Wikia

Wookieepedia

Demos Traxen

3,270 Edits since joining this wiki
February 14, 2006

Demos Traxen, welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wookieepedia. I hope you like the place and choose to join our work. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wookieepedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the Community Portal talk page or ask me on my Talk page. May the Force be with you! - MyNz 07:43, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, this is the first page I've actually created, I don't know all the ins and outs about Wiki yet...I'm better at editing, really.

My apologies for accidentally editing your user page. I mistook it for the article of a Star Wars character. MyNz 07:43, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

  • As did I! Sorry about that....I'll just leave it like this, and let you decide how to set up your user page...— Silly Dan 03:16, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Tollivar Edit

Hello,

I appreciate your attempts to make Wookieepedia better and more comprehensive. I noticed that you keep changing information in this article. If you have a link to the website where John Jackson Miller states that Force lightning was used, please post it on my talkpage so that I can make the appropriate corrections to the article. Otherwise, it will continually be reverted to the way it was when it passed Featured Article Nominations. Thanks,Tommy Dark side Master SWGTCG (Nine two eight one) 01:51, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

  • Tommy's request was perfectly reasonable—your uncivil response was unwarranted. Please try to not resort to such a tone with editors in the future over such a simple request. Thanks. -- Ozzel 21:06, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Removing messagesEdit

  • Please don't remove messages from your talk page; you may archive them on a subpage, but they should not be removed. Thank you. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order (Talk page) 17:31, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
    • The irony is now I want to remove this message as well...--Demos Traxen 19:01, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Image requestEdit

  • Here is the image you requested. Xicer9Atgar(Combadge) 17:26, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
    • Thank you! Very quick of you - wonderful.--Demos Traxen 01:34, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: Chopper Edit

Quite simply, it's because it's the nominator's decision. Moreover, I see absolutely none of your reasoning as to how you distinguish Chopper as the one who "decided they needed to help them". Chopper is clearly acting contemptuously toward the crippled refugee, and also, there's zero evidence that says it was the son who helped him. Your wording is biased, as we don't know if the clones "were forced to kill the droids", and you're putting their feelings into it when there's absolutely no evidence to suggest them. If you can provide accurate, clear reasoning, I'll change it back, but until then, I would like to ask you to cease your actions. CC7567 (talk) 22:06, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

  • I'd just like to clarify that while I've accepted that Chopper handed the crippled refugee the droid leg, nothing else has enough evidence to be confirmed. Thank you for your time. CC7567 (talk) 23:03, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
  • I don't want to ever see this again or you'll be blocked. You're bordering close to WP:NPA there, and I don't like your tone. Don't give CC a hard time; he knows what he's doing. Chack Jadson (Talk) 01:24, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
    • I'm so glad that Wookieepedia has become an oligarchy, rather than the democracy it's supposed to be. His condescending sarcastic response on my page is completely ignored, but mine is cause for threats of blocking.--Demos Traxen 01:31, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
      • Look, I obviously don't want to get blocked, and I'm sorry if I lost my temper. But I think I've done a good bit of work here myself, without searching for any recognition. So if trying my best to correct articles I know are incorrect, and defending myself after being provoked, get me blocked, then so be it.--Demos Traxen 02:07, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
        • I appreciate what you're trying to do, but there is simply no evidence and no way of identifying Chopper in those first two images. He could have switched with the other trooper. Unless you can directly prove to me with names or a much more reliable source that it is Chopper speaking in that second frame, there still isn't evidence. As for your suggested implications: yes, they are implications, but nothing more. CC7567 (talk) 19:06, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
          • Please just stop editing Chopper in protest. You're being disrespectful by continuing to do so even after I've asked you to stop editing it to "fit your own needs". I'll admit that the fact that the refugees pointed out that the clones were there, but if you're going to keep assuming things with no evidence, kindly stop adding unsourced information to the wiki. There's no way to tell that Chopper himself was contemptuous for the Christophsians alone rather than it being an effect of his hate for the droids. If it's not attributable to the comic, and unless you can still provide me with solid reasoning, it's not true. CC7567 (talk) 00:30, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
            • It's not so much in protest, nor to fit my own needs. I have no needs here beyond making the article the best it can be. I wouldn't consider anything I've written to be unsourced, as the images are right in front of you. I would say you were disrespectful for editing it to begin with, when it turned out I was right all along. I'm done playing this game, hopefully you'll wise up and not use the rational that "the clones might have switched positions, therefore all of this user's arguments are false".--Demos Traxen 00:39, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
              • To be clear, there is nothing to indicate that there was a father and son there, nor who the first speaker was. Everything else is attributable to the comic, and hopefully this matter is now resolved. I'm sorry for pulling you into this. CC7567 (talk) 00:59, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
                • Since you appear to have objected to Chopper on the GAN page to simply reaffirm what you already changed in the article, please strike your objection. It's invalid and unnecessary. CC7567 (talk) 20:55, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
                  • Did that before your previous comment... sorry! Thanks for keeping my last edit in, even after someone else changed it.--Demos Traxen 01:52, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Warning Edit

Please do not remove sourced content from Wookieepedia's articles, much less the site's Featured and Good articles. I refer to your unwarranted removal of information from the Nevar article, which, as you can see, has been promptly reverted by an administrator. If you continue to remove sourced content from articles following this warning, your actions will be construed as being in violation of our Vandalism policy, and you will be blocked from editing. Thank you for your cooperation. Toprawa and Ralltiir 16:52, September 8, 2009 (UTC)

  • I was only removing information that - within the span of a three paragraph article - had been repeated three times in almost identical phrasing.--Demos Traxen 20:31, September 8, 2009 (UTC)
    • Your edit here, at its center, is still little more than removal of sourced information. But nonetheless, your noble intentions are duly noted, which is why this is only a warning and nothing more extreme. More to the point, the content of the Nevar article has been reviewed and agreed upon by a fairly good cross-section of Wookieepedia's foremost article-writing experts, comprising the bulk of the AgriCorps review panel, which is why it is currently one of the site's Good articles. In other words, it's not the best idea to take it upon yourself to decide what and what should not be in there. Additionally, when you remove information as you have, you leave an entire section of unsourced information in your wake, which drastically diminishes the quality of the article in question. If you have suggestions for the article, please use the talk page or get in contact with either one of the reviewers or the user who wrote the article, which, in this case, happens to be myself, rather than shooting first and asking questions later. And while we're on the topic, if you have a vested interest in helping edit Wookieepedia, it would greatly behoove you to familiarize yourself with which of the site's articles in particular are Featured or Good articles, all of which can be found in the links I have previously provided you, as well as the guidelines for what constitutes a status article. Toprawa and Ralltiir 22:17, September 8, 2009 (UTC)

Waxer Edit

Please let QuiGonJinn handle the update for "Landing at Point Rain," as he's the one who's currently nominating the article for Featured status. This isn't the first time you've been asked to do this. While your efforts are appreciated, it is best to let the nominator handle all updates for an article either currently undergoing the nomination process for or already possessing higher status, as all other edits will most likely detract from the article's quality. Thank you. CC7567 (talk) 04:46, November 5, 2009 (UTC)

  • It's just hard to have to look at things like this. What you're essentially saying is that one person's contributions are more important and better than another's - that my contributions will "detract from the article's quality". It's rude and disingenuous. If QuiGonJinn is working on the article, so be it, but the episode aired tonight, and there were no edits. Therefore, instead of "detracting" from the quality of the article, perhaps my edit should be seen as an effort to keep it updated, or even to get the work started for a "better" contributor.--Demos Traxen 06:56, November 5, 2009 (UTC)
    • You're very much welcome to edit the article if you really want to, but my point that it will still most likely be rewritten by QuiGonJinn in the end still stands. Please note, however, that the unofficial clause about a nominator solely handling an article was not invented to be a personal insult to you but was adopted because in general, ninety percent of the time other editors took away from the article's quality with less well-written additions. CC7567 (talk) 07:03, November 5, 2009 (UTC)
      • Being spiteful isn't going to solve much, and we both know what you're trying to say and who that's directed at. Regardless if we are having disagreements, your negative attitude isn't productive or helpful to anyone here or the wiki itself. I apologize if my wording has been coming off as harsh, but that is simply the way that things are done here. CC7567 (talk) 16:38, November 5, 2009 (UTC)

Re:Gira Edit

No problem, Demos.--Jedi Kasra (comlink) 13:05, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

Florn Edit

Hey, Demos Traxen, nice to see another alien lover on the Wook! I think you are misreading the map on p. 17 of Star Wars: The Essential Atlas. The legend says that "Population is measured by average per inhabited planet per sector, with actual populations for key systems." The fact that Florn appears on the map makes it one of these "key systems," and, thus, the green dot represents the system, not the sector (it's unfortunate that the legend uses "planet" in one instance and "system' in another, but c'est la vie). Also, I'm sorry you found my sentence "poorly worded," but it's probably best to try not to insult other users' writing abilities in edit summaries. I'm not trying to be confrontational, but it seemed like you made it personal for some reason in that summary. Other than that, take a look at Wookieepedia:WookieeProject Aliens and join up if you'd like. If you're taking a crack at Alien Encounters, we could definitely use your help! ~ SavageBob 01:20, December 13, 2009 (UTC)

  • No worries; everything comes off a couple of shades more negatively in plain text. As for humanocentricism (anthropocentrism?), it's kind of part and parcel of Star Wars. Star Wars is rooted in old film serials from the '30s and '40s, what with their depictions of "primitive heathens" trying to eat the Great White Hunter, the Yellow Peril trying to kidnap the blonde damsel-in-distress, and on. It's understandable, then, that that pulp view of the "civilized West" (Core?) vs. the rest of the world rears up in the Galaxy Far, Far Away. I try to avoid this mindset in my own articles (by trying to avoid describing species as "primitive" and not describing certain species as having "been discovered" at such and such a time), but it's sometimes difficult to do given that the source material so often takes that tact. I guess this is a long way around to saying that, yeah, it's there, but since this isn't the real world, and we ain't really xenoanthropologists, there's only so much we can do to avoid it. :) ~ SavageBob 05:03, December 13, 2009 (UTC)

Re: Layout Help Edit

The intro should only contain what the writer deems aboslutely necessary to give the reader the most basic understanding of the article's subject. The length is up to whoever writes it. Overall, intros should not be excessively long but at the same time not a couple of sentences mashed together with random bits of information, depending on the amount of information available. CC7567 (talk) 23:50, January 4, 2010 (UTC)

BlockEdit

You have been blocked for two hours due to personal attacks. Work on your communication skills. --Imperialles 23:13, April 11, 2010 (UTC)

Sourcing Edit

Hey, DT. Good work on expanding Kobok, an article that's been on my own back burner for a while. I'm guessing most of that info comes from Geonosis and the Outer Rim Worlds, but don't neglect to add sources as you work. If you need some pointers on how to do sourcing, I'd be happy to oblige. Trunsk is an example of what I'm talking about, all the footnotes and whatnot. Keep up the good work on the articles. ~ SavageBob 04:12, April 12, 2010 (UTC)

  • Yeah, I've been interested in the species for awhile, so I went ahead and...ahem... procured Geonosis and the Outer Rim Worlds. I'd love some help with sourcing. I haven't quite been able to get the hang of it since joining the site, so even when I write an article as large (or larger) than Kobok, I've left the sourcing for others to do later. I hope that doesn't come off as lazy - I'd just rather someone with more experience do it right than end up screwing it up myself. That said, I'd love to learn more about it.--Demos Traxen 16:22, April 12, 2010 (UTC)
    • No worries; glad to have your contributions either way. But it's a good habit to get into to source anything you add to an article. It's pretty simple in principle: If you add something to the article, just type <ref>Reference info here</ref> after the information (usually after the punctuation). Then, near the end of the article, make sure there is a code that looks like this: {{Reflist}}. Wherever you type that code, the references you've been putting throughout the article will show up when in normal article viewing mode. It can get more complicated, but that's the gist of the basic way to source information. When I have a bit more time, I'll explain a few more advanced concepts. ~ SavageBob 22:05, April 12, 2010 (UTC)
      • Thanks!--Demos Traxen 22:57, April 12, 2010 (UTC)
        • Hey, DT. Not sure you noticed, but I replied to your Kobok request on my talk page: User talk:SavageBob#Kobok. Hope it helps! ~ SavageBob 06:06, June 7, 2010 (UTC)
          • Oh thanks! I must have missed it on my watchlist awhile back. I got wrapped up in the Act on Instinct edit explosion, I probably missed a lot of things. I'll try to get started on that this week!--Demos Traxen 17:08, June 7, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Edit

Hey, thanks for fixing a few of my more egregious boo-boos on the Act on Instinct articles. I noticed that you had done quite a fair amount of work on some of beforehand—I apologize if it looks as though I just callously ran roughshod over your work, it's just that I was trying to get those articles up to an FA standard, and it's my usual practice to write absolutely everything on a topic that I tackle from scratch. However, a lot of the existing levels of detail were really good, although some of the content was a bit too broad for the character articles, but I was just wondering if you would at all entertain the idea of writing up something else and taking one of these articles through the featured article process by yourself? Since I covered a lot of the AOI content simultaneously (again, I apologize, it was part of a small experiment I was conducting,) I was thinking that you might like to have a go at the Battle of Ukio (Clone Wars) article? Forgive me if this sounds a little presumptuous, but I noted that you seem to have an interest in the material, and since we're always looking for new FA writers, I thought I might as well ask. If you decide that you would like to do that, but you feel a bit daunted by the overall process, I would be more than willing to lend a hand. Thefourdotelipsis 07:49, June 3, 2010 (UTC)

  • I'd love to take a look at it. I'll admit that I was bewildered at first by the explosion of edits to the AOI articles on my watchlist, but I had to remind myself that we're working together, not trying to one-up anyone. So I appreciate your work on the articles as well, and I hope I had laid good groundwork for you. I definitely had been too broad with Keelyvine and Doctor. As I said, I'd love to take a stab at the Battle of Ukio article. Obviously it needs expanding, but is there anything in particular you've noticed that needs work?--Demos Traxen 01:01, June 4, 2010 (UTC)
    • Well, someone's started a prelude section, and provided the heading battle section, which is a good start, but it will also need an aftermath section as well, ultimately. This article provides a pretty good idea of what the basic layout should be. See, with a battle article, you have to be broad, and you can have detail (although avoid play-by-play things like "And then he threw his saber at one droid and then he kicked another one in the head, before turning and deflecting blaster fire from a third" - You just say "He overcame the guard droids" or whatever, if you know what I mean. Let me know if you need further clarification on that, although I think the level of detail you exhibited on the character articles was really good anyway, so it shouldn't be a concern). The other thing you have to do is make sure you retain a totally omniscient view of the battle, ergo, you can't just reveal things the way the comic reveals them, you have to progress sequentially. So, in this case, the Doctor's basic plan should be laid out first, in the prelude section, before you go into its actual implementation. The current version of the Doctor article reflects that. Basically, you've just got to make sure that nothing is revealed to a character, and then you go into an explanation of what was revealed to them, if that makes any sense. Also, you will have to source everything, since the TCW novel provides the date for these events, and you might also want to provide details of Ukio's secession, which was detailed in HNNsmall Abrion Sector Secedes; Separatists Get Agri-WorldsHoloNet News Vol. 531 52 (content now unavailable; backup links 1 2 on Archive.org). Anyway, take a whack at it, and if you need any help, just let me know. I'm more than willing to give read throughs or a polish or help you with the references or structure or anything that comes to mind, really. Thefourdotelipsis 06:21, June 4, 2010 (UTC)

Kobok again Edit

Hey, DT. I noticed you recently expanded Kobok quite a bit. Is that the rest of the information from my notes page? It looks like with a lead expansion and some cleanup, the article is pretty much done, so nice work. ~ SavageBob 23:02, August 31, 2010 (UTC)

  • It is indeed! And thanks! I had been putting it off for too long - I had written the entire thing, and really only needed to iron out the sourcing. I agree that the lead-in needs expanding, and I'll totally take that on if you don't mind. I'd love any additional sourcing or clean up that you have in mind, so please go ahead with that.--Demos Traxen 01:55, September 1, 2010 (UTC)

Valsedian Operation articles Edit

While your Valsedian Operation updates to articles like Ganch, Keelyvine Reus, and Sanya are appreciated, please note that all three of them are either current FAs or current FA nominations, which means that they must adhere to all of Wookieepedia's policies—namely, the sourcing policy and the unofficial but widespread linking clause, the latter of which means that all articles must be linked only once in the infobox, intro, and body of an article. Regardless of the editor, all edits to promoted articles that do not adhere to Wookieepedia policy run the risk of being reverted, as the quality of the articles—even without immediate updates—must be maintained. Therefore, please take the time to go back through your edits and fix these issues to ensure that the FAs and FANs maintain their level of quality and do not have to undergo any sort of probation. By saying this, I'm not trying to discourage you from editing promoted articles, but to help you be as meticulous as you can when making additions to them. Thank you. CC7567 (talk) 07:32, September 15, 2010 (UTC)

Problem reports Edit

Hey Demos, I noticed you reported a problem on an offensive page that was just created; in such an instance as that particular one, it is actually more helpful to add the {{Delete}} template to the article, so that administrators are notified right away to delete the article. Thanks! Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 18:00, October 23, 2010 (UTC)

Qid Proko Edit

GoodIcon2
"So—are you still worried about being sent to the Agricultural Corps?"
Qid Proko has been approved by the AgriCorps and awarded Good status. Feel free to add the {{User GA}} template to your userpage to acknowledge your hard work. The AgriCorps thanks you for your efforts, and looks forward to future nominations from you! — Congrats on your first GA, this better now be your last. :P Kilson(Let's have a chat) 08:08, April 19, 2011 (UTC)

Kobok FAN Edit

Hey, DT. Hope all's well! I've currently got three noms up at WP:FAN, but as soon as one of them passes, I'm planning to nominate one from my queue. Among these is Kobok, which, in my opinion, is ready for prime time. Did you have any other plans for the article? Did you want to nominate it yourself? If not, I'll likely nominate it myself in the next few weeks, but I wanted to run it by you first. Let me know; I'm happy as long as one of us takes it through the process. :) ~SavageBOB sig 17:55, June 8, 2011 (UTC)

  • I had thought you might be building up to that! I saw some redlinks disappear and some expansion going on there lately. It looks good! Definitely go for it, and you'll have my vote.--Demos Traxen 19:06, June 8, 2011 (UTC)

Re: Image upload Edit

Hmm. It seems that somehow an abuse filter was triggered, but I'm not sure why because it's supposed to only affect users with edit counts of under 50. It might be that one of the required fields on the image form may have gotten unfilled, but I'm not sure exactly what the problem is here. I would recommend asking more tech-savvy admins like Grunny or Darth Culator to see what's wrong. Hope that helps. CC7567 (talk) 00:41, August 23, 2011 (UTC)

Hi Demos Traxen. You triggered one of our upload filters because you are not emailconfirmed. We added a check that a user is emailconfirmed to upload as an extra measure against abuse. So, you can set an email in your preferences and confirm it by clicking the link in the email you will receive. That should allow you to start uploading images :). Let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Cheers, grunny@wookieepedia:~$ 01:12, October 5, 2011 (UTC)

Tohm expansion (probably also expand other characters from Ghost Prison) Edit

Hi. First off, great job on the edit for Trachta's article. That being said, I was wondering if you could expand Tohm's artice, as its really underfocused, especially when he's a major character and all that, as well as when you're going to do it if you're planning to do so.If it isn't too much to ask, I'd also appreciate it if you could do the same for the other characters in the Ghost Prison arc, both major and minor, that have appeared so far. I was only able to edit some from the most minimal details I could find that wasn't the comic. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 03:46, July 19, 2012 (UTC)

  • I'll definitely be working on Tohm at some point, though I hadn't really planned on it this week. Now that some of his past has been revealed, it makes it more enticing, so it should be pretty soon however. Gentis is another interesting character, but the rest of them seem to all be unnamed for now. Time will tell, but then again, I'm still working through people from Star Wars: Jedi—The Dark Side and Dark Times.--Demos Traxen (talk) 16:05, July 19, 2012 (UTC)

Reverted edit Edit

You've reverted my edit in the Mnggal-Mnggal article claiming it's non-canonical material. If so then please indicate it in the article where I took that information from. The article is Deep Charting Expedition and if you haven't looked into it, then I believe you should have verified it properly before undoing anything. Please be quick verifying it or my information will return until the article about the Expedition Nevermind, EJ did it for you. Thanks Winterz (talk) 04:23, August 19, 2012 (UTC)

  • Okay... then... --Demos Traxen (talk) 04:58, August 19, 2012 (UTC)

Re: Edit war Edit

Both of you are coming close to breaking the three-revert rule, which is a blockable offense. If you have an issue with another user's edit, the proper thing to do is go directly to the user's talk page and talk to him/her instead of continuing to revert, as you did before coming to me. Non-canon sections are acceptable in mainspace articles, though they usually go in the Bts. Next time, please talk to the user before reverting—the administration should only need to get involved if the users cannot resolve the conflict themselves. CC7567 (talk) 17:57, August 26, 2012 (UTC)

Ahsoka TanoEdit

Is spelled like this. Just wanted to make a note of that for your user page. Keep up the good work, man! :D (it's okay, I mispell a lot of thingz two) --Aryn Tarra (talk) 19:54, September 2, 2012 (UTC)

Re: CT-7719 Edit

Sure. I was planning on getting to it eventually but haven't had the time recently. CC7567 (talk) 18:47, October 25, 2012 (UTC)

  • Hey Demos! I might be a bit premature on this --- for all I know, you're planning to get to them this weekend --- but hopefully you can address CC's objections soon; if they're not addressed within the next week, the nom will be eligible for removal. Good luck! Menkooroo (talk) 12:02, November 7, 2012 (UTC)
    • Thanks for the reminder! I've been meaning to, but I've been so wiped out; I've been working 3 jobs and then I jumped onto a reelection campaign in the final week to make the job count an even 4. I should have time this coming Sunday/Monday though. Thanks again for the heads up!--Demos Traxen (talk) 00:13, November 8, 2012 (UTC)

Congrats on your first FA! Edit

FeaturedIcon
"So—you've finally made it in the big leagues!"
CT-7719 has been approved by the Inquisitorius and awarded Featured status. Please record your achievement here, and feel free to add the {{User featured}} template to your userpage to acknowledge your hard work. The Inquisitorius thanks you for your efforts, and looks forward to future nominations from you! — CC7567 (talk) 20:47, November 20, 2012 (UTC)

Objection to Unidentified clone trooper (Post 473) Edit

Hello, Demos, I believe I have taken care of your objective to the article.—Jedi Kasra ("Indeed.") 20:22, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

  • I know you have supported, but I was wondering if you could strike that objection to the article? Thanks once again.—Jedi Kasra ("Indeed.") 20:21, January 18, 2013 (UTC)

Unidentified Nikto Jedi‎Edit

Yep. You're probably right. I don't know what I was thinking when I made that edit. :S Rokkur Shen (talk) 06:16, February 21, 2013 (UTC)

UnID'd human female Jedi Edit

Hey Demos, could you also strike your objection to the article? Thanks in advance.—Jedi Kasra ("Indeed.") 06:22, March 5, 2013 (UTC)

Dashé BorrenoEdit

Hello Demos Traxen. I think there is no reason for you to keep removing the character's species. According to the Essential Atlas, 99% of the Naboo population are Gungans and Humans (Naboo). Furthermore, it's pretty obvious that "Dashé" is a Naboo name, not Gungan (like Padmé, Sabé, etc.). It is true that her species hasn't been mentioned in the article, but if we follow your logic, Alderaanian Trevor Insevade shouldn't be considered Human either, even though the population of Alderaan is mostly comprised of Humans. Thank you in advance for your answer. --LennyF (talk) 17:15, March 10, 2013 (UTC)

  • I understand your objection, and as likely as it is that she's a Human, it's speculation, and therefore not permissible on this Wiki. She could be a Rodian, for all we know. And you're right, Trevor's article should also be changed to reflect that.--Demos Traxen (talk) 17:36, March 10, 2013 (UTC)
    • Thank you for your quick answer. You're right after all, I'm only speculating here. It's too bad that we will probably never hear about these characters ever again. We would get a confirmation written in black and white. --LennyF (talk) 20:02, March 10, 2013 (UTC)

Re: Enemy Within images Edit

My pleasure, Demos Traxen. ;-) Initially, I just wanted to re-upload one image—that of the RX-Series pilot droid named Z-37. However, I noticed that one of our FAs was full of images from that same comic, so I just went on roll and reuploaded everything about CT-7719. ^^ --LelalMekha (talk) 15:23, August 16, 2013 (UTC)

Ribba yum yum Edit

Hey, DT. Sorry I missed the boat on your Ribba nomination at CAN. I was in the midst of finals hell when you messaged me. My apologies! You're more than welcome to notify me if you nominate stuff in the future, though! ~SavageBOB sig 14:47, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

XanatosEdit

Hey, since you've done big work on the Dairoki article, why don't you help me with the Dark Side section of Xanatos' own article? It's pretty much messed up. I had to rewrite other sections, especially the ones with info from the Jedi Apprentice books. Please tell me you're free to check it out. I can't keep this up forever! Lord KOT (talk) 00:00, January 31, 2014 (UTC)

Mama the HuttEdit

Wow are my edits incorrect exactly? Female Hermaphrodite makes no sense, hermaphrodites are both male and female, so that is an incorrect statement. --Ghrd224 (talk) 05:27, February 11, 2014 (UTC)

3RR warning Edit

Please note that both you and Ghrd224 are on the verge of breaking the site's three-revert rule, which is a blockable offense. Regardless of who is "right" or "wrong," I advise you to resolve this dispute via respectful discussion. Otherwise, a violation of the policy will result in a cool-down block from myself or another member of the administration. Your cooperation is appreciated. CC7567 (talk) 05:31, February 11, 2014 (UTC)

  • Listen to input from other users—that's not to say that you're not already doing so, but that's the best way to reach a resolution. I'd be willing to act as a mediator if necessary but the discussion seems to be progressing productively (instead of deteriorating to a revert war) as it is. CC7567 (talk) 05:41, February 11, 2014 (UTC)
    • Thanks for your cooperation. In general it's hard for everyone at times—myself included—to acknowledge that another person might have a more acceptable perspective, but I'm glad you were able to help compromise for the dispute. :) CC7567 (talk) 05:49, February 11, 2014 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki