Contents 1 VFD 2 Obi-wan part 3 What Anakin says 4 Greek 5 Pfphew... But, anyway... 6 Binocular view with numbers

VFDEdit

VFD? --Azizlight 12:45, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

• No need to VFD. It's either canon or it's not, and it's up to the author to provide a source. --Imp 12:48, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Ok it's sourced. Now can we VFD? :P --Azizlight 12:50, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Sure, but those aren't proper sources—I'm fairly sure they don't specifically refer to the Latin alphabet. --Imp 12:53, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
      • Why don't you go look at those sources--they're pictures (for A New Hope, it is the Death Star reactor core in the original movie), and it is obvious that the Latin alphabet is used. Expansionary Fleet Commander Mitth'raw'nuruodo ^Discuss 13:05, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
        • It was replaced with Aurebesh in the DVD edition, which would indicate that GL feels it doesn't belong in Star Wars. --Azizlight 13:08, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
        • That's not really good enough. Unless you can find an official source that addresses the issue (as opposed to the current ones, where you are just extrapolating), this is not canon. --Imp 13:10, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
• Um, where does it appear in Episodes 3, 4, 5, and 6? Never mind. --Azizlight 13:24, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Obi-wan partEdit

I removed the part about Obi-Wan on the Death Star, since in the newest versions of the film, which are considered the most accurate and canon, they have been changed to aurabesh. Wildyoda 14:09, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

What Anakin saysEdit

Wouldn't it be Plan Besh? :) Who knows, maybe B is a ancient short form of Besh. -- Riffsyphon1024 21:15, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

GreekEdit

The possibility of the existence of a Greek alphabet article has been considered while voting for this article. Actually its canonicity is not seen only in the TIE squadrons, but also in Dunari's Rest. I would like to see if anyone concurs with it, before beginning an article and voting for/against deletion later. If I see no replies, I will include information on Greek in this article, nonetheless MoffRebus 13:28, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Pfphew... But, anyway...Edit

All instances of this are obviously meant to be translations... Yet the vote's result was keep. That freakin' sign in Episode IV was changed , that should have been the end of it, dammit! But sometimes some people just need a good spanking from George Lucas in order to understand... It's a pity that George Lucas has better things to do than loose his time with sad little matters like this, even though it so often happens that because of this lack of involvement on his part, people are taking a dump on the fictional universe he so lovingly created...

But instead of just being bileful, I would like to propose a new idea. Since the Aurabesh of the the Original Trilogy is nonsensical, maybe the language used in the instances where we see Aurabesh in the Original Trilogy actually is an alternative way of writing the same language? Maybe it is this alternate form that is translated into Latin and Greek in all instances that we encounter them in the EU. --Master Starkeiller 18:37, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Just look what Pablo Hidalgo said in the BtS section (both here and in the Greek alphabet article). MoffRebus 07:33, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw that. So, is that supposed to be a good thing? I wonder what's wrong with the people handling canon, honestly... --Master Starkeiller 17:15, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Why isn't it a good thing? It's just your own subjective opinion my friend. For me, it is very interesting and I find nothing wrong, but it's just me. So it's not a matter of good and bad. MoffRebus 18:57, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it's a good thing. I personally don't want to see the droid main characters renamed Cresh-ThreePethOsk and Reshtoo-Dorntoo. I don't want to see Rebel ships renamed Xesh-wings and Yirt-wings, especially since neither of them look like Xeshes or Yirts. Lucas decided he didn't want Latin writing to be distracting on-screen; he didn't decide there should be no Latin alphabet at all. jSarek 19:46, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

The point is, when you got a universe set a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away, you just don't go there. And, however arrogant that may sound, that simply is not my own subjective opinion, it's common sense. If this stuff had anything, anything, to do with Star Wars, the movies would begin with "Not a such a long time ago, in a place not so far away..." 'cause that's the only description "on a universal scale" that would fit any place where people used the English language. And before anyone brings up the "Basic is English" argument, English is supposed to be Basic and not the other way around. Suspension of disbelief is what helps us watch movies and read stories with characters from another galaxy communicating in English. It's English to us, but it's not supposed to be actual English that the characters are speaking, it's supposed to be an alien language. "Cresh-ThreePethOsk" is a very good example. He's C-3PO to us, but he's not actually supposed to be "C-3PO" in the Star Wars galaxy; his name supposedly is the equivalent of C, followed by the equivalent of a hyphen, followed by the equivalent of 3, followed by the equivalent of P, followed by the equivalent of O, in what I suppose would be Galactic Basic Standard. If that is Cresh-ThreePethOsk (I can't write it since there is no Galactic Basic typefont), fine. Yet, regardless of his supposed "real name", irrelevant as it is to us, we call him C-3PO, utilizing that most useful among useful things in fiction: Suspension of disbelief. Suspension of disbelief is the key here, and that got lost somewhere along the way in Star Wars if there's now supposed to be actual English and actual Greek a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away... --Master Starkeiller 20:04, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

If you can suspend your disbelief of the extraordinarily unlikely possibility that humans would develop in a Galaxy Far, Far Away, then you can suspend it the little bit further to think that some of our languages did, too. Anyway, things such as the X-wing (which have X-shaped structures for wings, NOT Xesh-shaped structures) show that, even if we assume that what we're seeing is translated, there STILL must be a secondary alphabet of some sort with a letter shaped like an X. jSarek 20:23, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

If carefully handled, like in the movies, you don't have to suspend your disbelief; it suspends itself. The train of though you suggested, suspending your disbelief further and then further and then further, will lead to a mess, filled with all sorts of stuff that make you go "What? What the hell is this supposed to be doing here? This is absurd". The movies are the only true guideline we have. Lucas takes out the English, that should be it, no English in Star Wars. No Greek. Just alien stuff. But no... It's the easy way, to include everything. Quoting the canon article, in turn quoting George Lucas: "My universe and then this other one. They try to make their universe as consistent with mine as possible, but obviously they get enthusiastic and want to go off in other directions." If this other universe is not consistent with movies, what is the point of its existence? There are other fictional universes out there... If want the Roman alphabet, look for it in another fictional universe, mister, 'cause it's got no place in Star Wars! And as for the X-Wings, "X" is two crossed lines basically, I don't even have to suspend my disbelief to be convinced that people from another universe would be familliar with it. But it being followed by Y and then by Z, and being part of the English alphabet, well, no, that's a long stretch and that's just not good. --Master Starkeiller 20:40, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Just a quick note. You all remember that Luke calls him "Threepio", and you can't do that without pronouncing the Latin letters: 3-P-O. -- Riffsyphon1024 11:01, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

(tabbing reset) You are perhaps right, but unfortunately Wookieepedia handles EU as canon; Wookieepedia is not dedicated to G-canon only. Yes, Lucas removed Roman characters and said that the EU is not 'his universe' but Lucasfilm did approve it and we include EU-stuff in Wookieepedia. Although his quote is not officialized in a certain authorized EU work, Hildago is an authorised author. Also, the existence of Roman and Greek in EU is perhaps inconsistent to Lucas' view (although the X-wing slipped him) but NOT inconsistent to the movies themselves. It would be inconsistent if a movie line was 'there is no other alphabet than Aurebesh'.

Secondly, if we consider that Basic is 'translated' to English, then rest yourself. Roman and Greek could be as well translations of those non-Aurebesh Galactic alphabets. That's why they are called 'alternative' and not 'Roman' or 'Greek': to include all possibilities. Unfortunately Lucas is not Tolkien and never bothered himself with the languages. Tolkien solved all those issues in LotR, what is 'English' and what is not. MoffRebus 07:46, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

It's just that I feel this concistency of the Star Wars universe that is preserved in the movies gets lost like butter spread over too much bread in the EU. And Wookieepedia, though it's not Wookieepedia's fault actually, but the holocron keepers' fault, with its all-inclusive policy and it's eagerness to assume things by following the easy way (like assuming that Basic is not translated from English, but that it actually is English) does, from my point of view at least, degrades C-Canon. Of course I'm going to assume everything is supposed to be translated, my love for the Star Wars universe only allows me to do thus. And so we come to ask, how free are our imaginations anymore? Things that I am sure George Lucas would want to be left shrouded in mystery, as befitting a fictional universe like Star Wars', are "explained" in matter-of-fact way. Everything that isn't explicitly out of bounds, as decided by Lucas, is explored. And sometimes the results are not as good. At least we'll never learn anything about Yoda's species...................... I hope.......... --Master Starkeiller 14:32, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

It's a matter of personal oppinion. I consider Lucas' movies to be too narrow and the EU gives a substance to what we see. But you are right that the linguistic matter is not maturely investigated. i wish there would be a different explanation. from "Basic is English". MoffRebus

As corny as it is, Basic=English is the least of our continuity issues, so I just let it slide. Theopyros 07:25, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Obviously this is my opinion, which may or may not tie to fanon, but the way I look at the appearance of the latin and greek alphabets appearing in-universe is this:

The Latin alphabet originates from Corellia. Why, you ask? Because they basically invented the hyperdrive and are responsible for colonizing space (give or take, as far as I know), allowing their alphabet, as seen on their products, to become familiar (at least a little) all over, basically enough to name droids, fighters, &c. for them.

The Greek alphabet is of Kuati origin. Another well traveled influence on galactic society. I choose Kuati rather than the ancient royal houses mostly because you don't seem to see it anywhere but where the Kuati have their stake, such as the GAR (via Rothana, &c.) and later developments thereof.

But of course, none of this is canon, but just a little something to chew on. It helps me keep from getting frustrated with continuity. Theopyros 07:23, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

I have yet to think of a home for the Hebrew alphabet ("Aleph" - fighter), but I'll think of something. Theopyros 07:23, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Binocular view with numbersEdit

Did anyone notice the binocular views still have Latin numbers on DVD? —Unsigned comment by 85.99.219.44 (talk • contribs).

• Are you referring to this screen? -- Riffsyphon1024 09:51, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

• • I was referring to image shack dot U S )/img297/9003/450dv0.jpg this, and also we have Docking Bay "94". Both are from the 2004 DVD version of ANH. —Unsigned comment by 85.99.219.44 (talk • contribs).
    • Well that could have been something overlooked, although if you look at the the numbers in Aurebesh, I believe that they are not all too different from ours. The 94 is more likely an Aurebesh form of this, whereas the electrobinoculars is simply forgotten. -- Riffsyphon1024 07:31, 17 July 2008 (UTC)