Talk: Star Wars: Episode IX The Rise of Skywalker

Back to page
Wiki-shrinkable

This is the talk page for the article "Star Wars: Episode IX The Rise of Skywalker."

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.

No Carrie

According to this Carrie won't be in Episode 9 --Lewisr (talk) 22:48, April 14, 2017 (UTC)

Actually she will be in the movie and probably Leia will die in the movie just like Chewbacca --Scarlet2435

Scarlet2435, keep in mind that was from April 2017, before TLJ even came out in theaters. It is old, as the cast list confirms she will be in the movie. Magitroopa (talk) 18:11, August 31, 2018 (UTC)

Latest edits

The widespread media coverage makes me think the Trevorrow thing is important to this article, but it is too early for a critical reception section, so I put it in with development. Adamwankenobi (talk) 19:15, June 17, 2017 (UTC)

Trevorrow in inforbox

Unlike Lord and Miller, Trevorrow hasn't actually directed any of the film, so in light of the recent announcement, I don't think he should be credited under "director." Adamwankenobi (talk) 22:30, September 5, 2017 (UTC)

  • I would suggest hearing others opinion first before removing it, for me it should stay there for people looking who was the director first. Like historical information (I think that's overreacting, but I don't remember the correct word), especially since he was confirmed as one--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 02:19, September 6, 2017 (UTC)
    • I'm not sure it needs to stay in the infobox, but as long as its mentioned in the main body somewhere that seems fine. --Lewisr (talk) 02:22, September 6, 2017 (UTC)
      • I think this came up with the departure of Michael Kenneth Williams of how to address this kind of situations for example keeping pages, etc. Something I know is that people tend to see more infoboxes than main body for me it doesn't looks bad keeping it there, but if you guys think it should be removed from there go ahead then.--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 02:29, September 6, 2017 (UTC)
        • Well we can keep the page or just redirect it to the Episode IX page --Lewisr (talk) 02:32, September 6, 2017 (UTC)
          • Also I should note that Trevorrow has only been officially let go as director; As far as we know his writing contributions are still being used. Adamwankenobi (talk) 20:30, September 6, 2017 (UTC)
            • Until we know otherwise we should keep him still there as you say --Lewisr (talk) 20:32, September 6, 2017 (UTC)
              • As per this JJ and Chris Terrio are writing so looks like Colin is out full stop --Lewisr (talk) 14:37, September 12, 2017 (UTC)
                • Lord and Miller's work will still be featured to some extent in Solo, which is why they are still credited on the infobox. Trevorrow's work has been entirely discarded, therefore he should have no mention in the infobox. His involvement should be discussed in the article.
                  • Provide the source indicating that all his work was discarded.--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 02:54, March 23, 2018 (UTC)

edit/revert

i just tried to revert a questionable edit, & i think Lewisr was reverting at the same time; i only see Lewisr in the history, so i hope my simultaneous edit didn't throw a spanner in the works!

P.S. to 84.60.138.32: Someone died in Ep IV but the actor came back for Ep V and VI. Someone died in Ep II but the character was cloned in Ep III.

--71.121.143.180 20:43, December 15, 2017 (UTC)

Hamill on the Cast List

In light of the ending of Last Jedi, should Mark Hamill be removed from the cast list of this film until we have concrete confirmation? I understand Hamill tweeted that he'd be in the film, but that may have just been to avoid viewers guessing his fate prior to seeing the movie? Maybe it would be better to remove him from the cast list for the time being until we have official confirmation? --UmbraWitchAlraune (talk) 05:33, December 20, 2017 (UTC)

  • I think we should remove it because that tweet is not confirmation that he's in Episode IX. Hamill is a self-admitted troll when it comes to Star Wars information. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 05:49, December 20, 2017 (UTC)
i agree that the tweet is not confirmation of Mark/Luke being in Ep IX, and the cast list should not include him until someone official says something that unquestionably confirms Mark being in it... but if we delete him from the list, i bet swarms of eager, well-meaning editors are going to keep using that tweet as a reason to put him back.
As for what happened in The Last Jedi... like i told 84.60.138.32, someone died in Ep IV but the actor came back for Ep V and VI. Someone died in Ep II but the character was cloned in Ep III. i forgot to mention the possibility of flashbacks and/or Force visions/illusions, and i didn't even know about Dobbu Scay when i posted on this page before. i wouldn't assume a little thing like a character's death (there is no death; there is the Force) would keep any actor from being in subsequent films.
--71.121.143.218 06:15, December 25, 2017 (UTC)

Mark Hamill is going to be in Episode IX probably as Ghost Luke that appears before Rey and I don't think his name should be taken off the cast list. And I hope the the movie ends on a dark cliffhanger and the series ends forever when the First Order becomes they official rulers of the Galaxy and only Poe survives out of all the main characters. Since nobody likes Star Wars movies anymore, that seems very fair. From Scarlet2435 11:09, August 31st, 2018

Again, Scarlet2435, this is a discussion from December 2017, before the official cast list was announced. Magitroopa (talk) 18:12, August 31, 2018 (UTC)

I know that, I also just wanted to tell how I think Star Wars: Episode IX should end as a true Star Wars fan so Disney does not have to ruin it anymore.—Unsigned comment by Scarlet2435 (talk • contribs)

  • Please note the talkheader at the top of the page: Talk pages are for discussion on how to improve the article, not for chatting about the subject. — DigiFluid(Whine here) 18:16, August 31, 2018 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I'm new here on the wiki and I got to get used to how things are on here and I was only chatting up a storm on here was because I couldn't find the comments for any pages and when I saw the tab Talk, I thought it was like a chat room. Again I'm sorry.—Unsigned comment by Scarlet2435 (talk • contribs)

Matt Smith says he's not in it

What do we make of this? Since it's never been officially confirmed that he's in the film, should we remove him from the article? Adamwankenobi (talk) 22:13, March 8, 2019 (UTC)

No Spoiling Until the title is Revealed and before the Premiere(Images and Characters OK)

All fandoms of the Star Wars Community do not bring major spoiler of the plot of the movie for obtaining revelation of the story, you can also not revealing clear details of the rumored Mcguffin in all social media. We can afford for the news, images of vehicles, characters, planets and also the official poster for add the page for the Episode IX.—Unsigned comment by Giancarlo Vasquez (talk • contribs)

Should we add the 111M trailer views?, also note that these are organic views according to Deadline

Box office

Tone is similar to a promotional feature. The projections of the highest box office score along with a lack of mention of any counter-projections of a potential box office bomb and other language lacks neutrality in the article. —Unsigned comment by Buddydog262 (talk • contribs)

  • Okay but if you can provide these kind of sources then go ahead and add them in --Lewisr (talk) 22:52, August 1, 2019 (UTC)

add Resurgent-class Star Destroyer

i saw a part of a Resurgent-class Star Destroyer in the final trailer can i please add this ship in vehicle appearance? i the source and everything (Mrjosh1994 (talk) 22:50, October 23, 2019 (UTC))

  • What time does it show up at? - Cwedin(talk) 22:56, October 23, 2019 (UTC)
  • That's what I'm looking for--Vitus InfinitusTalk 00:04, October 24, 2019 (UTC)
    • Try Fathead and amazon(Mrjosh1994 (talk) 00:09, October 24, 2019 (UTC))
      • do they look anything like [1] and this [2](Mrjosh1994 (talk) 02:09, October 24, 2019 (UTC))
        • No, I found a cropped image of the poster but I want to look for the full poster and its source. Either way, the vessel in that scene of the trailer does not look like a Resurgent, and if it was it's still too difficult to say for certain. There's no rush on this, if we get further confirmation for anything we'll add it.--Vitus InfinitusTalk 13:39, October 24, 2019 (UTC)
          • i think know were i can find the source for the resurgent class star destroyer in star wars 9 in the empire magazine show kylo ren and a bunch of stormtrooper being blown away by some force in a hanger maybe that hanger is a resurgent class star destroyer hanger(Mrjosh1994 (talk) 22:38, October 24, 2019 (UTC))
            • But we don't know for sure that it's the hangar of a Resurgent class. Fan26 (Talk) 22:42, October 24, 2019 (UTC)

-i have seen the latest tv spots is the resurgent class star destroyer heen in one of those spots?(Mrjosh1994 (talk) 03:39, November 24, 2019 (UTC))

  • the star wars ix read d 3d poster is out and it's has Resurgent-class Star Destroyers that mean they going to be in star wars 9 is it all right if i add it and the AAL-1971/9.1 Troop Transport tha i saw in the Official International Trailer please?(Mrjosh1994 (talk) 20:18, November 29, 2019 (UTC))
    • If you source it to an actual source, then yes. Either way, there's no rush to add appearances, if nothing official confirms it until the release date then it'll be just added afterwards. Zed42 (talk) 20:22, November 29, 2019 (UTC)
      • i added the resurgent class star destroyer and the AAL-1971/9.1 Troop Transport to the appearance app and i know the note references are i just dont know how to add them right can you help please?(Mrjosh1994 (talk) 01:57, November 30, 2019 (UTC))

add Upsilon-class command shuttle

since we saw the Upsilon-class command shuttle in the international poster can we add to the appearance app?(Mrjosh1994 (talk) 01:13, November 24, 2019 (UTC))

  • As long as you add the source yes --Lewisr (talk) 01:16, November 24, 2019 (UTC)
    • ok where did the international poster come from? (Mrjosh1994 (talk) 01:36, November 24, 2019 (UTC))
      • I'm not completely sure, best to check some articles online which you can source or look at the source on the image uploaded on here --Lewisr (talk) 01:49, November 24, 2019 (UTC)
  • have and any notes and referances i can use? (Mrjosh1994 (talk) 02:14, November 24, 2019 (UTC))
    • Try this image --Lewisr (talk) 02:18, November 24, 2019 (UTC)
      • so try IMPAwards.com (Mrjosh1994 (talk) 02:20, November 24, 2019 (UTC))
      • I guess but it doesn't really say where the image is from, so using a news article may be a safer option --Lewisr (talk) 02:23, November 24, 2019 (UTC)

(Rover paul (talk)) only have more week two wait now and finally all the speculation and theories will be over with(Rover paul (talk) 03:56, December 14, 2019 (UTC))

Snoke's voice

Is there a particular reason we're not listing Snoke's vocal appearance in the appearances section but we are Vader's? I know the exact actors haven't been confirmed, but it's obviously as much Snoke as the following voice is Vader's, and it seems strange it was allowed to remain until somebody put James Earl Jones and Andy Serkis in the cast section. Giftheck (talk) 16:12, December 14, 2019 (UTC)

Blockade

Please tell me the last edition made is not part of a spoiler. --Eduardo (discusión) 06:55, December 17, 2019 (UTC)

Chewbacca Medal

Are we going to mention how Chewbacca got a medal twice once from the Private Ceremony on Yavin 4 and now here on Ajan Kloss he get's another Medal?--Dogsteeves (talk) 19:25, December 20, 2019 (UTC)

  • That's not why he's given the medal. Leia holds that medal during the movie and Maz gives it to him as the last thing Leia hold, but even if it was another medal there's no need to say he got it twice. They're two different wars.--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 21:44, December 20, 2019 (UTC)
    • Per the Visual Dictionary, that was Han's medal from Yavin. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 01:33, December 21, 2019 (UTC)

Bibliography section

Someone accidentally messed up the scrollbox for the "Bibliography" section. --Rakhsh (talk) 19:54, December 26, 2019 (UTC)

New Ships

According to [3], a few ships like Blue Ace, Jarek Yeager’s racer, and the Fireball, appear in the film. Totechalienrexstar (talk) 16:41, January 27, 2020 (UTC)

More detail on Treverrow's version and should we acknowledge the plot leak for the JJ's version??

Now that we have direct acknowledgment of the leaked script and concept art within the article via Treverrow's confirmation in the references, perhaps it would be prudent to go into more detail about what the version of the film would have been (in much the same way that earlier versions of Lucas' films have received similar coverage), perhaps even creating a dedicated section to it under "development". At the very least, adding some of the concept art to the article would give a visual idea of what the film was originally meant to look like before events went down as they did, in much the same way that the lava-filled version of the Emperor's Throne Room is featured in the behind the scenes section of that article.

At the moment, that section of the article is very barren. We have a title (Duel of the Fates), acknowledgment of Treverrow's involvement and brief reporting on how Carrie's passing conflicted with the story they had. While those are certainly important to cover, I think now that we have the concept art and the script, we should be covering any details uncovered in those as well, as they are very much part of the film's history, even if they didn't end up being part of the version that was eventually produced.

Obviously, I'm not suggesting to go into any rumor or speculation surrounding Treverrow's departure or any unsubstantiated drama. All I am really suggesting is that we document the facts we now have concerning what the story would have been in order to present a more complete picture of the film's history.

As an aside, the full story for JJ's version of leaked several months ahead of time, including deleted scenes that were later also confirmed to be real (the Oracle being the main example). I don't know if it would be feasible to mention that in the article as well (even if they are completely accurate to what the film would end up being, I'm not sure if the Google Doc and Reddit Post would classify as a valid source under policy), but I thought I might as well bring it up, as we do now have confirmation via the film itself that the leaks surrounding the plot were legitimate (Rey Skywalker, Han appearing to Ben, the Wayfinder and the dagger, the training flashback, Palpatine force lightnining the fleet and specific names of characters, locations and concepts such as "Boolio" "Pasana" "Exegol" and "The Dyad" are but a handful of examples of details that simply couldn't have been wild guesses from the marketing at the time).

Much like the Treverrow version, I'm not suggesting that we go into speculation surrounding why these leaks happened, only to acknowledge the simple fact that they did indeed happen for the purpose of historical accuracy, and providing links to the leaked summaries for archival purposes. CannonProductions (talk) 02:54, April 20, 2020 (UTC)

  • Be bold. That's a long speech, but nobody blocking anyone from improving the article in that regard, as long as it follow proper attribution/sourcing. --NanoLuukeCloning facility 09:18, April 20, 2020 (UTC)
    • Hmm, I did attempt to begin expanding the article, but the edit was almost immediately reverted. It had proper citations, so I'm not entirely sure why it was knocked back. Any insight on this would be greatly appreciated.CannonProductions (talk) 03:10, April 23, 2020 (UTC)

Kaz, Torra, Yeager

Currently we don't list Kazuda Xiono, Torra Doza, or Jarek Yeager as appearing in the film or participating in the Battle of Exegol, despite the fact that their racers are present in the film. It is a very small assumption to make that the pilots who regularly flew these ships in Star Wars Resistance are still flying them by the time of the film. They were included in the film as references to the show, with the intent of implying that Kaz and company continued to fight with the Resistance. It is a larger jump in logic to assume that the starships are being flown by unknown characters rather than the Colossus group themselves. RattsT (talk) 05:21, May 8, 2020 (UTC)

  • Not stating anything explicit when you're not sure isn't making an assumption, it's common sense. "When in doubt, [say] nothing." No assumption at all is better than a "very small" one. --Lelal Mekha The Uprising crest (Audience Room) 07:02, May 8, 2020 (UTC)
    • I understand, but the authorial intent is to imply that they are there. If they did not intend for the characters to be at Exegol, they would not have included the ships in the film. And we make small assumptions when the intent is clear. When Rafa Martez says that she met a Jedi with "dark robes" and "light green skin," she could be talking about anyone, but obviously the writer intends her to mean Luminara Unduli, and so we list her in the Appearances of "Dangerous Debt." This is also common sense, and these ships should be no different. RattsT (talk) 02:47, May 9, 2020 (UTC)
      • I completely agree with Lelal. Also, on a side note, I think the "Dangerous Debt" example is speculation, too. That Jedi could've been Barriss Offee or upwards of 10,000 other individuals. "Authorial intent" isn't always obvious. - Cwedin(talk) 03:03, May 9, 2020 (UTC)
        • Why not just note it in the Bts until we get confirmation? MasterCommerce GuildFredcerique 03:23, May 9, 2020 (UTC)

In Darth Vader 1 a bounty hunter appears wearing green Mandalorian armor. Their name is not mentioned, their face is not seen, and since it's a comic their voice is not heard. There is no indication who it is. Yet, we know that Boba Fett is underneath the armor, because who else would it be? That armor could be worn by literally anybody, but when we see a bounty hunter dress and act like Boba Fett in a certain time period, we know this is Boba Fett. So when we see very specific ships fighting with the Resistance, ships owned by people for whom it would be in-character to fight the First Order at this specific time, we can assume that those pilots are Kaz, Torra, and Yeager instead of unknown characters. If no one else agrees, however, I'll resign to include this in the BTS. RattsT (talk) 03:27, May 9, 2020 (UTC)

  • Not the same, we don't know who is piloting the ship. Completely different situation. The Dangerous Debt situation is also speculation.--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 03:31, May 9, 2020 (UTC)
    • We also don't know who wears the armor from the evidence provided solely in that issue, but we're not going to remove Boba from it's Appearances. I hope I'm not being combative in continuing to argue this, but I believe the intent of including the ships in the film is the creators' way of including the characters. RattsT (talk) 03:57, May 9, 2020 (UTC)
      • There's a big difference between a ship and a character. If you have problems with Boba Fett and his armor you're more than welcome to rise your concerns either in Boba Fett's talk page or a Senate Hall thread, since you're moving the topic from one thing to another. --DarthRuiz30 (talk) 04:07, May 9, 2020 (UTC)
        • I was using Boba as what I see as a similar comparison, but it's clear that's not a valid argument. I disagree on this, but I'll concede that I'm in the minority and let it go. RattsT (talk) 04:15, May 9, 2020 (UTC)

Byline at the top of the page

So, TFA's byline is a Snoke quote (There has been an awakening, have you felt it?), TLJ's byline is a Snoke quote (Darkness rises/light to meet it). Just a suggestion for consistency, but perhaps TROS' byline should be a Palpatine quote. Perhaps "Your coming together is your undoing." DoctorAphra (talk) 03:13, August 1, 2020 (UTC)

  • Or maybe "This will be the final word in the story of rebellion (or Skywalker)." DoctorAphra (talk) 03:15, August 1, 2020 (UTC)

Duel of the Fates deserving it's own page

I think there should be a page for Duel of the Fates- there used to be one (Star Wars Episode IX: Duel of the Fates), but it was deleted. I personally think it should be undeleted. It's a very notable piece of star wars history, and a very differint draft to TroS. if pages like Star Wars: Episode I The Beginning and The Empire Strikes Back second draft exist, this page should 100% exist. BearInsanity (talk) 05:20, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

  • At the time of its deletion, it had no sources/attribution suitable of the referencing or attribution policies. It's also worth noting that the "notability" of something for the sake of Wookieepedia is defined by the notability policy. We also just don't cover leaks, as site policy; really, just what Lucasfilm authorized. The two drafts you linked have several licensed reference works pointing to it that were either made or officially acknowledged by Lucasfilm, and that makes a big difference. The media coverage of Duel of the Fates also doesn't really quantify for the purposes of Wookieepedia, as we don't take that sort of coverage into account; it's not official, usually, unless there is indeed Lucasfilm comments being reported on. At present, Wookieepedia's coverage of it is limited to TROS's main page due to lack of information released in Lucasfilm-sanctioned sources such as the TROS artbook. If remade, it has to meet the sourcing, attribution, and notability requirements necessary for any article; if someone does find that evidence, they can; it's just not been easily found by any Wookieepedia editor thus far in a way that meets site requirements. The prior version of the page—the deleted page, I might add—was a mere few sentences long, with no references or links to sourceable material of any kind, so it's really not like we lost much deleting it in that form and it met the qualifications for deletion as well (which still apply here).—spookywillowwtalk 05:32, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
    • That's fair. Well, i hope one day official lucasfilm sources talk about it so we can make an article on it. BearInsanity (talk) 05:34, 17 December 2024 (UTC)