous' data table? Bryanstein (talk) 02:38, November 3, 2012 (UTC)

I think of their relationship as pretend-friendly adversary, what do you think? --Olivetho (talk) 15:40, November 19, 2015 (UTC)

Cleanup

I'm gonna be taking this page on as a project for WP:TCW. If you would like to give me a hand in cleaning this page up, the following items need to be accomplished:

-Biography needs to be updated per the sources listed on the page itself

-Personality and Traits needs expansion

-Sourcing

-General grammatical fixes

Gen. Grievous1138 (LOTR Mod Wiki Admin) ^comlink 11:29, September 23, 2016 (UTC)