Entertainment
 

Talk:Darth Plagueis/Archive2

From Wookieepedia, the Star Wars wiki.

This page is an archive of the discussion of an article. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's current talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.

Contents

[edit] Appearances?

Darth Plagueis appears in those two sources? I think they're just sources and not appearances. --SparqMan 21:18, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

  • I added "(mentioned)" after them since he doesn't exactly 'appear'.
    • Is Revenge of the Clone Menace considered his first appearance, or, as it's non-canon, would the 1st tag be placed on the "Plagueis novel" instead? - Kwenn 19:18, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Quote

I managed to get my hands on the new book Dark Lord for a quick read recently. There was a direct quote which Sidious remembers his master using, and which is essential for this article. Unfortunately I cannot remember it exactly, but just a heads up so you lot know to look for it. I think it includes summat like " Let me know what you fear, and I will show you what you must confront" and overall makes it seem like Plagueis was just as much of a bastard as his apprentice.

  • Thanks to Kuralyov! Gothymog 15:57, 4 Nov 2005 (UTC)
  • Much better than the quote I put in. -- SFH 20:13, 4 Nov 2005 (UTC)

the quote is "Tell me what you regard as your greatest strength, so I will know how best to undermine you; tell me of your greatest fear, so I will know which I must force you to face; tell me what you cherish most, so I will know what to take from you; and tell me what you crave, so that I might deny you." — Darth Plagueis

[edit] Sidious' knowledge

Sidious never actually learnt Plagueis' secret knowledge of life, did he? He says to Anakin that only one has achieved it, but he and Anakin can work together to discover the secret. --Fade 15:30, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

  • Absolutly correct--Eion 15:34, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
    • I'm gonna go ahead and sort that out, then. --Fade 15:36, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

--Master Starkeiller 22:30, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)We can never be sure. The story was told by Palpatine. Whatever he tells Anakin is not to be trusted.

Yes, he could have merely lied about that. After all, he probably intended to have Padme die, as her death is the breaking point required to shackle Vader to his side permanently. Giving Anakin the knowledge to save his wife would only result in Vader's betrayal, as Anakin would see no further need to be apprenticed to Sidious. Therefore, he told Anakin he himself did not contain the knowledge. He skirted the issue by mentioning that they could discover the secret together, while leaving open the "possibility" that Anakin could save his wife.

What is so hard to believe that Darth Plagueis had the abilities his apprentice said he had? Sidious always praised the achievments of the members of his shadowy order, he certainly would brag about the ability once he learned that anakin wanted to be powerful enough to keep people from dying.

  • Actually, Palpatine could have every well lied to Anakin that Plagueis found a way to save people from dying. Palpatine just wanted the Chosen One as his apprentice; he could really have cared less about finding a way to save people from death. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 12:13, 23 Nov 2005 (UTC)

That makes no sense at all,why would Sidious lie about it to Anakin? I mean we can believe that a sith lord could destroy a star, and absord force users, but not have the ability to create and preserve life? DarthMalus

Why lie to Anakin? To get him on Sidious' side! He was willing to do anything to get Anakin on his side, a small lie like that wouldn't do any harm. -Darthvadersnewmaster

  • Uh, this is a very old topic... Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) 20:54, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
    • Dark Lord and Ultimate Visual Guide both claimed that Palpy learned his version of cheat death (clone + spirit transfering) between EP3 and EP6. At the same time, Palpy admited to himself in Dark Lord that ancient Sith could cheat death by their own way (refering to Ragnos, Sadow, Nadd, or even Kun). Whether or not Plagueis could remain to be seen, probably in the new novel. Darth Kevinmhk 04:30, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Speculation

"It has been speculated that, given that Anakin was supposedly born of a virgin birth, it is possible that Darth Plagueis was the one who influenced the midi-chlorians that 'fathered' Anakin, thus making him a sort of father by extension. Further speculation produces the possibility that this may have spurred Sidious into killing his master, so that he may take Anakin as his own, potentially as a vital piece in discovering the Plaugeuis' secret." -- as far as I know, that is completely OOU speculation. It probably should be moved to Behind the Scenes to keep it from being confused as IU fact. --SparqMan 15:06, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  • Done --Fade 15:13, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Not supposedly, he was born of a virgin birth. It was the will of the Force. The will of the Force for Plagueis to manipulate the midichlorines to create life, but what he intended for evil, the force intended for good. DarthMalus

  • Plagueis or Sidious... --Master Starkeiller 12:29, 6 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • Or, it might not have been either one. Admiral J. Nebulax 21:53, 6 Dec 2005 (UTC)
      • Could be, but it seems as though the theory of Plagueis is the one that is most likely. DarthMalus
        • Remember, minimalism. There is no definitive cannon answer, and thats all that matters--The Erl
          • You mean "canon". Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 21:50, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
            • Oh my god, I'm so embarrassed. I can't believe I made that mistake. Just after I heard about it too. *Hangs head in shame*
              • Don't worry; it's not that it was something really important. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 00:16, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Anakin was "created" by Darth Plagueis becasue he could influence midichlorians. That's why he was born of a virgin. Darth Plagueis is powerful.

[edit] picture

does any one know where to find a picture of darth plagueis? If you do can you put it on the page?

  • If there was one, it would be up there. Admiral J. Nebulax 17:58, 2 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • Find someone who's good at drawing, see if they could come up with a concept for plagueis, put it here (NOT on the article) for us/others to look at, then we can decide. if we all like it, and we put it up somewhere, then it might get noticed by someone who works for Lucas, and they might tell him. <- very unlikely, so why not make one and send it to him??-Yoda1300 17:53, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
    • Wrong. We do not use fan-made images at all. Admiral J. Nebulax 20:32, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
      • Except for the case of Rokur Gepta. 62.254.64.13 19:38, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
        • How is that picture fanon? Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 20:08, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
          • Just wryly noting that even we have been known to use fan-modified images on occasion. Also Ben Skywalker. Personally I don't approve of using pure fanon images, but it IS a slippery slope. Where do we draw the line? 62.254.64.13 18:28, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
            • This is different. No non-fan-made images of Plagueis exist at all yet. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 19:28, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Just a thought...Yoda1300 21:35, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
    • Well, don't even think about it anymore. Admiral J. Nebulax 23:07, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
      • No need to bite his head off! It was a good idea, even if it was wrong. Jasca Ducato 17:47, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
        • "... a good idea, even if it was wrong". What the-? Admiral J. Nebulax 21:17, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
          • Yoda1300's idea of putting forward a concept idea of Darth Plagueis to be scrutinised was good. I agree that it would need to be adopted by GL first so in that respect, it was wrong. Jasca Ducato 19:16, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image

I have looked all over the web and there are no images of Darth Plageus has anyone found one cause if they did please put it on the article

          • Ta-da. Lonnyd 20:41, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
            • A little big, but that should work for now. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) 20:53, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
              • Interesting side note to this pic - Muunilist does have two moons. Lonnyd 09:14, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
                • he's right you know, oh so were using it as the main image now? despite it ntot being canon? Jedi Dude 09:24, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
                  • It's the only image we have of him as of now, so it's probably the best idea. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) 12:46, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
                  • I saw an image of Darth Plageuis on Rabittoth.com. He was a Muun but i wouldn't think a sith lord would be a Munn. Its a cool picture.

I saw that same image, why dont you put it on the page?

    • Because rabittooth's image, being undeniably cool, is not canon. It is a fan interpretation, which could not have place here. Wookieepedia politics specifically includes using only canon images. - Skippy Farlstendoiro 11:06, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Well that sucks! It is awesome. Too bad... Well i guess this will work. Darth Luminosity 14:46, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] So, Darth Plagueis was a Muun?

Who says a skinny Muun Sith Lord doesn't work? --Azizlight 12:40, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

This'll be as hard to believe for all of you as it was for me. But on the official site I just read this:

"James Luceno, author of the bestselling Cloak of Deception and Darth Lord: The Rise of Darth Vader, has been contracted by Del Rey Books to write a novel about Darth Sidious and his Muun mentor, Darth Plagueis."

Wha-wha-whaaaaaaaat?! Plagueis was one of those skinny Muun punks?

I just wanted you to know I wasn't high; I had to add it because the OS said it. But I'm as shocked as anyone. Luceno can yet make it work to my satisfaction, but on first listen, it's a mind-screw. Erik Pflueger 01:07, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

  • Perhaps there's a stronger species of Muun? Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) 01:10, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
    • He'd have to have drank a whole lot of Muscle Milk to be strong enough in my eyes. And that's the whole point, isn't it? "In my eyes?" Be honest, Jack (and anyone else): in all your work on the site, whenever you assigned a mind's-eye image to Plagueis, was there so much as one instant where you ever thought he'd be a Muun?! As I said, Luceno's no slouch; he's an excellent writer, and if anyone can make that work, he may be able to pull it off. But WOW! Erik Pflueger 01:14, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
      • I really expected him to be a Human. Well, there goes all my fanfiction about a Human Plagueis... ;) Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) 01:16, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
        • At times like this, I thank God I never wrote fan fiction... Erik Pflueger 01:18, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
          • Tell me about it. But James Luceno, if you're reading this, that bulky subspecies of Muun would go really good with Plagueis... Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) 01:19, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
            • I'll bet they thought "Ok, what's the least Sith Lord Like species there, is, just so that we wouldn't have guessed it right. Well, they sure know how to make a lame species suddenly become extremely cool. I guess we could start removing the Non Canon Image? Since that does not look Muuny. Or not. We could Put a Muun Shadow Pic?! I'll work on that and show it to you after I'm done, to see what you think. --Sauron18 20:18 08 June 2006
              • Well, you never know, the Infinities image could still work: maybe he really is a bulky Muun subspecies, and so he fills out the black robes. Erik Pflueger 01:21, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
  • How About this Shadow Image?? Or a variation of it?--Sauron18 01:25 08 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Well, I guess we can rule out that Palpatine was a speciest...How can a Dark Lord be taken seriously with one of those high, panicy voices? -- SFH 04:44, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
    • Remember, folks: IT COULD HAVE BEEN A WORSE SPECIES. Cutch 04:53, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
      • I concede the point, Cutch. :) Erik Pflueger 04:57, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
        • Hey, I think it'd be awesome if Plagueis was a Shriek. Larry certainly knew how to inspire fear in others; I'm sure ol' Darth P. the Wise could too. :-P -- Ozzel 05:07, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
          • And by the way, no two Sith are exactly alike in character or physical appearance anyway; just because he's a Muun doesn't mean he can't still be scary, in his own way. I can't see him being the same brand of evil Sith Lord that Sidious is, but perhaps he can be creepy in a sort of stereotypical child-molester fashion (picture the Reverend Kane character from Poltergeist II and you'll get the idea). Or, perhaps, if he's made-up and dressed right, his lanky frame could actually make him a kind of dessicated living figure of Death. He doesn't have to be the same type of evil character as Sidious is to work; he just has to be an outright bastard, and even a Muun can still be that. In fact, for all we know, Sidious' brand of evil could be a deliberate attempt to set himself apart from his master. After all, there were several ways in which he was - or saw himself as - better than Plagueis. And that attitude was justified; it was Sidious that took the final steps to achieve the Sith's revenge, not Plagueis. So, to be fair to Luceno, despite my obvious and, I think, understandable surprise - if not outright shock - I won't write this off as unworkable. Erik Pflueger 05:11, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
            • Actually, he could've been a whole lot worse than a Shriek.--Sauron18 00:55 09 June 2006 (UTC)
              • That does it, Sauron! You've gone too far! You've taken something that was amusing and you made it totally depraved! ;) Erik Pflueger 05:58, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
                • See? Muuns aren't that bad when you think about what GL might've done with Plagueis if he hadn't been EUized :p --Sauron18 01:25 09 June 2006 (UTC)
                  • I reckon his thin look will go well with his name, Plagueis. Since plagues often leave people with disfigured bodies and thin them out. VT-16 11:45, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
                    • Excellent point. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) 11:48, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
                      • It is shocking, right. But maybe that's why Palpatine hates aliens - because when he was young and weak, an alien master bully him. Darth Kevinmhk 13:46, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
                        • well shall we had this info in the article? the shadow pic is kl though. And yes, wat Kevinmhk said could have basis, maybe becasue of his masters alienness was part of what casued Palps New Order Ideals.Jedi Dude
                          • The only official info we have at the moment is the fact that he's a Muun. The rest is pure speculation and should not be added, since it really doesn't have any basis - Kwenn 14:19, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
                            • Plus, he wasn't an all-black colored San Hill. ;) Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) 15:42, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
                              • Well, I've seen shadow pics for Unknown characters before, which are basically the human sillouette, with a question mark. I think that for a character like him it might be nice to do the same, just to imply a general shape at least. What do you think? The Shadow? Shadow with a Question Mark?? It's what we do at the BSG wiki for the unknown Cylons, and it doesn't really look bad.--Sauron18 17:23 09 June 2006
  • I don't mind it. Cutch 22:25, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
    • I don't like the sillouette at all. I'd rather have no image. I'm sure the book will have a picture of him on the cover, we should just wait til then. I know it's a painfully long wait, but we can do it. Lonnyd 22:27, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
      • Why is everyone always so afraid of temporary images? There's something similar going on on the Revan page right now. Cutch 22:33, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
        • I added a question mark if that makes it better.... otherwise it can be reverted. I still think it's an opportunity which we rarely get, for a sillouette image to work it often needs to be quite unique, and a Muun? Well, let's just say it's a fairly clear indication of what Plagueis may look like, and yet not exactly fan art. (especially since all Muuns seem to look the same)--Sauron18 17:37 09 June 2006
          • Yet it's non-canon. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) 23:49, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
            • Technically, it is canon, since yesterday we were given his species, and since it reveals nothing more than the species' shape (which doesn't change, as per the description of the species) then it would be canon in that it shows what is canon and hides what is not.Sauron18 19:15 09 June 2006
              • No, it's not canon, because it's a fan-modified image of San Hill with a red question mark on it. That's not Darth Plagueis. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) 01:17, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
                • How about we just add a picture of San Hill and say Plagueis was of the same species as him? The blacked-out question mark pic doesn't really do much, because his silhouette will undoubtably be different (he likely didn't wear the same clothes), it'll be his features and skin tone that's the same. And about the general species picking- remember, San Hill is only one Muun. And considering his job he's probably lankier than most. I mean, think about it, if the only human you'd seen was Michael Jackson, what would you think about humans?! An individual is not necessarily representative of the average of a species. --Thetoastman 03:40, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
                  • Actually, all Muun are lanky and look relatively similar to San Hill. It's in their species description. And it's true, not all Muun may have the same body, but they do have on similarity, which is noted as a species trait. The shape of their heads.--Sauron18 02:03 10 June 2006
                    • Now, if we made it only portrait style, so that you can see the shape of a Muun head, though no other "Individual" traits, would that be alright? In my opinion it would not be wrong since it doesn't specifically imply it's Hill, but rather that it's a Muun. I'll change the pic again. A head shot would provide a perfect balance between identifying him, yet not being wrong by anything.--Sauron18 02:24 10 June 2006
  • That head-silouette fits in nicely as a temporary image. :) VT-16 08:24, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
    • Hey, at least it's not the one Wikipedia is using--Sauron18 03:35 10 June 2006

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darth_Plagueis

      • That's terrible! They qould never get away with that here. Lonnyd 09:45, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
        • Okay, we can't use any fan-modified images for the main image. Why? Because fan-modified it non-canon. I don't see why we can't just wait for a canonical image of him. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) 12:33, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
          • This is a method used in many places (including stricter wikis), to give at least an idea of what the character is. It's not supposed to be a fan depiction of Darth Plagueis, because the fact is that it's not. It's not meant to be a depiction --Sauron18 12:13 10 June 2006
            • I just want to say, this is a picture of a Base Muun, deindividualized (word?) to create an Anonymus Muun. The modifications don't remove the canonicity, but rather immunize the picture from the topic of "canonicity". Basically, it's just a temporary Muun John Doe Picture, it gives people something to look at (even if it's just a shadow) and it's not depicting anything that won't be.--Sauron18 12:36 10 June 2006
              • Indeed. I like the blacked-out bust. Cutch 19:19, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
                • We are not using a fan-modified image on the article. We either wait to get a canon image or have nothing at all. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) 19:53, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
                  • I concur with Jack Nebulax. AdamwankenobiTalk to me! My home. 19:59, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
                    • Wookieepedia is an encyclopedia, not a place to show off your modified images that are non-canon. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) 20:02, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
                      • It's not for showing off, it's a procedure that is used in other good encyclopedias as well, like the LostPedia for example. An Anonymus image looks better than no image. I really don't care who or what does the image, it's just temporary, but it's a good way of filling the spot without it being fan art and without having the official image. --Sauron18 15:30 10 June 2006
  • Look, I understand your point, and frankly I don't care whether or not it's put on the page. I just want to make sure that you understand my point, which was to improve the page with a Muun Doe, which could've been a nice change to the wookiepedia. It wasn't to "show off" anything, simply offering a good technique that works in other places well. So leave it imageless, or make a vote. It doesn't really matter, especially if you get the wrong idea. --Sauron18 16:06 10 June 2006
  • People take things too seriously... Cutch 21:13, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
    • Cutch, if it's a debate about a non-canon image, how the hell are we taking it too seriously? And as for "an anonymous image is better than no image", that's not the case here. It's canon or nothing. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) 23:29, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
      • I just don't understand how a blacked-out picture of a Muun is more speculative than the picture on the Jedi Exile page. Cutch 23:43, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
        • We don't put fan-modified images in articles, Cutch. That's like saying everything SuperShadow says is canon. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) 23:44, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
          • I know the policy. And I understand. But no, it isn't' like saying SS info is canon. There's a difference between specualtion based on available facts and complete contradiction of established facts. But, the image will not fly, and I've realized this. Playing Devil's Advocate. Cutch 23:48, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
            • Putting a black image of San Hill as Plagueis's main image is like putting a black image of Han Solo on Jos Vandar's page. It doesn't make it a canon image of that person. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) 23:50, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  • But the Jedi Exile's pic is okay. Cutch 23:58, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
    • Yes, it's fine. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) 23:59, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
      • I like the silouette. Good work Sauron18, And has been said elsewhere, this entire site is effectively extrapolation from canon facts. --Eyrezer 05:37, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
    • The Exile's pic is official (if not canon), which is the difference. It's the same reason we allow Infinities stories and not fan fiction. One is official and non-canon, the other is neither official nor canon. Same with the images, and why we have the Tag & Bink one up (though labeled as such) and not the silhouette. - Lord Hydronium 06:08, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
    • What about the Nas Choka, Elan, and Mezhan Kwaad pictures, those picture were never specifically labeled to be the characters' pictures, and yet they are put as such. --Sauron18 06:13, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
      • Come on, we dont even have a Plagueis pic (excluding Infinities here)! Whatever someone comes up with, it is neither official nor canon nor anything at all, it's a 100% fanmade. Maybe Plagueis is a Muun which doesnt look like a Muun: lost half of his head and replaced with machine; or lost some limbs, who knows? We have tons of characters whose species and gender are revealed but have no pic whatsover, why no one ever propose to give them pics, huh? Just be patient and wait. Darth Kevinmhk 08:17, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
        • As I had said, I understood your point, I'm not really pushing for the image, I am just questioning several.....choices that have been made before. By the way, it's not 100% fanmade, I would calculate more like....10% fanmade, since it's actually a deindividualized official image. --Sauron18 03:27, 11 June 2006
  • I think many of you misunderstand the role of a silhouette image. It's not trying to be a some kind of vague canon representation of the character. It's a symbol that says we don't know what the character looks like - and it IS a fact that we don't know what the character looks like. My only reservation is, if we do such an icon for Plagueis, does that mean we should do it for all unseen characters with infoboxes? jSarek 23:55, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
    • That would be a huge mistake. We should not use silhouettes at all for images. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) 01:07, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
      • Alright, I agree a silhouette image is debateable about its canonical value. Anyway if we use a silhouette on Plagueis, we will have to add tons of silhouette in other characters as well, and I dont really see the point of the same set of silhouettes spreading the whole Wookieepedia. Darth Kevinmhk 03:10, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
  • LOL...wow...well I guess it could work. I never would've guessed that Darth Plagueis was a Muun. Here ya go, a non-canon depiction of the one and only Darth Plagueis:

http://img.anakinweb.com/saga/photos/1/3429_plageuis.jpg

    • Just because Muun are pale and skinny, doesn't mean they are all weak. Does it say they are weak? But they get most of there ability to intimidate from their corpse-like appearance, I suppose, not their size. But I just thought Muun were too obscure and... minor. I mean, I'm not trying to be speciesist, but it doesn't sound that good. Oh well. What other books did James Luceno write? That Rise of Darth Vader book sounds, good maybe I'll get it. -Aiddat 18:06, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
      • Now that I think about it, Muuns are special in a way—in the Clone Wars microseries, San Hill is crushed when Durge jumps on and smashes the table Hill is under, but Hill emerges unharmed. Having Plagueis as a Muun may not be so bad. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) 19:26, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

http://img342.imageshack.us/img342/1816/muunmort4ej.jpg

(takes looks at new image, and downs a shot of Jack Daniels) I have now officially seen everything weird in Star Wars. -- SFH 23:16, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Maybe, there's also a lot of copy of Star Wars in harry potter. --Clone Paratrooper 16:56, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Just because Plagueis is a Muun, doesnt meen he'll look like the others. Palpatine was human, but he didnt look very much like one in his later years.

    • What???? Palps was disfigured due to a force attack, well the dark side anyway. Plagueis will look like a Muun as far as we know, and I think like many points in this discussion have said it does not mean he'l be weak, i mean look at the scary fan made image ^ :P Jedi Dude 17:04, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Darth Plagueis was a Muun?! WTF?!

[edit] Change this or I will.

"would be very possible that Plagueis was behind the miraculous conception of Skywalker, but this has never been fully proven."~Your Article.

George Lucas has stated many times that Anakin Skywalker is NOT a product of Darth Plagueis' power, but of the Force itself. If you knew the philosophy behind Star Wars you'd understand.

  • I don't know where you're getting those Lucas quotes from, but the New Essential Chronology heavily implies that this is the case. And please, enlighten us to the true philosophy behind Star Wars, oh wise anon. Lonnyd 22:36, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
    • Yeah, there's more for than against the Anakin Creation Thing. And Lucas never said such a thing as far as I know. --Sauron18 22:38, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
  • George Lucas has not stated that at all. In fact, he deliberately left it ambiguous. see here. QuentinGeorge 22:41, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
    • It sounds like SuperIdiot made that up about Anakin not being a creation of Plagueis. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) 01:05, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
      • In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if this "quote" came from SuperIdiot's website. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) 11:45, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
        • In my RPG campaign, "Legacy of the Dark Jedi", I played with the fanon ideal that Plagueis actually had a hand in the conception of Anakin Skywalker, Dooku, and Sidious himself. The catalyst was an ancient alien machine used by Naga Sadow on Yavin 4 to induce a high amount of midichloriens into human embryos of abducted females. I played with the idea that indirectly, Shmi Skywalker was abducted and Anakin thus concieved. Yes, not really, but a good campaign nevertheless.Mikda Fopal
  • Heh, probably not. But it at least gave the players something to do and destroy. ;) Mikda Fopal
    • no what Jack meant i think was did we really need to know that, it means nothing to us really and has no point in this discussion. Jedi Dude 15:34, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Sorry - didn't mean to offend. Just making small talk. I attempted to delete because of my error. Mikda Fopal

[edit] Picture

Should that picture really be on the infobox, what with being non-canon and all? - Angel Blue 451 16:23, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Archive.

Why were some sections archived while ones before them weren't? Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) 13:25, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sith organizations

Who keeps changing the affiliations from the Order of the Sith Lords to Sith or Sith Order? Sith isn't descriptive enough, it could mean anything like Sith Triumvirate, Brotherhood of the Sith, or Brotherhood of Darkness. It needs to be more specific. Jedi Wolf 3:43, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

  • That would be me. And Sith is the more correct term. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) 20:44, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Okay, Nebulax. I've had it. What do you have against me, for god sakes! I've been mostly accepting of your criticism, but lately it's been getting ridiculous! You're the only one who has complained to my face (so to speak), so what's your problem? Jedi Wolf 3;50, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
      • I have nothing against you. I'm just trying to improve Wookieepedia. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) 20:52, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
        • Personally I like the "Order of the Sith Lord" or "Dark Brotherhood" vs just "Sith." It's more specific and descriptive. Lonnyd 09:24, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
          • But more people know those organizations under the collective term "Sith". In fact, before coming here, I didn't even know what the Dark Brotherhood was. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) 14:40, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
            • We should have the more specific organization. Nebulax: That is a moot point. We strive to be accurate, and there are tens of different Sith cults. You don't see us putting "Jedi" in NJO individuals' infoboxes. --Imp 14:45, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Honestly, do we know?

  • Well, honstly, Goerge lucas or even palpatine in the movie never realy confirmed that Plagueis was actually a muun, i mean who really thought up that article. How do you know its the truth from goerge lucas but not just from goerge lucas but from the Star Wars legacy of it all. I'm not going to except the fact that darth Plagueis was one of those silly looking creatures. When palpatine described him all powerfull and such stuff, it really dosnt fit with the emotion of a muun. The only way i were to beleive if it was the truth that was confirmed by lucas or the true story!
  • It just dosnt seem correct, even for the Cannon aproacchment! If you agree or disagree post me at Kenobi317@aim.com or just post here! User:kenobi317
  • Yeah I agree. I heard years ago that an employee that used to work for Lucasfilm talked about how Lucas had discussed Qui-Gon Jinn being Darth Plaguis.

Initially, this sounds retarded. But then he explained about how Qui-Gon started his life as a Dark Lord, and was captured and had his memory wiped. (This idea was later re-used and put to work in the early planning stages of KOTOR) Yoda was the one who did this and had him assigned to a Master to re-learn as a Jedi. When Qui-Gon was killed by Darth Maul later, he died, and then became one with the Force, losing all ego and coming to a state of purity within the Force. When he died, all his previous memories returned to him, including the secret behind "cheating death through the Force" (Ever wonder how Qui-Gon suddenly picked up that technique literally out of nowhere? It was the technique described by Palpatine that Plaguis had discovered) Yeah, If you do some serious thinking, that kind of adds up. Anyway, that whole part right there adds some serious salt to that "theory" which might just be the truth. It sounds to me whoever made Plaguis into a Munn was just a Comic book writer that didn't know too much about Star Wars and made that concept up out of thin air.

In any case, I agree with you. Plaguis probally *really* isn't a Munn, and since Qui-Gon *did* suddenly have a way to cheat death once he returned to the Force, we could definantly see that as Plaguis' secret to prolonged life through his Force technique. —Unsigned comment by 69.51.150.91 (talk • contribs).

    • Kenobi317: It doesn't seem correct to you. Canon says Plagueis was a Muun Sith Lord. Do not argue with canon, especially not here. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) 20:37, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
      • Plagueis is an important character, which means any possible development of Plagueis would probably have to go through Lucas first. Evidently, he has greenlighted the idea that Plagueis should be a Muun. -- I need a name (Complain here) 20:39, 11 November 2006 (UTC)


  • well, palpatine was the apprentice, how about asking him. lol, i'm just kidding. If one of us were to meet goerge lucas, i think that would be one of the first things to ask.
  • no, he's right, i mean we know hardly anything from what we know from Him in the movie, i mean he's only mentioned! Hopefully in the future, more will be confirmed about him.
  • do you know when, i collect them.
  • Well if you do get the book, enjoy, but i just want to see for myself ! yeah i'll count down the minutes.
  • And who says you can tell us to stop posting!
  • yeah, i thought wookieepedia was a place where you can express what you think of the topic!
    • The discussion is pointless. He is a Muun, there is a book coming out dealing with it - \\Captain Kwenn// — Ahoy! 20:54, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
  • wait, everyone, this is pointless although i will admit, that A muun is very weird for a sith
  • finally, people who are aggreeing with me.
    • As I said above, don't start discussions with yourself, whatever alias you're under. This isn't a forum - \\Captain Kwenn// — Ahoy! 21:03, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
  • sk8erkid11, who's side are you on!

uh, i didnt know theyre were sides, and kenobi317, you dont have to make a big freakin deal out of this!

  • Ok, you can argue with kenobi317, while i find a different page, and can someone tell me the SPECIAL LINK to the 77 page.
    • i know nothing about a special link.
  • I have your IM i think. You heve it on your Info, wait do you have an IM Jack Nebulax!
  • OK, Dont give me your IM, if you have one!
  • Kenobi, stop spamming. Jack, stop replying to him. --Imp 21:27, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
  • I am asking cus Sk8terkid11 shares the special wookiepedia talk link with me, so i'll know if it expires, know his IM from his info, but it dosnt expire thats why I am asking. the talk can end here i supose, well, that enouph from this talk
  • ok, thanks, sorry bout the mess. Yeah thats his talk page alright. Sorry this wasnt ended before it started.
  • i was just joking around about you giving me your IM, Jack Nebulax

[edit] Picture of Plagueis next year?

Chris Trevas said he thinks we'll see a picture of Plagueis next year here, http://boards.theforce.net/literature/b10003/23156129/p15/?354 --Rune Haako 04:25, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bible?

  • It is a poor comparison. It is also a False Analogy. You are making a comparison between a holy book and a work of fiction and that could cause some controversy, not to mention you are unintentionally equating jesus with an evil cult. It really is not a valid comparison. You could make dozens of comparisons that sound "eerily" similar. I'm just saying it is disrespectful. Now how does it improve the article?

[edit] Constant reversion

Even if that wasn't a technical violation of the 3RR, it was a deliberate violation of the meaning of 3RR. You don't blank entire sections without consensus. Discuss first, then blank. -- Darth Culator (Talk)(Kills) 03:49, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Well, I for one think the section is unneccessary. It's a bit of the stretch of the imagination, and seems to be a shameless plug for christianity, while ironically comparing the dark side to god. Lonnyd 13:42, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
  • I don't think it's necessary either. But the person who kept deleting it was going about it in exactly the wrong way. Now we can discuss it here, and if the consensus says to remove it then we remove it. -- Darth Culator (Talk)(Kills) 13:45, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
    • I think it's fine. I'm a Catholic, and I'm not offended by it. Maybe die-hard Catholics would be offended (perhaps the person removing it is a die-hard Catholic), but I don't have any problem with it. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) 15:24, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
  • I say remove it. It is not the best example. You don't compare the message of Christ, love and forgiveness, to the Sith message of hate and vengeance. Perhaps a better example could be found. Contrary to popular belief, Catholics and Chrsitians are quite different. Apparently, it is Tradition that is the source of doctrines that the Catholic Church follows, which are clearly not taught in the Bible. The Catholic Church still says that they are implicit within its text and elucidated through Apostolic Tradition. Some of them are as follows: The Mass, Penance, Veneration of Mary, Purgatory, Indulgences, the Priesthood, the Confessional, the Rosary, Venial and Mortal Sins, and statues in the Church. The issue is whether or not these teachings of the Roman Catholic Church are credible. Do they accurately represent Christianity? Can they be substantiated with the Bible? Do they contradict the Bible? Well that is getting off topic but I vote for a removal. DarthMalus
    • But are you offended by it? I really don't care at this point if it stays or goes, though. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) 18:51, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
      • I think it is misleading and vote for a removal. This will also avoid offending others who may read that. DarthMalus
        • That's the thing: I just want to see if anyone who reads it gets offended. That will help me if it comes down to a vote. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) 12:28, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
          • I don't want to be seen as pig-piling on DarthMalus, because believe me, that's not my intention. So I hope he takes no offense. I just hate it when people make distinctions between Catholics and Christians, as if Catholics aren't Christians themselves. They are. In fact, doesn't tradition hold that, once they stopped being a Jewish offshoot, Catholics were the first Christians? I perfectly understand and agree with expressing a distinction between Catholics and Protestants, and all the myriad offshoots thereof, but to say that Catholics are separate from Christians is, if not just bad English, highly inaccurate to me. I'm not offended on any religious or theological level, it's just like hearing people say "nuclear" like it's "nuke-ular." It just grates on me, that's all. Erik Pflueger 02:33, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Then it will be done DarthMalus

[edit] Still a Muun?

Does the cancellation of the novel mean that he can no longer be safely regarded as a Muun? Or do the promotional materials for the canceled novel still have weight? jSarek 00:57, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Hmm. The descriptivist side of me says "we can keep it until something contradicts it," and the prescriptivist side of me says "no way, it's all non-canon now." Maybe we keep it, but with a tag? Or better yet, put it in BTS only? —Gonk (Gonk!) 01:33, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • And to think of the reactions it once caused. -- SFH 05:02, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
    • I think we'd better BTS it until a new source confirms him being a Muun. IMHO, author's intentions do not make canon (Stacy's spelling), specially if the publication is abruptly interrupted (Alien Exodus). If it was just me, I'd grab the Muun theory as if it was a teddy bear, but I do not think we have enough proof. - Skippy Farlstendoiro 07:08, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
      • This was the stupidest move Del Ray has ever made. I was looking forward to this novel! Darth Byss 19:13, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
        • Chee says the Muun stuff didn't come from the novel, so it's still canon. -- I need a name (Complain here) 19:19, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
          • This is exactly what I meant: If Chee says so (thou we still don't know where exactly "the Muun stuff comes from"), then it's still canon :) - Skippy Farlstendoiro 10:11, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sidious/Anakin Quote

Is it really necessary to include the Anakin part of the quote in Plagueis death section...I personally think it sounds better as just "he could save people, but not himself" or however it goes...it's more ironic that way than having the stupid Anakin part of it...I just wanted to check before I changed it myself - Darth Fett 05:30, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wookify

  • I'm going to make a wookify tag here, becuase it sounds like this an article from wikipedia. --Darthchristian 19:08, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
    • There's no need for a "wookify" tag. The article is fine as is. —Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) (Record of Imperial Service) 20:42, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
      • Well, could you at least delete this line? Fortunately, more objective sources have begun to shed slightly more light on the biography of this shadowy figure. That's why I put a wookify tag on the page. --Darthchristian 16:24, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
        • I see zero need to remove that line. And FYI, one line does not mean an article deserves a "wookify" tag. —Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) (Record of Imperial Service) 16:42, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
          • Alright, so it doesn't need a wookify tag, but that line makes it sounds like a wikipedia article. Unless you can reference that line from an in-universe source, that line needs to be deleted. --Darthchristian 17:24, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
            • No. Once again, there's no reason to remove it. While no source has said that line, no source has never said that line is not true. —Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) (Record of Imperial Service) 22:40, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
              • While no source has said that line, then where is it coming from? An out of universe source! I believe that it was put there because of the cancelled novel about Darth Plagueis, and it sounds like Wikipedia. That's why I put the wookify tag there in the first place! Just delete the line. It's not going to kill the article. --Darthchristian 23:57, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
                • First of all, do not edit my comments. Second of all, you're overreacting. It never harmed the article. Third of all, even though it's been removed, do not order me around. Besides, the line being kept wouldn't kill you, so you need to calm down. —Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) (Record of Imperial Service) 00:53, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
                  • Hmm. I can see where Christian is coming from. I mean, that sentance has a) OOU content in prose (objective sources, unless that means IU sources), weasel words, and POV issues. But, honestly, it's not something to freak out about this much, IMHO. Jorrel Fraajic 00:59, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
                    • It's already been removed, Jorrel. —Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) (Record of Imperial Service) 01:02, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
                      • And all is as it should be. Thefourdotelipsis 01:05, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
                        • For what it's worth, maybe I can help shed some light on this. I remember being the one to add that line in the first place, and the more objective source I was referring to was actually Vader: The Ultimate Guide. The reason I called it "more objective" was that, remember, this was soon after Revenge of the Sith, and the only knowledge we had about Plagueis at that time came from Palpatine's lips, and Palpy lies. A lot. Now, here was a source that wasn't the lying, scheming Sidious, saying that Plagueis was real, that he may actually have created Anakin, and why he was killed. This information came, according to the book, from Sith lore - if that was to be believed - but I'd have to say that if the Sith themselves believed that a. Plagueis likely created Anakin, and b. Sidious killed him and other things, then there must have been some truth to it, and that's a far cry from a lie Palpatine told Anakin to get him to join the Sith. It was, therefore, more objective, at least to me.

Does this mean I need the line kept? No, not really. For one thing, that was 2005. This is 2007, and the New Essential Chronology and Dark Lord: The Rise of Darth Vader and other sources have joined hands with V:TUG to provide a not-that-bad basic account of Plagueis. I won't lie, my heart absolutely aches that the Luceno book was canceled, and those of you know know me well can easily guess why. But the line was not put there because of it, Darthchristian, though I can understand your logic. The line may just be out of date now. I or someone else will find a way to say the same information without the controversy. Maybe it'll be me, or maybe it'll be my pal Jack, or maybe it'll be Darthchristian or FourDot or somebody else. All I wanted to do was to provide some context to this discussion. But it's no real biggie. If you put the line back, or lose it, either way I'll be fine with it. Erik Pflueger 01:40, 25 April 2007 (UTC)


noooooooooooooo he cant b a muun they r ugly nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!i couldnt find the add thing so 4 the record this waz from(starting at noooooooooooooo part)Clonetroop125 01:01, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] His picture in The Essential Guide to the Force?

Do you think it'll be in it? Rune Haako 16:30, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lightsaber

Is the staff he is carrying a Lightstaff.

[edit] Date?

  • I checked the reference and no date for death is given. The way it is written, seems as though they were exploring Palpatine's secret identity. It also hints that Plagueis is responsible for Anakin's conception, but how is that possible if he died 3 years before Anakin's birth? What was the original source for 43 BBY? To me, that seems to be the accurate date, and I believe it was stated on the Star Wars Forum somewhere, but I may be mistaken. I am saying that there is actually no canonical date of death, and I believe the article should reflect that. Thoughts?

[edit] Its cool hes a muun

Come on people wat would you want yet another human sith? Just because muuns look weak doesnt mean they are. Yoda looks like my friends pet bird. Whites are in gangs despite the steryotype. Instead of throwing in yet another Human, twilek and cyborg sith they took a creative aproach and made plagues (i know i spelled it wrong) a muun. 1 of the few things EU did right 

  p.s. Catholics are christians just like orthodox and baptists are
  • I swear, I'm going to need to replace my worn-out keyboard within a month because of you Wookieenewbs. As I have said countless other times, the talk pages are for discussing the improvement of the article, not the subject. And on that note, what the hell is that "Catholics are Christians" stuff at the bottom of the post? Unless that's your sig, it has no place here either. Darth Bassan94 15:03, 1 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Quote

I think we should use this as the uote for the article, as the present one is just a little bit naf. "Tell me what you regard as your greatest strength, so I will know how best to undermine you; tell me of your greatest fear, so I will know which I must force you to face; tell me what you cherish most, so I will know what to take from you; and tell me what you crave, so that I might deny you." Master Jamie 20:36, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

  • I don't think it should be the main quote. It doesn't really describe Plagueis. Grand Moff Tranner (Comlink) 22:23, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Darth Plagueis Novel

i know the darth plagueis novel by James luceno was cancelled, but in the last section of the darth plagueis article, it says it wasnt the right time to talk about plagueis. so does that mean there may be one eventually???----—Unsigned comment by 97.88.238.69 (talk • contribs).

[edit] Age

Why is his date of birth listed as 52 BBY when it says in the article that he reigned in 60 BBY?68.43.207.114 22:34, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

  • It says he died sometime between 52 BBY and 46 BBY. There is no year of birth listed. -- Ozzel 22:40, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
  • The UK-only Star Wars Annual 2008 includes a sith timeline and includes the entry <-82 BBY for Plagueis. It's unclear if this is intended to be his birth date or the date when he became a sith lord.

[edit] Technicality

  • Since we actually have no source stating that Darth Plagueis died in ?? BBY, and only a mention of the event in the NEC though not explicitly saying that his death was a certain year, should the dates 52 - 46 BBY be moved to behind the scenes as no actual date has been given? DarthMalus 00:08, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Was he a full muun?

Judging by pictures and concept drawings it seems that He never really looked like a Muun you see in the movies. So could part of his history be that he isn't a full muun and had a human or other species parent? —Unsigned comment by Hirman (talk • contribs).

[edit] Stop Fighting!

My gosh guys! Stop fighting over it! It dosn't matter if he was muun or not! I know your trying to make the article better but stop fighting over it. Come on this is so stupid. It's going to get any better like this. Just be careful or your going to be exiled.--The Dark Messenger 20:49, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Talk:Darth_Plagueis/Archive2"