Talk:Max (bunny)

From Wookieepedia, the Star Wars wiki.

This is the talk page for the article "Max (bunny)." 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.

Max (bunny) is a featured article, which means it has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wookieepedia community. If you see a way this page can be updated or improved without compromising previous work, please feel free to contribute.

This article was showcased on Wookieepedia's Main Page from 10 November to 16 November 2008.

[edit] Canonicitiy

Due to Max's mention in the Dark Forces Saga, i think the noncanon template should be removed. Any objections? --Eyrezer 23:36, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

• Oh my goodness! I... I had no idea that Max was verified as canon! You've made my day, Eyrezer. Taking off the non-canon now. :-) -BaronGrackle 02:20, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Canon Courtesy of Abel G Pena. ;) I'm not sure whether I should laugh or cry sometimes... (Ulicus 14:54, 25 July 2006 (UTC))
    • I think cry would be the best option. As much as I love Sam and Max, I can't believe he's Star Wars canon. Green Tentacle ^(Talk) 10:28, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
      • Maybe they should write a junior novel about how he teams up with Jaxxon, and then both get killed by a Gungan Dark Jedi who was trained by Tremayne...yeah. .... 06:06, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
        • Well, it's not *exactly* canon that Max exists. Abel's article is deliberately vague, referring to his partner at Kwenn as a "pint-sized lagomorph." He was of course *intended* to be Max, but he was careful not to say so explicitly. jSarek 07:51, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
          • Very true, and the Children of the Green Planet species is also deliberately never named, nor is the mysterious galaxy that Senator Grebleips funded an expedition to. :-) -BaronGrackle 08:32, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
            • Relative of the Lepi species perhaps?

[edit] Move to Unknown lagomorph

His name is never mentioned in Star Wars canon, so I suggest we move it to "Unknown lagomorph" or something like that. If we do that we should also remove all instances of his name from the article besides the behind the scenes section.--Lord Oblivion^{Sith holocron} 20:41, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

• I think Peña's comment, which is linked in the article, is enough to justify who this is. -BaronGrackle 21:36, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Easter egg

Added the new Template:Easteregg that I made in response to "Santa Claus". Hope that should settle things. Bredd13_comlink ALTA in a GFFA 04:55, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

• The reason it was reverted is because Max has been verified as canon (rock on!), and the current easter egg template comes with a non-canon claim. This might be straying, but I'm also not sure whether the Santa Claus article applies as an "easter egg", as it's not something hidden to be found; by the same logic, we could say that Henry Jones is an easter egg, which I don't think he is. -BaronGrackle 14:18, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
  • It has been verified by game designers (part of the Lucasarts licensers) that he is an easter egg and is not canon. That is exaclty what the template is for. Bredd13_comlink ALTA in a GFFA 19:55, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Canon is not decided by the game designers. Any comments they make outside of the game are not canon. The Wizards of the Coast article, however, are. —Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 20:01, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Quotes

Both those quotes need to be sourced. I'm not sure that first one is actually a quote, instead of an excerpt from the OUU article. --Eyrezer 04:22, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

• It is exactly an excerpt from the article, so it may need to be removed. However, this was my justification for putting it in: it is written in an in-universe context. The article talks about Kyle Katarn's history in a manner very similar to that of our own Wookieepedia articles, with the biographical sections going into no mention of OOU elements such as games, concept drawings, or what have you. The article covering Maw even uses the phrase "pain in the choobies", which we would never use OOU. That being said, I completely understand if it needs to be removed for lack of a specific character saying it. We may want to consider the same for the Repeating blaster article as well. -BaronGrackle 16:22, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Templates, templates

Someone apparently recently created a canon-Easter egg template, and that was the one most recently placed on this page... perhaps the image or title should be changed to differentiate from the other one. Anyway, one has to look for Max to find him in each of his sources, including Peña's abstract referencing of him in the Katarn article. The only problem is, since Max is never specifically named, I'm afraid he also qualifies for the conjecture template (just like Children of the Green Planet), and I'm afraid we may wind up with too many templates crowded at the top of the page. -BaronGrackle 15:03, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] This article is giving me a headache...

1. Who deemed this guy canon?
   1. This is more of an opinion: I really don't think this article should exist; This guy isn't something that would "fit" in Star Wars.

Please don't yell at me for this comment... but I would appreciate it if someone agrees with me...--SWME 19:21, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

• How many times are people going to have to say this? 1) He was in a canon game, 2) Abel Pena referenced him in The Dark Forces Saga, and 3) This site does not cater for individual wants and desires. He's in canon sources, he stays. —Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 20:21, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
  • <kind of disappointed...> Oh fine!--SWME 00:30, 4 March 2007 (UTC) <still kind of disappointed...>

[edit] Ambiguously canon.

Yes, Max can be found in Jedi Knight: Dark Forces II. But Kyle doesn't necessarily run into him. It's possible, yes. But it's also possible for Kyle to be killed and have to restart the level.

The only thing that can be said to be 100% verified about this character (calling him "Max" is speculative) is what comes from the Dark Forces saga, part 1. The Barons Hed team-up with "Max" is no more canon than saying "Kyle killed the first two mercs with his lightsaber, picked up an ammo refill, shot the third one with his blaster, then ducked behind cover as the final hostile returned fire, grazing his shoulder." It might have happened that way, and it might not have.

The player can bypass the house with Max, the same way that they can complete the game without ever learning Force Protection. No other source confirms that Kyle and Max crossed paths in Barons Hed... so saying that they definitely, inarguably teamed up in Barons Hed is untrue. No source says they did. No source says they didn't. It's ambiguous. -- SM-716 talk? 01:45, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

In Wookieepedia, canon in games is considered the best achievement of a player, that means discovering all secrets, talk to everyone, open all the doors, uncover all quests etc unless they contradict canon or logic. Browse in some articles and you will see. Look at some KOTOR characters. The player can ignore all of them and solve only the main quest, but Wookieepedia say that Revan DID talk AND helped all of them. You can't tag all of them as ambig canon just because some (or even if many) players could ignore or didnt discover them. See for example Griff Vao.

As for Griff, myself I didn't see or rescue him in my first game, because I didn't have Mission follow me in a spaceport, in order to trigger Lena appear and speak about the existence of Griff in the game (see the BtS section that explains this). That doesn't mean that Revan's meeting with Griff is amgibuous.

Asking for your comprehension, I will revert it back. MoffRebus 09:22, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

• As I have not played KOTOR or its sequel, I thought it best to leave the related articles in the hands of more knowledgeable editors. Is Griff Vao considered an easter egg?
  Can you please provide a link to the page or CT where the policy you mention was established? I think I should read it for future reference. I had been editing under the impression that all events determined solely based upon player input were considered speculation until a later source confirms them, and that only plot points in the game's narrative (cutscenes, mission briefings, etc.) were canon. I cannot cite any official wiki policy to back that up, I'm afraid-- just a general impression that I was doing things correctly until now.
  But regarding Max: if that's actually the policy that this wiki adheres to regarding easter eggs in video games, then by that logic, all the ambig tags from this article should be removed. The room in Ice Station Beta and the metallic object in Mos Eisley are no more or less hidden than the rabbit with a Bryar pistol in Barons Hed.
  In my defense, however, Kyle's encounter with Max is curiously omitted in both the novelization and audio drama. -- SM-716 talk? 16:29, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I was expecting someone else to reply but anyway: to be honest I am not aware of any such written policy. It's an unwritten 'law' which, in wikis, is equal to written to me. Like yours, it's just a general impression of mine, out of a large number of articles. Griff is not an easter egg, but theoretically, since KOTOR is an open ended RPGs, it can be finished by completing only the half of the availiable (optional) quests; therefore miss meeting and helping almost all of the NPCs. It would be pointless to tag half of all KOTOR characters as ambig. If you ask me, I think it's a good opportunity to discuss this 'issue' of the canonicity of optional elements of games as a Wookieepedia policy.

As for Max' easter egg appearances, my common sense says they are still ambiguously canon (his existence as canon can be explained, as well as meeting with Kyle, but his effigy in maps and backgrounds, not very plausible), but I wouldn't mind about...

As for the game vs novel, I have seen them as completing each other, and contradictions pointed out in BtS sections MoffRebus 23:44, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

• • I tend to agree with just about everything MoffRebus said here, but I can still see why some would want to list his Barons Hed appearance as ambiguous. One thing to consider, though, is that his "appearance" in Peña's online saga is as much an easter egg as his appearance anywhere else (easter egg as in a fun thing hidden in the scenes, that you must pay attention to find/understand). The reason I placed an ambiguous tag over his "image" appearances is mainly because of his appearance in Shadows of the Empire: his face is used as a "challenge point". Challenge points are, undeniably, game mechanics. So... they don't exist in Star Wars. So Max's head wasn't a challenge point. Though I agree that doesn't mean much compared to the other image appearances. -BaronGrackle 05:15, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Oh, come ON!

How the **** can this be a star wars character and HOW could it be canon?!?!?!?! If you look at the image, it is poorly cropped and has jagged edges on the bunny. Also it looks like it's 3 inches tall and cut out of a magazine page. The gun looks like it was cut out of a Halo game cover and glued onto the hand. This is SERIOUSLY the stupidest thing i've seen in my life!! I can't BELIEVE you guys think it's canon, 'cause that poor quallity image doesn't fool me! Also, a paper bunny wouldn't be in war. -- Ham Solo^{/talk to the ham}_{You're all clear, kid!} 00:35, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

• It's a cookie from a digital source. The article and its talk page explain everything, no need to get bent out of shape. Greyman^(Paratus) 00:37, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Name the digital space it's from and get a screen shot of it. You can't believe everything you see, a nerd can make an image of anything they want. Here are just some things about the image. I didn't add this but the backround is far bigger than him which would mean he's barely even a centimeter tall. —Unsigned comment by Ham Solo (talk • contribs).

• lol...oook, w/e. I bow to the ultimate wisdom before me...lol Greyman^(Paratus) 00:54, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Congratulations, you've discovered that old games have crap graphics. Regardless, it's The Dark Forces Saga that establishes Max as canon, not Star Wars: Jedi Knight: Dark Forces II, where the image is from. -- I need a name (Complain here) 00:56, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
• Ham: play Jedi Knight: Dark Forces II. Get to level 5 ("Barons Hed - The Fallen City"). Find a house with a locked door near a bridge. Wait around until a woman walks up to the door and opens it. Go inside. Press F12 for a screen cap, like I did. -- SM-716 talk? 20:12, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WHAT THE HECK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WHAT THE HECK the first sentence in the canon thing said he was canon,but then it said it was not!WHAT THE HECK IS UP?? Imperialwalker 20:57, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

• Read it more carefully. His name has not been canonically confirmed, but his existence has. Gonk ^(Gonk!) 00:33, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dead horse, prepare for your beating....

Okay, as I said in the "Ambiguously canon" discussion from March: I haven't ever played either KotOR game, so I can't really use MoffRebus's Griff Vao example as reference for how we should handle Max's cameo in Jedi Knight. However, I DID notice a template that has started to find use on a number of KotOR characters' pages in the time since. It looks like this:

...followed by:

Seems like the above template would perfectly describe Max's appearance in Baron's Hed if we swap out game titles... would others agree that this is a similar scenario to those of the KotOr characters linked above? If there are no objections, I'll add it to the appropriate section of Max's article. -- SM-716 talk? 19:26, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reference to Jedi Knight from elsewhere

In the trailer for the cancelled Sam & Max: Freelance Police game Sam expresses astonishment about being three-dimensional, to which Max replies "It's been done." I think that is supposed to refer back to him having already appeared as a three-dimensional model in Jedi Knight. Would this be worth mentioning in the article? 85.217.2.160 15:26, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

• I'd have to say not. That could be a reference to anything. Gonk ^(Gonk!) 20:07, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
  • I don't think it could be just "anything". As far as I know Jedi Knight was the only place where Max had appeared in 3D when that trailer was released. 82.141.120.230 03:34, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

I think there was also E3 footage of the original defunct S&M 3D game. Ruusan 03:41, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dark Forces appearance

From the current article: "Also, during the Galactic Civil War, the Imperial Ice Station Beta had one room that was in the shape of the rabbit's head." Technically, the room wasn't shaped like anything; the lines are only visible on the map, not in the actual game environment. This leaves it ambiguous as to whether they represent something embedded in the rock, an Easter egg planted in Kyle's in-universe HUD system, or an aspect of the game's interface that has no in-universe significance. --Andrew Nagy 02:38, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

The map is a representation of the level. If there's a shape of Max's head on the map, then a room of the same shape must exist on the map, QED. 81.168.125.47 16:06, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

The lines actually represent sector boundaries, which are part of how the environment/area is represented in the game engine, not part of the environment itself. If you examine the actual cave in-game, you can see that it has a uniformly flat floor, with no breaks or lines. --Andrew Nagy 17:14, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lagomorph vs. Bunny

I began a talk section on the bunny article concerning whether it is a distinct species in Star Wars. If there is agreement there, I'd recommend moving this back to Max (lagomorph). -BaronGrackle 05:13, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

The following was posted in Talk:Bunny. I'm adding it here to discuss the implications on the Max article. It was made in response to claims from me that bunny is not necessarily a species in Star Wars: -BaronGrackle 00:51, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. We don't know that Max or bunnies by extension are sentient (hence the capitalization) and we don't know that bunnies are rabbits in the GFFA. Also, we can tell that it's a species name, because "Sam" mentions that he's a dog, which is a known species. And strategy guides are C-canon, I believe. Thefourdotelipsis 00:20, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

• I'm willing to believe that "official" strategy guides are C-Canon, since they come from an official source. I just don't think that Sam's quote is enough to verify that bunny is a species name distinct from rabbit. Sam also made this quote in the "real" fictional universe; the fact that he said dog and bunny in the same sentence does not distinguish bunnies from rabbits in the real world, so I don't feel it necessarily does here. When I made this page, it was called Max (rabbit). It was later moved to Max (lagomorph) based on Abel Pena's canonicity verification, and I find myself still agreeing with that article title. I just feel that Pena's article was so essential to Max's canonicity... while the strategy guide feels like it has less authority just because of the ambiguity of its writing perspective. I think lagomorph should be how we describe Max in the title, with the introduction explaining that he has been called a lagomorph and a bunny by different sources. I don't intend to fight this to the death; we all love Max here. How attached are you to bunny being part of the title? -BaronGrackle 00:51, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Fairly, since, to take that strategy guide literally, as we must, we are given a positive identification of his species, and species name is generally the best of disambiguat...ors. Thefourdotelipsis 23:28, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
    • But how does "He's a bunny, I'm a dog," identify his species any more or less positively than "a demented, pint-sized lagomorph"? The only "dogs" in the GFFA besides the speaker of the first quote are non-sentient pets... and given the speaker's ability to speak, he would appear to be of sapient intelligence. So it seems he would be using the term "dog" in a non-official capacity, similarly to a Mon Cal hypothetically saying "I'm a fish." (Or maybe Han Solo calling the Killiks "bugs"?)

      So why would the term "bunny" be any more official? The ability to operate technology such as a blaster would seem to indicate that Max is in fact sentient, meaning neither "bunny" or "lagomorph" would be the official name of his species, both being lowercased. So I guess my point is this: we don't know what species Max is. Using "bunny" or "lagamorph" as a disambiguation...ator for Max's article is probably fine (take your pick), but the species article (at either name) probably needs a nickname tag. -- SM-716 talk? 21:54, 18 July 2008 (UTC)