FANDOM


Forums > Senate Hall archive > SH Archive/Do these nameless jedi action figures have bios?
Clonewarsjedi3pack

Hi there! I'm wondering if anyone here can help me out; it seems like every single character in the SW universe, however fleetingly featured, gets to have at the very least a name and usually a bio. But these three jedi action figures sitting on my shelf with all their buddies feel mighty dissed because they still don't have canonical names.

Has anyone ever heard of these Clone Wars toys later being given names and/or backstories, like the AOTC action figure that was originally named simply "Nikto" but was later deemed to be Fi-Ek Sirch by StarWars.com?

Hope someone can help me out.

Cheers, DarthFistula.

  • The one in the middle is definitely Lumas Etima, but I don't know about the rest. --Tinwe 16:23, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Thanks man. Although, and I hate to ask, but (given this site's strictness about canonicity) do you have any official source that he's Lumas Etima, other than the resemblance & statement on his Wookieepedia file? The file in question doesn't itself name a source. Anyway, just curious if you know one way or the other. Anyone else got any ideas?
      Bondara
      The Twi'lek looks one whole hell of lot like Anoon Bondara (skin, robe and sabre colours all match exactly), but that doesn't exactly jibe with this being a Clone Wars-era action figure. Could be just a case of the right character packaged in the wrong era? Any thoughts, people...? Cheers, DarthFistula.

I dunno. It certainly looks like Anoon Bondara in every way. Who knows, maybe the sourcebook that that image came from based their design in turn on the unnamed action figure? Given the exact resemblance I'm inclined to believe the Twi'lek is Bondara until some canonical contradition can be found, regardless of the "Clone Wars" packaging. No idea about the Rodian though. Anyone???? -Barry.

  • I'd agree with that; I reckon that the figure is Anoon Bondara. And I think the "proof" that the human is Lumas Etima is the fact that the packaging "photo" includes the (presumably) canonical image of Etima from the film. But I still don't know of any canonical name for the Rodian. However, you might be interested to know that there is a file here on Wookieepedia for the unnamed Rodian Jedi, although it contains virtually no information and has a cleanup tag. Its only cited source is the action figure itself, so unless anyone else has any info, I'd say that this character was created from scratch for the toy and has not external existence; something backed up by the apparent use of a photoshopped Mace Windu body to create the "photo" image on the packaging (which suggests that unlike Fi-Ek Sirch this character was not an unnamed extra who was actually on the AOTC set). Which is not to neccessarily say that his existence isn't canonical. However, if it is the case that this file is solely based on the toy, then (and with all due respect to the original writer) I question the assertions that he was stationed at the Temple, deployed to Geonosis or that he presumably died there. I see no basis for this (apparent) conjecture, and thus question it's canonicity. I agree that it should be tagged for cleanup. As to his name though; I hope someone else can help ya. All the best, -DarthBinks

---The Twi'Lek looks like Norcuna to me. And he's a Clone Wars era character.---

  • It's possible, and Norcuna would fit better into the "Clone Wars" theme than the late Bondara - Kwenn 08:22, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Thanks guys, that's a big help. So, does anyone think it'd be okay/not okay to therefore state in the Norcuna file that the action figure is based on him (although, depending on the publication date of his first comics appearance, it could well be the other way 'round)? Please advise. DarthFistula.

Ad blocker interference detected!


Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.