Talk: Second Imperial Civil War

Shouldn't we make an article called Fel's capture of Bastion or Retake of Bastion??? Themelle444 18:42, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

• Not really a battle, though. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 20:22, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Well, we can have non-battle events. I dunno, I guess it was a pretty momentous shift in the war. -LtNOWIS 01:16, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
    • True, but it just seems like the article would be a sentence, a picture, an appearance, and maybe a category and stub template. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 11:24, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Name

• I suggest we rename this the Second Imperial Civil War until we can get a name confirmation. Fits it more, it was a civil war. Bly1993
  • Read the "Behind the scenes" section. —Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 14:36, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Oh. Bly1993
      • Besides, "Second Imperial Civil War" would be even more conjecture. —Grand Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 20:57, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
• And it would leave out the Galactic Alliance and the Jedi.--Gonzalo84 19:45, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
  • It's not better to call it Third Galactic Civil War, so we include also the Galactic Alliance Remnants and the Jedi Order and the other faction wich fight this war?? JMaster, 8:45, 19 October

Daluuj and additional name discussion

• I was skiming over this article, and noticed that the skirmish on Daluuj is considered a part of the Fel insurgency. Shouldn't it be removed? Afterall, it only involved Jedi, who have no interest in working with Fel. Both the Jedi and GA's actions against the Sith would be entirely seperate of the Fel Insurgency. While I understand the rationale for the name (and it fits perfect with Fel's actions), the other factions fighting the Sith would not say they are part of the Emperor's fight. Thoughts? AdmiralNick22 22:07, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
• I agree with AdmiralNick22, this should be removed from the list of battles, as there were no Imperial factions involved in this battle. --—Unsigned comment by StarWarsDude (talk • contribs).
  • It seems to me we should have two articles, one for Fel's insurgency, and one for Stazi's. Or at the very least, rename the article so it doesn't unfairly exclude Gar Stazi. -LtNOWIS 11:25, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I suggest we rename this article to "Anti-Sith Insurgency" or Fel/Stazi Insurgency.--Gonzalo84 14:45, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

• Yeah, I have been saying since last year that a new name is needed. Either name proposed by Gonzalo84 is fine by me. I probably wouldn't hurt to propose the question to Randy Stradley or John Ostrander either. They may give us some clues to what the war is called. AdmiralNick22 20:29, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Choice: Change name to include Stazi or create seperate article

This name is not appropriate for the actions of the Galactic Alliance Remnant. We have a simple choice- rename the article to be more inclusive of all factions opposing the Sith or create a seperate article for the GA Remnant. Perosnally, I favor renaming this article into something less specific like "Anti-Sith Insurgency". However, seeing as we are now seeing more and more opposition to the Sith by factions other than Fel, (including upcoming issues where the Jedi may play a role) the time to make a change is needed. Thoughts AdmiralNick22 18:40, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I support renaming the article "Anti-Sith Insurgency".--Gonzalo84 06:07, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

New Picture

I think that the Battle of Mon Calamari (left) picture is better than the Battle of Borosk (right) for this article. Does anybody agree? or File:Battle of Borosk (Legacy era).jpg Steves490 21:27, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree.71.106.15.178 16:05, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Fifth Faction

Shouldn't Karness Muur be treated as a separate faction since he pursued his own ideals and tried to conquer the galaxy? QuiGonJinn^{Be mindful of the Living Force...} 21:32, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

New artcile name

Shouldn't we rename the article? The Legacy Era Campaign Guide names this conflict the "Imperial Civil War" (in capital letters!). I know this name is used for another article, but we culd that article move to one of it's other names used.--Daritha 19:02, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

• Agreed, since the current title is conjectural. But we shouldn't change the name of the old Imperial Civil War since that's named in an actual source. Rather the name of this article should be Imperial Civil War (Legacy era) or something along those lines. Xicer9 17:40, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Good idea. In this way, we don't cause (more) confusion about the two conflicts.--Daritha 18:48, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
    • What is the source of the name of the existing Imperial Civil War? Mauser^Comlink 18:50, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
      • Possibly Dark Empire, since it's the 1st appearance there?--Daritha 19:04, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
      • Straight from the Dark Empire Sourcebook:

"Most outsiders called this conflict 'The Imperial Civil War.' COMPNOR/ISB purists called it 'The War of Purification,' while those opposing the militarists began calling it 'The Mutiny.' Most just referred to it as the 'Time of Destruction.'"

The DE Sourcebook continues to refer to it as the "Imperial Civil War" from then on. Xicer9^(Combadge) 22:00, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

So, what's about the name? Is any decision yet made?--Daritha 13:30, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Factions

The Remnant and the Jedi should be separate since they are not allies anymore. Or maybe the Jedi could be removed altogether since they are part of the Third Jedi Purge. --Gonzalo84 05:08, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

The jedi and Fel empire and The GA should be merged --AnakinSol 16:54, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

i have added the Chiss Ascendancy to krayts side because "During the Sith-Imperial War, the Chiss were dragged into the conflict on the Fel Empires side when Fehlaauraitelloro, the Chiss diplomat to the empire, was made a Moff and placed on the Moff Council.[1] Darth Krayts Galactic Empire allowed the Ascendancy to retain much of its autonomy. However, it maintained some control over Ascendancy by making heads of Chiss houses high-ranking officials within the new Empire. It also gave the Ascendancy control over large tracts of the Unknown Regions.[1]", which is on the Chiss Ascendancy page and sourced to the Legacy Era Campaign Guide. Asdf1239 05:28, February 15, 2010 (UTC)

• Maybe I am really bad at reading this article, but I fail to understand where it explains why the GFFA and the Jedi Order are enemies, could someone care to give any sort of explanation or at least to point to the place in article where it says it (at least I assume this article at least should say why seeing as it is an explanation for the situation and factions of the war).--99.152.246.190 21:34, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Removing "Known battles"

May I ask that we remove the known battles since the template covers them already?--Chairman Jack the Black 04:14, April 12, 2010 (UTC)

Key figures and Commanders

I'm going to remove the non-essential commanders/key figures from the list as they are more or less just listing every member (such as can be found on articles like One Sith). Alexsau1991 ^{(talk page)} File:StupidSithEmblem-Traced-TORkit.svg 20:54, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Post-Final protocol expansion

I've started expanding the article on the second imperial civil war. I've added the hunt on the "Butcher of Dac" by Cade Skywalker and his crew of the Mynock. Feedback is welcome as I'm preparing a few new sections that covers the Star Wars: Legacy - War 6-issue comic series. Don't worry, I'm not going to engage in serious disruption to make a point. --SDBryan (talk) 16:38, August 26, 2012 (UTC)