Talk:CC-1138

From Wookieepedia, the Star Wars wiki.

Article milestones Date Process Result 2 October 2007 Featured article candidate Success 9 October 2007 Featured article
Current status: Featured article

Contents 1 IU perspective 2 501st 3 Mygeeto 4 Bacara look alikes. 5 To the Vanishing Point 6 Timeing discrepancy with True Colors

[edit] IU perspective

To keep an IU perspective on things, shouldn't this be at 1138 (clone trooper) or something similar? --Imp 21:52, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Isn't that taking it a little too far? -- Riffsyphon1024 21:57, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Well, not really. I guess we could wait until there has been a vote concerning IU categories (Jedi characters would be Jedi individuals), and apply the clone trooper part if the IU perspective on categories garners the most votes. --Imp 22:00, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • I would only rename it if there was more than one person with the same number designation. And then I ask, why did we decide to name them by the number and not their names? -- Riffsyphon1024 22:26, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
      • The numbers are only names to the Kaminoan cloners. The clone commanders themselves choose their own names and prefer them to the number designation. I still think they are more than mere "nicknames". Cody was called "Cody" throughout ALL of Rots. QuentinGeorge 04:22, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
      • Their names are the numbers. Names like Cody and such are just nicknames. We wouldn't name the article on Chewbacca 'Chewie', for example. --Imp 22:30, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • This could of course be solved by naming this CC 1138, which is emerging as the common designation in a lot of sources. --SparqMan 23:14, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 501st

What is the source for AdmThrawn's additions regarding the 501st on Mygeeto? --SparqMan 06:52, 1 Nov 2005 (UTC)

My source is the official site's databank itself. The 501st's presense on Mygeeto is detailed in the databank's Mygeeto entry. -- AdmThrawn -- 1:48 AM, 1 Nov 2005

• Thanks for clearing that up. Please add it to the Sources section when you can. --SparqMan 17:43, 1 Nov 2005 (UTC)
  • The 501st was on Mygeeto only prior to ROTS, Sparq;)JustinGann 06:24, 2 Nov 2005 (UTC)
    • Well, nothing in my article contridicts that, so, I think it's good as is. -- AdmThrawn -- 2:32 AM, 2 Nov 2005

[edit] Mygeeto

Mygeeto is not an "ash" planet, Jack Nebulax, so, quit changing it back. If you've bothered to read Mygeeto's databank entry, you'd know that the ash we see in RotS is from the constant artillery barrages, not from the planet itself. -- AdmThrawn -- 4:45 AM, 12 Nov 2005

• Exactly, it's an ash-covered planet due to the artillery barrages. What I meant to say is that it was, at the time, covered in ash. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 12:54, 12 Nov 2005 (UTC)
  • The world has been described as frigid, not unlike Hoth, which would explain the likeness between the armor of the Galactic Marines and that of the Imperial snowtroopers that assaulted Echo Base. -- AdmThrawn -- 5:19 AM, 12 Nov 2005
    • But the Galactic Marines standard armor is not snowtrooper armor. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 13:28, 12 Nov 2005 (UTC)
      • While this fact has yet to be officially confirmed by the likes of Ryan Kaufman or Karen Traviss, I am inclined to agree with you nonetheless. If indeed you are correct, which I believe you to be, Mygeeto's frigid climate would be the reason we see them in the armor that we do. -- AdmThrawn -- 8:00 AM, 12 Nov 2005
        • Off of the Snowtrooper problem, the 21st Nova are trained for any and all Fast-attack missions, and their specialized equipment helps in ALL types of situations. As stated by the Guid for the GAR in Star Wars Insider, the Galactic Marines' helmets protect against SNOW, ASH, dust, spores, etc. but really, any unit in the GAR can withstand certain amounts of foriegn material. And anyways, Mygeeto is not an ASH planet by default, or because of natural causes, so we wouldnt say that Couroscant is a City-Planet, when it is a mountanous planet COVERED in a city. Liberater444 05:56, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bacara look alikes.

http://img458.imageshack.us/img458/5743/bacaras6vj.jpg --Rune Haako 23:30, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

• Interesting. Admiral J. Nebulax 23:54, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Actually, they are probably Bacara's lieutenants. Admiral J. Nebulax 23:54, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
• Sorry about bringing up an old discussion but the look alikes could be heavy troopers from BattleFront2BobafettH23 01:53, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
  • I hope not. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision) (Data file)} 14:22, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Why?BobafettH23 21:16, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Because it's very stupid to have clone heavy troopers actually looking like Bacara. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision) (Data file)} 21:17, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Oh, thanks.BobafettH23 21:22, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
    • As I said before, I'd say the safest bet is that they're Bacara's lieutenants. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision) (Data file)} 21:25, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
  • thanks, againBobafettH23 21:32, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
    • No problem. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision) (Data file)} 21:34, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] To the Vanishing Point

Is he actually named in this comic?--CT-5619 ^{helmet comlink} 01:14, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

• Yes. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 01:15, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Oh, okay then.--CT-5619 ^{helmet comlink} 23:05, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
    • We should probably make a note of his other armor. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 01:30, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Timeing discrepancy with True Colors

• In True Colors, Bacara is mentioned as leading forces on Mygeeto. However, True Colors is set in 21 BBY, not 19 BBY, when the Battle of Mygeeto occured during the Outer Rim seizures. This means that, either he fought in two separate battles on Mygeeto, or the battle dragged on for a long time. Either way, this is going to necessitate a rewrite, as at the moment, the True Colors mention is referenced with all the 19 BBY stuff, which is totally out of place --80.42.46.130 21:43, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
  • It is a continuity glitch (surprised? :P ), and one that I forgot to mention in the "Behind the scenes" when I wrote the article. When I get some spare time this evening, I'll add a paragraph or two to the "Behind the scenes" to explain the glaring (ugh!) continuity error. Thanks for reminding me :) Cheers, Greyman^(Talk) 21:49, 9 June 2008 (UTC)