I think someone should put in that she is the Dark Lord of the Sith into a succession box because I can't do it. Yours Truly Valenthyne (talk)
Someone should rename her page as Empress Acina, since that is her title now. Also, she should have a Biography section with all of the updated information. I would do it, but I'm not good at sourcing. Sincerely LatinoGamer123
Fallen Empire and beyond[]
- We shouldn't determine what choices were made until a community consensus is reached, among other factors. Rakhsh (talk) 13:29, October 31, 2017 (UTC)
Acina shouldn't be listed as dead[]
Acina's death is dependant on player choice. It's not canonised. That section should be removed. Norraya1631 (talk) 11:52, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
- Hi. Please read the top template within the page but I'll explain it here. We're not a game wiki, we try to write all articles in the best literary way possible. Some TOR subjects are differing greatly due to gameplay choices but we have to be able to write one in main part of the article, and through community consensus we decided for one "Republic Commander, light side choices" since the logical choice is that the Republic will survive in the end. However, we DO NOT DECIDE CANON. Every gameplay choice is indicated in the Behind the scenes section. All we did here is choose a consistent path to write the main body of our TOR articles, as maintaining a neutral POV at this point is impossible. Winterz (talk) 14:04, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
- Though deciding that one alternative is correct might be more convenient for the writers, it also defeats the point of the wiki: It's misleading and unhelpful to classify characters as being absolutely stone dead when that's just one possibility. The least we can do is add a disclaimer next to the death tag saying "Dependant" or something similar. I recognise that there has already been a consensus on this, but that really doesn't prevent us from at least clarifying critical information for the reader. If I hadn't played the game before reading this article I would leave with the impression that Acina's death on Iokath was canon, because the alternative has been banished to the "Behind the Scenes" section, as if to imply that it's less valid than the real version in the proper article. Right now this article and the others like it just serve to misinform people trying to learn about the Old Republic by presenting one non-canonised scenario as truth while hiding the other non-canonised scenario in a paragraph at the very end.
Changing "Died c. 3630 BBY, Iokath" to "Died c. 3630 BBY, Iokath (Possibly)" wouldn't detract from the literary quality of the article and would be more clear. Norraya1631 (talk) 14:14, 19 January 2021 (UTC)- The body of the article already makes a clear POV and the infobox is merely an extension of the body. Having a POV within the article's body and then having the infobox with a neutral POV seems wrong. As for clarifying critical information, that goes in the Behind the scenes section. Deciding one alternative isn't just what is more convenient to the writers, it's for the readers too. Imagine this article written entirely with a neutral POV; you can't. The header template already signals that the prose isn't what is canon and that alternatives to the body's story are stated in the Bts.
Winterz (talk) 03:07, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
- The body of the article already makes a clear POV and the infobox is merely an extension of the body. Having a POV within the article's body and then having the infobox with a neutral POV seems wrong. As for clarifying critical information, that goes in the Behind the scenes section. Deciding one alternative isn't just what is more convenient to the writers, it's for the readers too. Imagine this article written entirely with a neutral POV; you can't. The header template already signals that the prose isn't what is canon and that alternatives to the body's story are stated in the Bts.
- Though deciding that one alternative is correct might be more convenient for the writers, it also defeats the point of the wiki: It's misleading and unhelpful to classify characters as being absolutely stone dead when that's just one possibility. The least we can do is add a disclaimer next to the death tag saying "Dependant" or something similar. I recognise that there has already been a consensus on this, but that really doesn't prevent us from at least clarifying critical information for the reader. If I hadn't played the game before reading this article I would leave with the impression that Acina's death on Iokath was canon, because the alternative has been banished to the "Behind the Scenes" section, as if to imply that it's less valid than the real version in the proper article. Right now this article and the others like it just serve to misinform people trying to learn about the Old Republic by presenting one non-canonised scenario as truth while hiding the other non-canonised scenario in a paragraph at the very end.
Still a Darth[]
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't "Darth Acina" and "Empress Acina" used interchangeably after KOTFE? --Potsk (talk) 12:17, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Alliance with Acina?[]
Hi folks! I was wondering about the possible alliance the Alliance Commander can forge with Acina after their incident on Dromund Kaas. It is left rather unclear in this article. There is no wrong and right answer here, I know that. But since this wiki has it written down that the Commander sides with the Republic on Iokath, I would assume that he also declines the alliance with Acina after Dromund Kaas. That's just logical to me. And I would also find it useful to write that down by maybe just adding one sentence there and adding a concerning paragraph under "Behind the scenes". What do you think?—Unsigned comment by 80.187.113.247 (talk • contribs).