This page is an archive of the discussion of an article. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's current talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
Contents
Off-topic discussion
Yesssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss!!!! -- Riffsyphon1024 03:04, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- This had better be amazingly detailed. ;p VT-16 09:18, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- So we're getting this instead of the (totally conjectural) New Essential Guide to Planets and Moons? Nice. —Unsigned comment by StarNeptune (talk • contribs)
- Yeah, one or the other was the idea. This is better because it can still detail planets, but show them on regional sections of the map that are canon. Of course, this title is totally conjectural as well unless Jason Fry said it by name. -- Riffsyphon1024 05:13, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
- This better have a good map.--The All-knowing Sith'ari 21:58, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
- I think the map was the first thing on their minds. But they need to add about 50 more closeups plus detailed stats on many more planets, moons, stars, black holes, galactic disturbances, other galaxies, etc. -- Riffsyphon1024 03:24, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- I'm hoping for a detailed map of Roon. It would also be cool if they snuck in Andowyne on the overall map. Adamwankenobi 03:33, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- Then that would only make their April Fool's joke canonical and that can only go so far. -- Riffsyphon1024 03:35, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- I know it would. :D Adamwankenobi 03:37, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- Then that would only make their April Fool's joke canonical and that can only go so far. -- Riffsyphon1024 03:35, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- I'm hoping for a detailed map of Roon. It would also be cool if they snuck in Andowyne on the overall map. Adamwankenobi 03:33, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- I think the map was the first thing on their minds. But they need to add about 50 more closeups plus detailed stats on many more planets, moons, stars, black holes, galactic disturbances, other galaxies, etc. -- Riffsyphon1024 03:24, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- This better have a good map.--The All-knowing Sith'ari 21:58, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, one or the other was the idea. This is better because it can still detail planets, but show them on regional sections of the map that are canon. Of course, this title is totally conjectural as well unless Jason Fry said it by name. -- Riffsyphon1024 05:13, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
- So we're getting this instead of the (totally conjectural) New Essential Guide to Planets and Moons? Nice. —Unsigned comment by StarNeptune (talk • contribs)
- Say, there's some locations from What's The Story that would be great to include in this book http://media.ign.com/boardfaces/54.gif --Azizlight 03:42, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- Like Bal'demnic Aziz? -- Riffsyphon1024 03:45, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- Bal'what? No idea what you're talking about. And if you were to mention a certain river and a certain village on a certain forest moon, again, you've totally lost me :-) --Azizlight 03:53, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- Bright Tree Village. Hah... -- Riffsyphon1024 03:56, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- Oh man, if there was a good map of Endor in this book... :-D -- Ozzel 03:57, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- (agrees with Ozzel) Adamwankenobi 03:58, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- You're right. There isn't. -- Riffsyphon1024 03:59, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- (agrees with Ozzel) Adamwankenobi 03:58, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- Oh man, if there was a good map of Endor in this book... :-D -- Ozzel 03:57, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- Bright Tree Village. Hah... -- Riffsyphon1024 03:56, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- Bal'what? No idea what you're talking about. And if you were to mention a certain river and a certain village on a certain forest moon, again, you've totally lost me :-) --Azizlight 03:53, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- Like Bal'demnic Aziz? -- Riffsyphon1024 03:45, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
One thing I'm hoping for with the map is a departure from the idea that the "far half" of the Galaxy (as it appears on all the other maps to date) is mostly the Unknown Regions, on the far side of the Galaxy from Wild Space. I mean, with 25,000 years of hyperspace exploration, they can't still have one third of the galaxy unmapped. ... Unless, of course, there's some weird hyperspace disruption effect that's keeping the "far side" of the Galaxy unexplored. - 206.74.236.80 07:39, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- As much as it completley sucks, I think they'll perpetuate that stupid idea. It's pretty much canon[Redacted by administration] :( Melda 09:08, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- Nothing wrong with a hyperspace disturbance at the edge of the Galaxy. -- Riffsyphon1024 05:58, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Lemme put in another cheer for the idea of this book. ;P I'd love if they would actually stick every planet mentioned in the books on one giant map... Planets like Serenno, Melida/Daan, etc etc that have had tons mentioned about them, but barely have a general location, let alone pictures or maps. - Indy Gold 04:15, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
- They may be better off giving us a 9200x9200 wallpaper for something like that. And I'm sure people would still be complaining about missing planets.... DAWUSS 00:15, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
- That would be sweet, and Adam is right, I am happy that it will be the source to replace the NEGPM, so it better have it all. And if they don't mean to put planetary information down as I'd have hoped, people can still access us for the details, but I hope they do more closeups. -- Riffsyphon1024 05:58, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
I am hoping for a big poster that has all the planets in the Star Wars galaxy, that I could hang up in my room. —Unsigned comment by 777rak (talk • contribs)
- I am terrified. Utterly terrified. - Graestan 01:05, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- Only getting better!! More placements! -- Riffsyphon1024 05:17, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Atrivis sector
Is it time to put merge tags on Atravis sector and Atrivis sector? On the one hand, it's not technically canon if it's not published yet; on the other hand, AFAIK listing them separately is kind of a speculative inference too, as we didn't make separate articles for Myrkr and Myrkyr.
I don't know what the actual Wookieepedia policy on unpublished material is, but Sissk is one article that treats an unpublished statement as canon. --Andrew Nagy 18:03, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
- I would say no. As I pointed out in the tfn thread, the Star Wars Encyclopedia has separate entries for the two places, which are placed immediately next to each other. Therefore, it's not treated as just a spelling mistake in that canonical source. The Atlas has a long way to go before being published. --Eyrezer 21:41, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Yoda's Stories
Jason has said that the planets from Yoda Stories may be added. Should it be included in the article (considering its a game with questionable canon) or does this article have enough stuff as it is? Zakor1138 02:48, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
Salutations
when i saw this i totally freaked...OHHHHH YEAAAAAAHHHHHH BABY!and please nobody complain if they miss ONE (or two) planets...this book seems to be the best thing to ever happen since the essential chronology --User:Yow66
July???
Nooooooooooooooo!!! How much longer for this to release? -- Riffsyphon1024 10:57, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
Move
Should the article be moved to STAR WARS: THE ESSENTIAL ATLAS? It's what Dan Wallace called it on his blog. Oyam5000 02:47, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
- I just looked it up on Amazon.com and it's called Star Wars: The Essential Atlas. The ISBN number is 0345477642. -- Reignfire (Holotranceiver) 03:01, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
- It's at the correct name now. -- Riffsyphon1024 06:45, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
- I've moved the page back to "The Essential Atlas" in according with all of our other "Essential Guide" articles, without "Star Wars" in the title. I think it makes the most sense. Feel free to discuss here. Toprawa and Ralltiir 15:08, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
- Every book that ever comes out is called "Star Wars: TITLE." All of our articles could just as easily be under "Star Wars" something. Toprawa and Ralltiir 15:12, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
- I've moved the page back to "The Essential Atlas" in according with all of our other "Essential Guide" articles, without "Star Wars" in the title. I think it makes the most sense. Feel free to discuss here. Toprawa and Ralltiir 15:08, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
- It's at the correct name now. -- Riffsyphon1024 06:45, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
grammar
"Canonical names will be provided for planets whose existence could previously only have been preferred from genitives. " Shouldn't this read "inferred"?JustinGann 20:12, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
- Yep, it should. --Eyrezer 23:18, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
In-Universe
Will this be like the New Essential Chronology and Jedi vs. Sith? As in, will the book be told from an in-universe perspective, with the book being published in-universe as well? Taral, Dark Lord of the Sith 22:11, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- There's no real explicit mention of it, but yes, it is treated as an in-universe book, with interviews and transcripts and everything.TIEPilot051999 00:42, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
Release date
There's a new release date, August 18, just check Amazon entry. Should we change the inf? ShaakTi1138 18:43, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
- This is just becoming ridiculous now, though Jason did say there was some last minute changes needed. That attention to detail however will make it the best reference guide. -- Riffsyphon1024 07:49, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
- I saw the book at Comic-Con. Picked it up and leafed through it. Won't be long now! Tony Knightcrawer 11:11, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
EU pictures?
- What's going on? All the pictures I've already seen from the Atlas are characters from the EU? What do they have to do with the Atlas? --Sompeetalay 20:37, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
- Not only is the Atlas just a series of maps, but Wallace indicated there would be some galactic history included as well. -- Riffsyphon1024 23:31, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
- And because it seems fans on boards with people who got the ComiCon advance copies are much more interested in character pictures than, you know, the maps that actually are the reason the book exists. A few maps HAVE been posted, though; you can see some of them here. jSarek 23:42, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
- The big question is, and I've asked Dan himself this, are we allowed to post this material before the actual publication date? -- Riffsyphon1024 23:44, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
- Wow, those maps seem a lot more promising than those stupid EU-heads. That's what the Atlas is all about! Hmmm ... Dan is a great guy. I'm sure he'll let you know. But it isn't our 'fault' that the book was released at Comic-Con. They shouldn't have released it if they wanted to avoid scanned pictures. I know, I'm just a jealous guy ... ;) --Sompeetalay 13:52, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
- The big question is, and I've asked Dan himself this, are we allowed to post this material before the actual publication date? -- Riffsyphon1024 23:44, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
- And because it seems fans on boards with people who got the ComiCon advance copies are much more interested in character pictures than, you know, the maps that actually are the reason the book exists. A few maps HAVE been posted, though; you can see some of them here. jSarek 23:42, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
- Not only is the Atlas just a series of maps, but Wallace indicated there would be some galactic history included as well. -- Riffsyphon1024 23:31, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
Hapes Cluster
It's totally amazing. We got about 30 new planet articles, many obscure ones were given location, the Hapes Cluster now has it's proper astrography map - and it's all from just one sneak-peak page. Imagine what'll happen when one of us gets the whole Atlas. I'm thinking about starting a sect dedicated solely to worshipping Wallace and Fry. MauserComlink 14:39, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
- I got a copy of this at the San Diego Comic-Con signed by Wallace and Fry. I've been fixing some errors in miscellaneous articles. Barringer 19:53, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
- What is really cool is that those 30 are not creations by Dan and Jason, but are based on prexisting terms in Star Wars. For examples of what I mean, see the "new" planets Wodan, Chosper, Zalori, and Nantuker. --Eyrezer 22:02, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
- Superb!! What about planets from the Droid Cartoons and Clone Wars? Does it have a lot of info on the CS? --Sompeetalay 10:16, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
- What is really cool is that those 30 are not creations by Dan and Jason, but are based on prexisting terms in Star Wars. For examples of what I mean, see the "new" planets Wodan, Chosper, Zalori, and Nantuker. --Eyrezer 22:02, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Page 186 - 9. Into The Deep
Uh... anyone notice anything off about this image? It's the scene where Luke and Leia are watching the Falcon fly away at the end of ESB, but it's different. It shows a nebula instead of the galaxy. I have the VHS and DVD versions of the film and maybe I'm being silly, but I don't remember this at all. I just checked the DVD version to be sure, and it does not show any nebula. Why would anyone take the time to modify that frame? Anyone think LucasFilm might be messing with the films again? Personally, I find the view of the galaxy to be much more stunning... Tony Knightcrawer 12:05, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
- It's a famous production still that had been around from at least 1980 and was replicated in so many official sources no one can even recount tham all. Nothing to worry about. MauserComlink 12:54, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
- Well that would clear up any ideas that it was the galaxy from outside the plane though the rendezvous point is beyond most planets in the Outer Rim or Wild Space. -- Riffsyphon1024 00:22, 28 August 2009 (UTC)