Talk: JSarek/Archive7

< User talk:JSarek

OOU Layout Guide

Hey, jSarek,

I'm wondering if I can get your advice on something. I've given a lot of thought to the OOU layout guide and have really come around to the idea of putting the plot summary first. I want to re-propose it with the suggested changes, but I was wondering if you could give me your thoughts on the following order:

  1. Plot summary
  2. Conception
  3. Production
  4. Main characters

The reason I advocate putting "Main characters" after the development info is that I always give the character profiles a leading OOU paragraph that draws heavily on info already established in Conception and Production. The OOU layout guide, as I've written in the proposal, explicitly suggests doing this: "A character profile should be written in-universe in the present tense, but a leading out-of-universe paragraph giving background information on the character is optional." See here and here for examples. Like, in Agents of Chaos, Han Solo's character profile mentions James Luceno and Brian Daley, and I would hate for that to be the first time they're mentioned in the entire article, and for them and their friendship and Daley's death to require heavy context.

I bring this before you because you mentioned that you thought that both "Plot Summary" and "Main characters" should come before the development info in your vote. Buuuuuut, what do you think about putting "Main characters" after the development info? As it will draw on info already established in the previous three sections, I think that having it as the fourth section is best, but I was wondering if I could get your opinion. Definitely let me know! Thanks, and cheers. Menkooroo 02:51, March 2, 2011 (UTC)

  • Thanks for the input! And no worries about taking a little bit of time to respond; I completely understand business (busy-ness?) and limited availability. I kinda had a gut feeling that plot summary and characters should stick together too, but I also think that the leading OOU paragraph is a very useful addition to the "Main characters" section, necessitating its placement after the development info. Thanks again for the advice, and have a not-too-stressful next few months. Cheers! Menkooroo 14:25, March 11, 2011 (UTC)

Star Wars Roleplay Wiki

Hi, at Star Wars Roleplay Wiki, we have used several pictures from Wookieepedia, is this allowed? We have asked someone else, but they have not replied. If it's not allowed, could you send us a few links to sites where we can get them from, so we can get them ourselves? Thanks,
Babaric fett 07:19, May 28, 2011 (UTC)

Kae Kwaad TC

Hey jSarek, just letting you know that a new voting option has been created on the Kae Kwaad TC per general demand. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 14:40, June 2, 2011 (UTC)

Hiya!

Heya! If you're interested, I have a couple of objections to Voren Na'al over on the Wookieepedia:Re-featured article nominations page. I'd take care of them myself, but one of them requires taking a look at some source material (but precisely which source material is uknown). If you have time, they should be quick fixes that would keep the article in top shape and allow it to appear on the main page again. Take a look! Menkooroo 05:00, June 14, 2011 (UTC)

A user having some problems understanding

A user, Williamstrother, is having some problem understanding that fanon and his ideas don't belong on Wookieepedia. I've already attempted to explain this when he created fanon pages. Recently, he has tried to make a change to the Stormtrooper article calling them shock troopers because he thinks it's "only fair to the regular soldiers".. I think he needs an admin's approach about this. Korsa3clicky 23:27, July 9, 2011 (UTC)

  • I don't see that edit as adding fanon so much as an attempt at a different formulation of the same idea. I left a comment anyway, and will try to keep an eye on out for problems in his future edits. jSarek 01:06, July 10, 2011 (UTC)
    • I meant that recent edit as being one of his ideas, but I suppose I may have misunderstood the user's intentions(specifically when he said he was trying to be fair to the other soldiers). Thanks for your attention on this though. Korsa3clicky 01:12, July 10, 2011 (UTC)

J8Q-128 Finbat Missile

GA-Icon
"So—are you still worried about being sent to the Agricultural Corps?"
J8Q-128 Finbat Missile has been approved by the AgriCorps and awarded Good status. Feel free to add the {{User GA}} template to your userpage to acknowledge your hard work. The AgriCorps thanks you for your efforts, and looks forward to future nominations from you! — Thank you for writing an article for the barn-burner. Kilson(Let's have a chat) 11:37, August 8, 2011 (UTC)

T-65B development in SWAJ #4

thanks for your quick reply on the T-65 X-Wing talk page. is there any indication in the Ral Shawgrim article stating the T-65B was under development? many sources I've seen say the 65B was actually the primary X-Wing fighter of the Rebellion and that it arrived early on. i modified the T-65B page to include that information. i have even found some sources that say Red Squadron piloted the B at the Battle of Yavin. "Near complete datafiles..." mentioned in your quote could just refer to the datafiles themselves. i dont think its possible it could be referring to the "near complete..." T-65B. it was either developed before yavin or after hoth, cant be both. please respond. this small tidbit of information, along with the unsourced T-65AC1-3 stuff, (thats another story), has been bugging me for a year. --FreqiMANN 16:59, August 8, 2011 (UTC)

We're halfway there

thumb|left|200px|Hey jSarek... good job So guys, we're nearing the halfway point with this barn-burner. I just want to send out a broad message thanking everyone who has and plans on participating in Wookieepedia's second barn-burner, and update you guys on how it's going so far. So far, we have promoted nine Comprehensive Articles, twelve Good Articles, and one Featured Article! Fantastic job everyone who wrote and reviewed those weapons articles, I couldn't have asked for a better group to do so. We also have a number of current Good and Featured Article Nominations currently up, which you can see here.

However, as we approach the halfway point, I do want to encourage you all to keep writing and reviewing weapon articles for the barn-burner. Our goal should be to meet or surpass the level set by the previous barn-burner, which had over forty promoted articles. While we should aim to pass as many articles as possible by the end of the month, I may extend the barn-burner a little into September for any stragglers, especially for those Users who are writing extremely long Featured Articles for the project.

I should also notify participants of a recent Consensus Track over weapons that is about to pass. The CT is over when we should fill in the "Owners" field for Template:Weapon. Right now, it seems as if we are leaning towards filling in the field for unique weapon types, and not filling in the field for general weapon types. As such, we should fix any weapons we have, or will, write for the barn-burner to fit these new parameters. Thanks you for reading this, and keep up the good work. Kilson(Let's have a chat) 09:39, August 15, 2011 (UTC)

LX-80

GA-Icon
"So—are you still worried about being sent to the Agricultural Corps?"
LX-80 has been approved by the AgriCorps and awarded Good status. Feel free to add the {{User GA}} template to your userpage to acknowledge your hard work. The AgriCorps thanks you for your efforts, and looks forward to future nominations from you! — CC7567 (talk) 09:15, August 20, 2011 (UTC)

Numbers

Any chance that, as the guy that wrote The Written Word, you'd have access to quality vector images of Aurebesh decimal integers? There was a Knowledge Bank thread last month where it was pointed out that Wookieepedia kinda dropped the ball on that one. SinisterSamurai 06:23, September 7, 2011 (UTC)

  • Alas, no. The graphics of the article were handled completely by SW.com. Our vector images, IIRC, were all created by User:000. jSarek 09:03, September 7, 2011 (UTC)

Niktos

Hello jSarek, I see that you have removed the pics of both Wooof and Klaatu, claiming those aren't the actual characters. Here's what Leland Chee said on Facebook: Wooof = vintage Klaatu Klaatu = vintage Klaatu (skiff guard)

The link is given in both their behind the scenes sections. For this reason, I am going to revert both your edits. Hanzo Hasashi 23:17, September 8, 2011 (UTC)

Wukkar

GA-Icon
"So—are you still worried about being sent to the Agricultural Corps?"
Wukkar has been approved by the AgriCorps and awarded Good status. Feel free to add the {{User GA}} template to your userpage to acknowledge your hard work. The AgriCorps thanks you for your efforts, and looks forward to future nominations from you! — 1358 (Talk) 08:19, October 2, 2011 (UTC)

New

hello, i'm new to this wikia and a big fan of star wars but are all these articles such as the skywalker family true? I'm doing a report on star wars for my school and i found this website and i wanted to ask if all these stuff other people write about are true? --xXNighthawk119Xx,the Hawk that Soars in the Night 17:08, November 5, 2011 (UTC)

ok, thank you but what i meant to say was that if this information is real, like is for an instance cade skywalker a real person in the world of star wars and like the comics that further exceed ben skywalker and the solo twins real like you guys have proof? thank you for time on answering my questions --xXNighthawk119Xx,the Hawk that Soars in the Night 18:28, November 5, 2011 (UTC)

ok, thank you --xXNighthawk119Xx,the Hawk that Soars in the Night 23:50, November 6, 2011 (UTC)

excuse me, i hope i'm not bothering you but are the Mandalorians important to the world of Star Wars. They have a a bit of a "history" so i must be thinking they're important. I'm making a subtopic based on Mandalorians if they are important. Thank you for helping me, --xXNighthawk119Xx,the Hawk that Soars in the Night 00:38, November 10, 2011 (UTC)

New, redux

Hey, I'm new here and have a question regarding image uploading. I would like to upload 2 pictures, more specifically one from the Clone Wars with Appo in it, the other of Hasbro's depiction of Fi Skirata, whenever I attempt to upload an image, it states that I do not have permission. I do not know why. Can you please email me at garindanspy@gmail.com if possible. Thank you.

Best regards, --Garindan Long Snoot 22:42, November 14, 2011 (UTC)Adam F.

  • Email sent. jSarek 00:57, November 15, 2011 (UTC)

Guerrerite