Article milestones Date Process Result 7 July 2009 Featured article candidate Success 2 December 2009 Featured article
Current status: Featured article

Contents 1 (Un)Spoiler concerning fate 2 Padawan 3 Knight 4 Rookies 5 Picture

(Un)Spoiler concerning fateEdit

I don't believe TVG explicitely states Vebb dies during that encounter. It seems ambiguous to me: "With his companions gone Kit decides it's best to fight another day." Maybe they were taken captive, or seemingly fell to their death, or escaped? 71.217.5.241 16:01, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

• If you think it needs to be changed, then change it.~ Dr.Kermit 23:56, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

PadawanEdit

So I'm confused, how come in Kit Fisto and Bant Eerin's pages it said that Kit never took another padawan after Bant?? If this is true, then how is Nahdar, Kit's padawan? Greekpimp - Talk 02:07, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

You're right, it's a mess. In my opinion, this guy shouldn't even exist. Somebody got sloppy and made up a new character without getting a full backstory. Kit gets two Mon Cal padawans? It really just seems sloppy--Shadowxander 08:18, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

• The CW probably changed Kit's intentions, and no doubt the Jedi were pressed by the Council to take Padawans to get as many Jedi in the field as possibleJustinGann 12:32, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Knight Edit

He is a knight, Kit couldn't see his training through to the end it was in the sneek preview of the CW.

• In the source, it says "Fisto is joined by his former Padawan, the Mon Calamari Nahdarr Vebb." So either Vebb was reassigned, or finished his training. -- Cato Neimoidia 02:18, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

So by the time of the episode, Vebb is a jedi knight. Was he Fisto's padawan from the begining or do we not know for sure yet. Should we change his page and say he is a knight, or should we wait till the episode airs??? Greekpimp - Talk 20:13, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Rookies Edit

Er, in case I missed something, Nahdar wasn't in a flashback in Rookies.

In fact, I don't recall any flashbacks in Rookies.

And yeah, I signed in and made my first edit just to point out an error. That's just how I roll.phazonpirate@gmail.com 02:57, 24 December 2008 (UTC)Rety

• By flashback, it means that part where the Narrator is talking and images are flashing around. Since that was technically the first time he appeared, it got labeled as such Dr.Kermit^{(The Doctor is in)} 03:03, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Picture Edit

May I change the infobox picture into this one? It has better quality, and is front view. Alexrd 12:05, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

• Where on the Cartoon Network site did you find this? I'm looking but cannot find it at the stated source. - JMAS ^{Hey, it's me!} 12:28, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
  • On the dataclip video of Lair of Grievous. So, can I use it? Alexrd 12:35, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
  • It's not mine, nor anyone else's except Dark Lord Trayus. You'll need to ask him. - JMAS ^{Hey, it's me!} 12:40, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
    • Also, you need to put the specific source you got the image from. You need to state the specific video in the image source. - JMAS ^{Hey, it's me!} 12:42, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
      • Since it's a flash based website, I can't put the direct link of the video. It will always take you to the homepage. Alexrd 12:45, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
        • After testing the picture in the infobox, I find it unsatisfactory as a main infobox picture compared to the one already in place. It is smaller in size overall, does not fit well in a box that should be 250px, and because of the transparent background, the surrounding area of the image is the same colour as the infobox border. As an Inquisitor who plans to review said article as it is up on FAN, I would object to its placement in the infobox. - Cavalier One^{(Squadron channel)} 12:47, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
          • The infobox can still be with 250px, as well as the picture. Overall it has better quality than the one in place, the only complain may be the lack of background, but I think it's a bit irrelevant. It's just my opinion, nothing else. Alexrd 12:54, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
            • I know it's a flash based web page. But you can still put "Lair of Grievous dataclip" or something to specify where on the flash based side they need to go to find the image. I have to assume you extracted the image file as a SWF file from Firefox's browser cache? If so, can you direct me to what the swf file was titled in the cache so I can find it? I would be able to easily make the background white instead of transparent. - JMAS ^{Hey, it's me!} 12:58, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
• A little experiment:
• Both sized to 250px. From a purely aesthetic point of view, I know which one I prefer in the article. The new image in smaller in pixel size, and the lack of background is a major factor in my opinion. Again, it would be a point of objection on its FAN. - Cavalier One^{(Squadron channel)} 13:03, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

• Actually I extracted the .png from the temporary files folder of IE, since I couldn't find the .swf on Firefox. Alexrd 13:10, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
  • I don't want to intrude, but you could always use the imageBG field of the infobox; I understand it was its raison d'être. Simply saying imageBG=white makes it better than in the experiment; and we could always use some code to get any shade we'd like. Anyway, even if the image is not the main one, I think it is too good to not be used anywhere in the article. --Skippy Farlstendoiro 13:14, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
• I've reuploaded the image with a 250px white background. - JMAS ^{Hey, it's me!} 15:43, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
  • At its current size, that new image really isn't acceptable for an FAN or an article infobox. CC7567 ^(talk) 16:18, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
    • Well, it doesn't look bad now. Now we have to wait for Trayus decision, right? Alexrd 16:20, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
      • Honestly, Alexrd, with two Inquisitors having stated the image is too small for the infobox, it's not going to end up in the article's infobox. If you want to make a request of Darth Trayus, I'd suggest it be to include the image in the article somewhere if possible, not to place it in the infobox. - JMAS ^{Hey, it's me!} 16:24, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
        • Sorry, I didn't saw the message of CC7567 when I posted. Alexrd 16:26, October 14, 2009 (UTC)