Wikia

Wookieepedia

Talk:Death Star

110,037pages on
this wiki

Back to page

DefeaturedIcon

Death Star is a former featured article. Please see this article's entry on the Inquisitorius page for the reasons why it was removed.

LinkFA-star

This article was showcased on Wookieepedia's Main Page from February 25 to March 3, 2007.

Article milestones
Date Process Result
16 October 2006 Featured article candidate Success
27 November 2006 Featured article
8 April 2007 Featured article review Kept
22 April 2007 Featured article
1 December 2007 Featured article review Removed
16 December 2007 Former featured article
Current status: Former featured article
Wiki-shrinkable

This is the talk page for the article "Death Star."

This space is used for discussion relating to changes to the article, not for a discussion about the topic in question. Please remember to stay civil and sign all of your comments with four tildes (~~~~). Click here to start a new topic.


Lets split these articles up into two DS I, and DS II, whoese with me? --Kosure 04:16, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC) Me!--Rossdaboss99 11:40, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

CategoryEdit

Category: Capital Ship? Is that an appropriate designation? Yes, it's capable of moving under its own power, but I've always heard it referred to as a mobile battle station, not a capital ship.

  • Agree, its a bit outside that class.
  • Not a capital ship, but a space station superweapon. -- Riffsyphon1024 13:36, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
    • Since all spacestations are essentially spaceships travelling in a fixed orbit, it might not make much difference to have it in a separate paragraph. VT-16 17:14, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Star Wars: Battlefront's Story line has proven to be canon and it states that escape pods from the Death Star landed on Yavin 4.

Deaths Aboard the Death StarEdit

How is the Deaths Aboard the Death Star section pointless?

If someone wants to know who died aboard the Death Star, they can check it out right there.

Jack: I think its very rude of you to just completly delete that without even putting a talk here first to see if it should be deleted or not.

  • I can tell you who died aboard the Death Star: everyone. And even if it should stay (which it shouldn't) it would need to be in the Death Star I page, not this one. MarcK 14:00, 12 Nov 2005 (UTC)
    • Plus, it's pointless because if they wanted to find out who died aboard a Death Star, they could look it up on that character's page. And see, even others know it shouldn't be here. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 14:03, 12 Nov 2005 (UTC)


Eh, not everyone. http://www.theforce.net/swtc/bast.html Most did die, but not everyone -SWF

  • Actually, Chief Bast is like the Schrödinger's cat of the Imperial Navy. As Leland Chee has explained, he is not definitively dead, but his survival is also uncertain until someone mentions him in a future work. —Darth Culator (talk) 23:16, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Third Death Star Edit

I think this article should make notice of the supposed third death star, as seen in Star Tours. Adamwankenobi 14:10, 12 Nov 2005 (UTC)

  • Well, that page itself is in pretty bad article condition, and I think the "third" Death Star was really the prototype Death Star. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 14:13, 12 Nov 2005 (UTC)

DS mk 1 vs. planetary shields Edit

Is it a bit of exaggeration to say that the DS could easily punch through the most powerful shields? Is this speculation or actually sourced from somewhere? --Maru (talk) Contribs 23:43, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

  • It's shown in Episode IV when the superlaser blasts through the planetary shield of Alderaan. I assume that's what you're talking about, right? Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 00:06, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
    • The shielding effect was visible in Episode IV, and was actually redone to be better defined in the SE. The Episode IV novelization has Vader saying "The defense systems on Alderaan, despite the Senator's protestations to the contrary, were as strong as any in the Empire. I should conclude that our demonstration was as impressive as it was thorough." I take that to mean the shields, since it is commonly accepted that they did away with weaponry. I think this indicates the "most powerful shields" statement is not hyperbole. —Darth Culator (talk) 00:42, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
      • So, to sum it all up, the Death Star's superlaser could easily punch through any planetary shield. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 01:56, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Oh. I didn't know about the shielding (foolish me, I took Leia's protestations of Alderaan's defenselessness and peaceability at face value). Never mind then... --Maru (talk) Contribs 03:18, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Protection Edit

This page has been protected due to an ongoing diameter edit war. Please settle the issue here. - Sikon [Talk] 14:23, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Here, I'll settle it: Anon, you're wrong. There, it's done. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 20:59, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Ummm...Edit

The planes Poggle the lesser had were for the Geonosian Great Weapon, which was part way built but destroyed in 19 B.B.Y. Sidious had another engineer revise them for the construction of DSI.

  • No, the Ultimate Weapon was never built. Those plans were revised into the Death Star plans. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 23:05, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Yeap, remember that the final plans that were polished, finished, and actually used for the construction were made primarily by Bevel Lemelisk and Qwi Xux from Maw Installation. The Geonosian design, from what I understand of it, was a very basic design and not as big or powerful as the Death Star. And of course the original idea was Raith Sienar's. But really the Death Star that was actually constructed was the brain child of Maw Installation and it's staff.--Kyp-Durron 18:57, 14 July 2006 (UTC)Kyp-Durron
    • It's like this: Raith Sienar comes up with the plans, the Geonosians try to work on them (under the name of the Ultimate Weapon), the Death Star I begins construction, Lemelisk and Xux do some more modifications, the Death Star prototype is contructed, the Death Star I's faults are fixed, the Death Star I is completed and later destroyed, and the Death Star II begins contruction and is later destroyed. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 19:30, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Death Star plans vs history sectionEdit

Now that we have a separate article about the plans, some portion of it should be truncated or moved to that article. MoffRebus 23:51, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Necessary?Edit

"In Star Wars: Battlefront II, a battle in the Death Star can be played in the Clone Wars-era in Instant Action only." Due to this, it was not an actual battle at all." Is this really necessary to have in Behind the Scenes?--Darth Oblivion 02:29, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Aah. I see.--Darth Oblivion 22:32, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Broken "math" in main article Edit

Noticed the maths functions appear to be broken. Added the attention template because I am unfamiliar with the mathy stuff. If this is a temporary problem then it'll probably fix it self anyway. --beeurd 01:15, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Rebellion Edit

The article says the Death Star appears in a flashback in Star Wars: Rebellion. I looked through the series, and I can't find it. -LtNOWIS 21:14, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

  • I believe it's after Tank has "defected" to the Rebs. He and Luke start chatting, Luke bringing up the Trench Run. We see a bit of the battle in flashback form, IIRC - \\Captain Kwenn// Ahoy! 21:16, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
    • You're right about the Trench Run flashback (it shows Biggs Darklighter being killed by Vader) but the timing is a little off. I'm pretty sure it's before Tank's fake defection. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 21:19, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
      • Yeah, I was thinking of the talk where Tank wonders if Luke ever considered the innocent lives he destroyed by blowing up the DS, in #4. No flashback. - \\Captain Kwenn// Ahoy! 21:20, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Time Edit

It took the Imperials 19 or 20 years to make the first death star. Why did it only take 4 years to ALMOST complete the second one? 67.72.98.117 18:08, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Planets of Construction Edit

Is it known which planets had construction projects going on to contribute to the Death Stars? Wookiee Jedi 01:06, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Similar to SW.com entry Edit

Certain paragraphs are nearly identical to the starwars.com Databank entry for the Death Star:

[1]

Wouldn't it be better if it was more original rather than just a copy of what's on the official site? Captain Yossarian 17:07, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Mini Death Stars over Coruscant Edit

I read something about them somewhere....are they canon? Should they be included? Lalala la 01:03, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Those would be the habitation spheres. And although not actual Death Stars, we could definitely use a mention. —Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 01:35, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Yes, the reason they resemble Death Stars is becuase they are from artwork for early drafts of ROTJ where two Death Stars were being constructed. Adenn 05:55, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Drydock image Edit

Given the presence of an Executor-class Star Dreadnought, can't the image be safely presumed to be of the second Death Star? After all, no Executor-class ships were built until after the first Death Star's destruction. Red XIV 21:48, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

  • The planetary objects don't appear to correlate to Endor or its moons, but I might be wrong. Wasn't part of the DSII sent from another system to the Endor system? Might be from before that transfer. VT-16 13:41, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Present Tense Edit

I saw that the inquisition requested a shift in tenses. I'm a little uncomfortable with a few of the places were I changed to the present tense, and I'm bound to have missed some places. So if someone should probably look that over... And I found it fitting to keep the History section in the past tense. If anyone has a beef with what I did, feel free to change it. Reben Tai

  • Sorry, what the Inquisitorius really meant was that the present tense needed to be removed entirely from the in-universe sections. --ATATatarismall.png 20:45, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

DS timeline by Leland CheeEdit

Just so you are aware, there are some discrepencies in this article that need to be taken care of. I've highlighted some of the points here:

~ -21: Darth Sidious orders Geonosians to begin construction [Revenge of the Sith Visual Dictionary] -19: Clone Wars end after the Confederacy leaders are killed on Mustafar. [Revenge of the Sith] -19: Separatist holdings are turned over to the Empire. [Revenge of the Sith] -19: Palpatine, Tarkin, and Vader oversee construction for the Empire [Revenge of the Sith] 4.3: Death Star III? [Walt Disney Star Tours attraction]

Basically, it seems construction on the DS began during the CW, at the hands of the CIS. At the end of the Wars, following the death of the CIS council, all holdings, including this unfinished frame, was transferred to the Empire and they continued construction. This is consistent with the CIS council discussing a drawn-out war until their secret weapon is completed, which was projected to take "years" (according to Reversal of Fortune). And then there's the "Death Star III". Better make an article with conjecture in the title for now. VT-16 13:41, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Therefore, "Ultimate Weapon" may need to be redirected into "Death Star I" after all. Not something I like, but if it needs to be done, I'll support it. —Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 22:13, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Tion, Bail, Leia quoteEdit

The link for "Tion" leads to the planet Tion, not to an individual Lalala la 22:44, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

  • That's easy enough to fix. Just replace [[Tion]] with [[Tion (Lord)|Tion]] (which I just did). -- Ozzel 22:52, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
    • Eh, I really wasn't sure which one it was so yeah Lalala la 23:18, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Why???Edit

Why did they build it anyway I mean they used the superlaser on Super Star Destroyer. The only reason I can think of is just a massive spacestation, but wouldn't make sense to have multiple instead of trusting just. If it was destroyed (which it was and they rebuilt it) you would lose gaigantic amount of ships/soilders and just all around value. Darth Nezzera(In umbris potestas est)Sith Emblem 14:36, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Star Wars: Battlefront II vs. Death StarEdit

The new book Death Star strongly implies at one point that the events of Battlefront II are NOT, in fact, canon. Over the course of a page or two the riot attempt is described, and various factors from the game (such as the presence of the 501st and Jedi) are outright mocked. Should this have an impact on the various articles that make direct reference to Battlefront II as canon?Chrisstansfield 13:39, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

  • Not really, since the characters dismissal of the event as a rumour is due to their own beliefs, not because any of them were present and know it didn't happen. -- I need a name (Complain here) 16:43, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Well, sure, if one wants to be ultra-pedantic, it doesn't outright disprove anything. But anyone who understands anything about writing or subtext can figure out that if the intention was to be vague, the subject wouldn't have been mentioned at all. The only reason the passage was included was to dispute the events. Moreover, the presence of the 501st either was or was not fact. They would not have been flown up briefly to deal with a riot, unbeknownst to all the other residents aboard, and then flown off again. They either were there or weren't- and the tone of the conversation is clear- they weren't fixtures aboard the Death Star. 216.194.21.184 05:53, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Small MoonEdit

I thought the Death Star II was supposed to be as large as a small moon, yet in ROTJ it is orbiting the Endor moon. Telos 21:54, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

  • The Forest Moon of Endor isn't a small moon; it's a giant moon, nearly 1.5 times the diameter of Earth's. jSarek 00:59, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Earth's moon is a small moon and its diameter is roughly 3500 km. So how in the world is the Death Star I only 160??? Here's what I think: DS I = 3500ish km. DSII = Emperor's private DS, only 900 km. wdyt?--71.87.110.38 04:55, January 19, 2012 (UTC)

Move to Expeditionary Battle Planetoid Development Initiative? Edit

According to this page, Expeditionary Battle Planetoid Development Initiative was the official name of the Death Star initiative - which, if I gather correctly from reading the article, is what the topic is (I could be wrong). Should it be moved to that title? JorrelWiki-shrinkableFraajic 08:36, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

  • I don't think so. It's known as the "Death Star" in every other source it's mentioned in. Admiral Derek 16:13, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

QuoteEdit

Should there be a quote on this page of Motti saying "This station is now the ultimate powere in the universe"? Darth Newdar 08:28, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Death Star in Ep. III Edit

I have stron reason to believe that the Death Star briefly shown in Ep. III is the Separatits' Great Weapon. This is because the laser dish is significantly smaller than the first Death Star's. Also, the one in Ep.III is completely spherical, while the one in A New Hope is elliptical. Also, it is canon that the Death Star started after construction after the Empire was formed, but how could the Imperials have completed so much (including the reactor, superstructure) when it was just formed?

  • No, the Great Weapon is the first Death Star. The info about the Death Star being constructed after the Empire is formed has since been overridden by Episode III. Grand Moff Tranner Imperial Department of Military Research (Comlink) 22:54, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Any in-universe differences can be chalked up to design changes over the years. Other than that, it is both the Great Weapon and the Death Star I. VT-16 23:51, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

New articles for Ultimate Weapon, Expeditionary Planetoid, and Great Weapon Edit

These are all different projects originally not related to the Death Star. Only their designs were incorporated. Two of these once had their own page but were absorbed into the Death Star article. They are even from separate gov'ts also, so they should get their own article.

  • They're all part of the project that became the Death Star. It just had different names over it's history. Grand Moff Tranner Imperial Department of Military Research (Comlink) 22:54, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Bigness Edit

How big is the Death Star? What is the distance from the center?

A joke? Edit

Luke switched off his computer, to the concern of the Rebels in the base, then fired two proton torpedos into the "reactor core". This caused a chain reaction that destroyed the battle station just before it could fire on the Rebel base. This fatal design flaw resulted in protracted litigation between the Empire and numerous military contractors.[10]

Is this a joke? The citation is to Episode IV, which I'm pretty sure did not say that the Empire sued contractors over the design flaw. -- 24.179.153.138 01:45, March 26, 2010 (UTC)

The Death Star Is Retarded Edit

Sorry, but it is. So you have a super weapon station that takes 4 years to build and costs an astronomical amount. How is this thing supposed to scare anyone. Sure, the people living in the local star system might be afraid, but what about the rest of the Empire? There are millions of worlds and thus millions of star systems. The Death Stars couldn't move from one star system to another, no shields remember, so the fear factor only exists on a solar scale not on an imperial scale.

And again, the thing can generate enough power to destroy a planet but it can't generate energy for its own defense fields? So, its stuck next to whatever planet it is next to, for its defense? Again, retarded.

Lucas didn't think this thing through.

  • Talk pages are for discussions only related to the article. Chack Jadson (Talk) 20:56, April 9, 2010 (UTC)
  • A number of canon characters agree that the Death Star design was retarded, but most of them also know that the Death Star COULD, in fact, travel from star system to star system. For example, the Death Star destroyed Alderaan in one star system, then travelled to another star system for the intended purpose of destroying the Rebel base on Yavin 4 (although the Rebels destroyed the Death Star instead).

70.17.204.246 23:14, February 15, 2012 (UTC)

Failure Edit

Would it be logical to chalk up the Death Stars as absolute failures and an ultimately fatal waste of resources? --Fireman V2 02:01, April 10, 2010 (UTC)

Depends on your point of view. On one hand,it was a failure because it was so vulnerable and was destroyed. On the other,it could be a success,because the Super Laser worked perfectly,and ended up destroying Alderaan. What do you think?DarthSnips95 01:27, July 31, 2010 (UTC)

The Death Star One wasn't a failure. It was a Disaster. The Empire lost it's largest most powerful battle station, that it has spent decades building, and they achieved pretty much nothing positive to their cause. Their was the part where the carrier attacked the Death Star, but that isn't really important. It hurt the Rebels, no doubt about that, but it wasn't decisive. Alderaan was Decisive though... a decisive defeat for the Empire. They took out one world, and helped ignite a massive rebellion. Then Yavin, the worst of all. When the Empire took one of it's greatest loses in the entire war...and the sole rebel casualties were a couple starfighters. The Second Death Star was a disaster too. It's superlaser worked, but blowing up a couple rebel cruisers is nothing compared to the loss that the Emperor represented. However, the Second Death Star could have been a success. If it was finished, then it would have been near impossible to defeat. There wouldn't be any fancy proton torpedo runs into thermal exhaust vents, and this Death Star would be better against starfighters with the addition of new point defence batteries. The Superlaser would be able to ensure almost immunity against enemy capital ships, and the turbolasers would mop up the remnants. However, if anybody has done the Math for the Battle of Coruscant, you would realize that the Death Star actually could be defeated by a large enemy fleet. The Coruscant Fleet had over a 1,000 Venators, with over 400 Starfighters each. So 420,000 Starfighters from that fleet. 420,000 starfighters could probably take on the Death Star in my opinion. Maybe not easily, but they could blast apart most of the surface defenses, and their carriers could hang back out of range. The Second Death Star has..7,200 Starfighters..couple thousand Skiprays...those wouldn't put up much of a fight. Just my take on things.

Wookieepedia search function vs Death Star Edit

When i use Wookieepedia's search box to look for "death star", Death Star is NOT one of the first FORTY search results (2 pages of search results, 20 results each). Glitch? 70.17.204.246 23:08, February 15, 2012 (UTC)

Real life costs of constructing a Death Star Edit

Real life costs of constructing a Death Star

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/9105709/Economists-calculate-the-cost-of-building-a-Death-Star.html

Some one very clever. 16:44, February 25, 2012 (UTC)

Better imageEdit

There's a better image here [2] at Philip Metschan's site [3]. Jartka'irn (talk) 05:33, August 19, 2012 (UTC)

  • And here's a smaller image [4] from the official site. Jartka'irn (talk) 05:44, August 19, 2012 (UTC)

The first death star reference in a darth plageius novel book??? Edit

somebody had told me that darth plageius and darth sidious had discussed the plans four 4 the first death star in that book/novel. is that true or false or not?

Why did the first death star take so long to build? Edit

The second death star took about 3-4 years to build truly. The first death star took about almost 30 real years to make. Why is that?

QUESTIONEdit

How are people able to walk around inside the Death Star, and on the surface? Doesnt that defy the rules of gravity? Please somebody explain

UnretconEdit

Leland Chee has finally stated on his Twitter page that the DS1 and DS2 sizes are being "unretconned" back to what they were (120km and 160km) - is it now time to change them?

[URL="http://boards.theforce.net/threads/death-star-owners-technical-manual-imperial-ds-1-orbital-battle-station.50014788/page-5#post-51122190"]Death Star Owner's Technical Manual: Imperial DS-1 Orbital Battle Station[/URL]--86.162.182.60 09:26, November 9, 2013 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki