Talk: Inquisitorius

Change location

I think this page should redirect to The Inquisitor, rather than Inquisitorius. Jak Himself (talk) 03:15, August 3, 2014 (UTC)

Imperial Inquisitor

Should this page be moved to "Imperial Inquisitor?" Cevan (talk) 16:21, June 25, 2015 (UTC)

• A redirect currently exist on that page, linking it to Inquisitorius. I set up a delete tag on that page so we can move this one over. However, we will need to switch everything that currently links to Imperial Inquisitor so that when the move happens, Legends isn't linking to the canon version. - AV-6R7^{Crew Pit} 16:24, June 25, 2015 (UTC)
  • We shouldn't move this page based on a preview from a book that's not out yet. Sometimes people here are too eager to move a page the moment a new name can be found. Let's hold off at least until we see the final version of the book, if not until Season Two starts. Be patient—there's no reason to move this now. - Brandon Rhea^(talk) 16:59, June 25, 2015 (UTC)
    • Inquisitors are identified as "Imperial Inquisitors" in Lords of the Sith, not just Star Wars: Absolutely Everything You Need to Know. Cevan (talk) 17:01, June 25, 2015 (UTC)
      • I think that is enough evidence to make the move. - AV-6R7^{Crew Pit} 17:10, June 25, 2015 (UTC)
        • Unless canon source material uniformly (or predominantly) refers to the subject as "Imperial Inquisitor," there's no reason to move the article. To reiterate what Brandon said, let's wait until Season Two comes out, with all of its accompanying source material, before making any drastic changes. Patience is a virtue. CC7567 ^(talk) 18:32, June 25, 2015 (UTC)
          • Then I propose this. We don't move the page, but we change Imperial Inquisitor to redirect here, since they have been called that in canon. As far as I can tell, Imperial Inquisitor is never used in Legends. - AV-6R7^{Crew Pit} 18:39, June 25, 2015 (UTC)

Inquisitorius Infobox

Should we make an Infobox for the Inquisitor characters seeing how it has been revealed that there is a group of them? --Kyle03 (talk) 19:28, December 29, 2015 (UTC)

• Given that the Inquisitorius is part of the hierarchy of the Galactic Empire, I don't think so.--Rakhsh (talk) 19:44, December 29, 2015 (UTC)
  • You could say that about Palpatine and Vader though. They are both Sith so they have Sith infoboxes but they are part of the Galactic Empire too so why shouldn't the Inquisitorius have their own Infobox like the Jedi and the Sith do. Technically, we could have all of the Jedi have the Galactic Republic Infobox. --Kyle03 (talk) 18:46, January 2, 2016 (UTC)
    • The Sith rule the Empire, but the Sith and the Empire are ultimately two separate organizations. Sidious and Vader get Sith infobox colors because they are Sith first, Imperials second. Unlike them, the Inquisitorius is not separate; it's part of the Empire. - Brandon Rhea^(talk) 18:49, January 2, 2016 (UTC)

Inquisitorius

So in the whole article, nothing mentions where the term Inquisitorius comes from. Since it is not a real word from what i have tried to research. May i ask where it came from? Otherwise i suggest this page is moved to Inquisitor. --Tetsu Aero (talk) 14:46, April 9, 2016 (UTC)

• As the article suggests, it was first identified as Inquisitorius in Seventh Sister Inquisitor in the Databank (backup link) AnilSerifoglu (talk) 23:52, April 9, 2016 (UTC)

2.3 Expansion/rewrite

An unidentified Inquisitor is mentioned in Star Wars: Uprising. They should be added.

agreed

Extinct?

What is the source for the inquisitors being gone by the battle of yavin? Indrid (talk) 09:47, November 20, 2019 (UTC)

• The first Star Wars movie.

Jaewade (talk) 10:47, November 20, 2019 (UTC)

• • that seems a stretch. Indrid (talk) 11:48, November 20, 2019 (UTC)
    • Not really... All the Inquisitors are former Jedi, so if Vader is "all that remains" of the Jedi religion then the Inquisitors cannot exist at this time. Tarkin is fully aware of the Inquisitors and works closely with them during the early rebellion. - Xanderen 12:55, November 20, 2019 (UTC)

All of them died before the Battle of Scarif. A source: Star Wars: The Dark Side. Stam (comlink) 15:39, November 20, 2019 (UTC)

Canonicity?

Why is there a template stating the canonicity of this article is in question? The Inquisitors appear in several objectively full Disney Canon sources and media. Is it referring to a specific source, and if so, which one?DFaceG (talk) 07:03, January 28, 2020 (UTC)

• Is disputing the canonicity of FFG sourcebooks.--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 07:10, January 28, 2020 (UTC)

18 BBY ??

the timeline of its foundation says it's 18 BBY, however this says 19 BBY;

https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Darth_Vader:_Dark_Lord_of_the_Sith_6

I changed it to 19 BBY but someone changed it back --Marco 1907 (talk) 15:59, May 18, 2020 (UTC)

A list of the members?

I realize very well that because they are a subset of the Galactic Empire, but the membership is so extremely limited that i feel its personally perfectly fine to make a list of the membership, and to leave a note in that same area that there may be more because it was kept top secret. I myself came directly to the page to find such a list to be able to read what little we know of each Brother and Sister, only to find I had to scrutinize the page to find their names. I dunno, it just seems more... encyclopedic?-- Hunnybear7 (talk) 08:32, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

• Seems like a good idea to me. Perhaps it could be a “Members” section? EthSch13 (talk) 11:00, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
• A "Members" section (or similar) would work, but it should not be just a simple bullet list. There are several Featured articles with sections dedicated to Members (like Anti-Terrorism Unit#Notable members) that can serve as example. 1358 ^(Talk) 11:04, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
• Well, that might be a bit redundant, because we already explain in chronological order, what the various inquisitors did. Maybe a table, with a picture, and when they served as an Inquisitor? Jarhead002 (talk) 20:05, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
  • Not necessarily. I view the members sections as a way to explain how each member would fit into the unit (group dynamic if I was to find a phrase to sum that up). Braha'tok enthusiast ^{Hello there} 09:02, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
• YES! We need a "Members" section. I hate that the page does not included it. It confuses me. Jpercy 2 (talk) 3:20, 27 June, 2022 (UTC)

I have attempted to make a list of members in the past because I also find it incredibly tedious to scroll through paragraphs of text to find all the members, like I am trying to find needles in a haystack. However both times it was removed by long time member and rollback Lewisr for being "speculative" and "unnecessary".

A list of members of an organization would not make the page much longer, it would make the page slightly more appealing by disrupting the giant wall of text and it would make life easier for anyone wanting to see who the members are. A wiki is meant to be clear and easy to go through for the fans and making a list of members is only beneficial. I am tired of having to check which brother and sister is or isn't an inquisitors and then scouring the wiki for the three unidentified inquisitors. I have resorted to using the Inquisitor lightsaber page as a list of inquisitors because on that page my list was not removed. If the problem is the list is just bullet points then I can make a slightly longer list with individual sections, but I fear my effort will be removed again. CrimsonDawn55 (talk) 10:17, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

• I concur—there's no reason to gate the list from inclusion just because a massive group like the empire itself isn't warranting of a list of members. Especially when considering that their names are often only known as 'number brother/sister', it becomes very difficult to actually place the members without a list. The point of a wiki is to provide easier access to information: Why are we making people hunt for it? GermanTacoss (talk) 06:44, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

A list would only help confused fans. Not making a list is just negligent. I put this together: (This is a proof of concept not a 100% fully finished list!)

---

[Administration: See CrimsonDawn55's userpage for proof of concept]

---

I had to make this list on my own userpage, where I can look whenever I want to look up a list of inquisitors. This list makes this talk page longer, but I just wanted to showcase it since this is what the discussion revolves around. (If testing page formats isn't allowed on this talk page, please delete only the list I've made and not my entire message.) I would just edit the page itself, but it would get removed again. Could we make a proper vote so the rollbacks don't think I'm some lone vandal who's adding unnecessary information? I would hate for the work I did to just be deleted. CrimsonDawn55 (talk) 14:33, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

• That was the sort of thing that ecks mentioned above as being acceptable using the example he provided above Anti-Terrorism Unit#Notable members. I would suggest to remove the bullet points and instead format it like the provided example Lewisr (talk) 15:05, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
• Also please note that the use of {{clear}} is not allowed on mainspace articles, so that should be removed when/if it is placed on the actual article. VergenceScatter (talk) 15:57, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback! I modified the list to your example (hope it's correct). I removed the Clear template. I used it because there wasn't enough text and without the Clear template some images fell lower and the format became messed up. Does it look better now? I am admittedly bad at textwriting, so I hope someone could flesh it out more. I would really like this to work, but it would suck if it fails because I'm bad at writing sentences. (Also I know there's code errors, I don't know how to show this list without also including them. Please don't delte just because it's a work in progress)CrimsonDawn55 (talk) 15:14, 8 July 2022 (UTC)