WannaLeiaHey, Doc, I dig your username. It's much better than IthinkIwannaPadmé or IthinkIwannaGardulla. ;-) KEJ 17:41, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the support Kej. I was almost banned for a year because admin Sikon thought it fell under the obscenity clause! Glad he saw the light. Thanks again. IthinkIwannaLeia 17:37, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Scarl systemSome of the information you added to the Scarl system article has me concerned. You have written, "this was the first place Star Dreadnaught Executor traveled on a test run while still under construction. After the main hull was constructed in the Fondor Shipyards the Executor traveled to Scarl." Where, exactly, are you getting this information about a "test run" and traveling to the Scarl system after the hull was completed at Fondor? It's certainly not in the novel of comic. Toprawa and Ralltiir 00:35, 14 September 2008 (UTC) Response to ScarlThanks for the concern tobrawa and Ralltiir. The Scarl system was mentioned in the on page 11 of Star Wars: The Force Unleashed (comic). The comic made it seem like the Executor was actually constructed there. When I went to add this to the Executors webpage, I found that it someone had already wrote that it was constructed at Fondor. Presumably this can be backed up by source material from a previous work. I did not write it so I cannot say. I simply did my best to merge the two (possibly) contradicting origin stories. Since it is clear from the panels that major construction was going on, and it was far from complete, while it was in the Scarl system, it can be assumed that some work was done on Fondor and it was finished in Scarl, "away from prying eyes"--Force Unleashed loading screen quote. I have not read the force unleashed novel, so if there is any additional info or clarification please add it.
Further review of the executor articleI don't know if it was changed by me or someone else, but the current version of the page cleverly states that construction was started on Fondor (as stated by essential guide to vehicles) and finished in Scarl(as seen in the Unleashed comic). There is no original material. Everything meets standards. IthinkIwannaLeia 22:14, 18 September 2008 (UTC) Translating Sith BooksI would like to commend you on your tedious extraction of titles on Sith lore books from Legacy 27. I would have done the whole magnifying glass and Aurebesh reference myself but I saw that you had already taken the time to do this. You are becoming quite the Wookieepedian. Have a good day. -- Riffsyphon1024 09:05, 8 December 2008 (UTC) Riffsyphon Thanks for the compliments and noticing my efforts. Sorry I beat ya to it. Also, sorry it took so long for me to respond to you. Currently my only interest in the star wars galaxy is the comics and the cartoon (mild interest in that). As you have noticed, both of these are rapidly covered in articles here. Because of this, I have gotten away from regularly posting (don't have a lot of free time now). But, hopefully I'll get back into writing something every now and then. IthinkIwannaLeia 00:47, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Gun platform
Your reason of "is not a specific title and therefore cannot be the name of an article" is complete baseless. May I draw your attention to Category:Articles with conjectural titles. You're stating that is has similar asthetics to the IG-series droid indicates they were of the IGBC is completely based on your own opinion and therefore is Original Research, which is not permitted on Wookieepedia. - JMAS Hey, it's me! 01:58, 25 April 2009 (UTC) Thank you for refering me to the Articles with conjectural titles page. If anything, looking at that list, there is not a person, place, or thing that does not have an adjective or other modifier in front of it. For example, take a look at Ambrian bat, ambrian reptavian, Arkanian starfighter,Adarian ship, Aurra Sing's blockade runner, Azlyn Rae's starship, Azkul's mercenaries. All of these titles tell what the object in question is and is preceded by either the planet of origin, or its owner. The Arkanian starfighter is the example that most relates to our own. It never had a name mentioned in the source material. It simply came from that planet, and was presumably made by the Arkanian people. In the same way, the gun platform needs some descriptive term before it so that we know the article is talking about one type of gun platform in general. You would not entitle the arkanian ship's article, "ship" so you wouldn't call this article gun platform. Now you are correct that looking like IG-series is not important for the naming of the title (whether or not you can mention it in a behind the scenes, for instance, is another issue that I will take up elsewhere). The important fact for naming this particular article is that the "gun platforms" were located at Muunilist and that planet is owned and controlled by the Intergalactic Banking Clan. The same adjective (Arkanian) describes both being from the planet Arkania, and being created by Arkanians. Therefore their is no issue there. For the battle platforms, is it more useful to descibe them in terms of the planet, or the owners of the planet. Of this, I don't have an opinion. If you want to revert it back to "Muunilist Gun Platform" Or "InterGalactic Banking Clan Gun Platform" it is fine because it is conjecture anyway. Moral of the story is that I was wrong for my reasonings but right in my action. You would not have a article titled "starship" and expect it to be about one particular type of starship. In the same way, an article about gun platforms should simply be a description of what gun platforms are and maybe a list of ones we have seen. An article about specific Gun platforms orbiting around the IGBC controlled Muunilist needs to be named as such. The word conjecture, itself means to make logical conclusions from given data. This is NOT original work. IthinkIwannaLeia 09:14, 25 April 2009 (UTC) Your signatureI just wanted to make you aware that your signature is currently in violation of Wookieepedia's Sig policy, which states that a user's signature may only include "one font color." If you could please alter your sig to bring it in line with policy, we would appreciate it. Thanks. Toprawa and Ralltiir 17:23, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Re: DuelsI simply don't want to continue this argument; I understand your views, but I am not going to argue back with mine. CC7567 (talk) 20:30, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
CAN objectionsHey, ITIWL! Would you mind revisiting the comprehensive articles nomination page and striking your objection to the E-11 blaster pistol article? While your objection was well taken, it's not actionable at this time. When these blasters appear in the new MMO game, we can revisit the articles, but as of right now, they are comprehensive per our definitions. Thanks for your help! ~Savage |
