Contents 1 Welcome 2 More griping: Boba Fett and the Bounty Hunter Wars trilogy 3 Kevin J. Anderson 4 Featured articles 5 Pong Krell 6 Warning 7 Pong Krell 8 The General 9 Krell 10 Krell (again...)

Welcome Edit

HanShotFirst, 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:

• Internal pages:
  • Senate Hall
  • Wookieepedia FAQ
  • Manual of Style
  • Online sources
  • Wookification
  • Things to do
  • Jundland Wastes Sandbox
  • What Wookieepedia is not
• External Wikipedia pages:
  • How to edit a page
  • Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
  • Picture tutorial
  • How to write a great article

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wookieepedian! By the way, you should always sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the Senate Hall, visit our official IRC channel, or ask me on my talk page. May the Force be with you! — SFH 04:43, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

More griping: Boba Fett and the Bounty Hunter Wars trilogy Edit

First, the trilogy.

The characterizations were all wrong; Zuckuss referring to himself in the first person, Bossk practicing cannibalism when it was established in Tales of the Bounty Hunters that he wouldn't eat the flesh of another reptile (page 153), let alone another Trandoshan, let alone his relatives. Dengar had been a super-strong badass and competent bounty hunter, and here he's reduced to being Fett's lackey.

Now, about Fett. Is anybody ever going to decide exactly how good Fett is or isn't? In ESB he seemed like a decent villain but nothing more than that. In ROTJ he died in a really inglorious way because he was dumb enough to set foot on a skiff that was hovering precariously above the Sarlacc and put himself in the line of fire from the barge. Then in the Dark Empire comics he makes a number of amateurish mistakes, most notably among them flying his ship into a planetary shield (first Greedo, then Boba...will Tom Veitch not rest until he makes every bounty hunter from the movies look like a moron?). In Tales From Jabba's Palace, Tales of the Bounty Hunters and Tales from the New Republic he's portrayed a lot differently and kicks a lot more ass without anybody ever soundly defeating him. In The Bounty Hunter Wars, Fett is so much more dangerous and smarter than everybody else that it's not even interesting. In The Unifying Force he holds his own in the battle he gets involved in, but still needs to be bailed out by Han & friends. I mean, is a little consistency too much to ask?--HanShotFirst 06:31, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Kevin J. AndersonEdit

User:QuentinGeorge removed your criticism section in that article because it was found to be poorly written, overly Point Of View. We are separate from Wikipedia and we do not follow the policy of having a criticism section for authors. Please cooperate with us or you might be banned. MyNz - Zainal 07:36, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, please give him my thanks for that "poorly written" crack. Now why, may I ask, do you have different standards than Wikipedia? The same Wikipedia, by the way, upon which this whole site is based?--HanShotFirst 16:21, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

This is not the place to criticise authors and debate about the Star Wars universe. We can do without people who always criticise and speculate on the Star Wars universe. We already have to deal with frequent vandalism everyday.

Also please show some respect to User:QuentinGeorge. He is an administrator and has been here for several months while you have been here for only a few days. We don't have to be a puppet state of Wikipedia and we can make our own guidelines and rules which suit us. Wikipedia was created for a different purpose and so is Wookieepedia. I hope you understand now. MyNz 08:22, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

People deserve a certain amount of respect regardless of any position they may hold. Simply because Quentin is an administrator, or because he's got seniority here, does not mean he deserves any more respect than a newb like myself.

I never said anything negative about Quentin, btw, until he insulted me. Administrator or not, chance of a ban or not, if somebody insults me I am going to stand up for myself instead of just sitting there and taking it.--HanShotFirst 17:54, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Btw, MyNz, I've been here a lot longer than "a few days."--HanShotFirst 05:29, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

• If you want to know why we don't allow criticism sections, check out: Wookieepedia:Votes_for_deletion/Quote:Karen_Traviss –Sentry^Talk 06:16, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Featured articles Edit

Your edits to the Celot Ratua Dil article have been reverted because they failed to adhere to the guidelines of what must comprise a Featured article. All contributions to Featured articles must adhere to Wookieepedia's Sourcing policy. Please familiarize yourself with the two pages linked here so you have a better idea of how the site runs. Thank you. Toprawa and Ralltiir 18:03, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

• About Ratua: it's my FA, so I'll look into what you said and try to improve it. Chack Jadson ^(Talk) 18:50, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Okay, thanks.--HanShotFirst 18:52, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Pong KrellEdit

You have to stop making edits to the article that are clearly biased against Pong Krell and sympathetic to the clone troopers. The article already states how Krell has a low opinion of clones and how he is willing to risk high casualties in order to win battles. Don't make any further edits that clearly break the NPOV rule. JRT2010 15:46, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

Warning Edit

Kindly cease the editwarring on Pong Krell and resolve the issue on the talk page. You and JRT are already close to breaking the three-revert rule. 1358 ^(Talk) 16:11, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

Pong Krell Edit

Before you break the 3RR rule with JRT2010, I recommend that you please cease the edit warring and talk with him on his talk page. Arguing and debating over who's correct in the article's edit summary won't solve anything. JangFett ^(Talk) 16:12, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

• It doesn't matter if the episode's synopsis is "sympathetic" to the clones. As you yourself pointed out, the article is supposed to be NPOV, per Wookieepedia's own rules. This whole "Krell is a bad guy" and the "clones are unfortunate victims" has no relevance whatsoever to the article, and would clearly violate the NPOV rule. I mentioned that Krell was known as an efficient general who won many key victories in the Clone Wars, but that he also disregarded the safety of his clone troopers; your edits reflect your message on my talk page (e.g. everything is Krell's fault as a a general and the clones are blameless), and is clearly anything but an objective point of view. But keeping this strictly to a talk page discussion, I don't really feel bad whatsoever for the clones because A) They are fictional characters and not worth getting worked up about; B) Considering what they go on to do in Episode III, and what they become under the Galactic Empire, it's hard to feel sympathy for these guys. So what if Krell cared less about clones? Many Jedi treated them well, and it sure didn't stop the clones from gunning them down without so much as a second thought. JRT2010 18:13, October 30, 2011 (UTC)
  • Cross-posted: See, here you are telling me not to get worked up about fictional characters and then immediately say "Oh, well they go on to kill all the Jedi, so they're bad so screw 'em." You seem pretty worked up about it for somebody who says that they're fictional characters and thus unworthy of getting worked up about. Anyway, that's an incredibly simplistic way of looking at things. You are familiar, I assume, with the concept of brainwashing. Cody and Rex and all the others (you'll note that, unlike you and unlike Krell, I refer to them by their names rather than their numbers because despite being the victims of brainwashing they are still people) did not want to turn on their commanders. On the contrary, guys like Obi-Wan and Ki-Adi Mundi and Aayla Secura and all the rest had won their loyalty (unlike, again, Krell). But Palpatine said the trigger word, their programming kicked in, and they had no choice. Now, as for the whole NPOV thing goes, I have a feeling that even if I were to phrase things in a totally impartial way you would still be making a big fuss over how it was unfair to Krell. The entry for the episode, last I looked, was a very accurate recounting of what happened, but you probably find fault with the person who wrote that daring to point out that Rex said (out of earshot of the other clone troopers, IIRC) words to the effect of "I really recommend we go with the original plan, a frontal assault is not the way to go" and wouldn't you know it? He was right! The D.O.U. entry says that. Are you going to claim that's violating the NPOV rule? Finally, even if Rex and Fives weren't conducting themselves according to how a soldier's supposed to, I honestly don't care. I was taught that if somebody treats you like dirt--as Krell was doing--then you should stand up to that person. In my view, they did the right thing, and I have a lot more respect for both of them than for a soldier who just blindly follows orders, who is a sycophant.--HanShotFirst 23:07, October 30, 2011 (UTC)
    • Wrong assumption about them not wanting to kill their Jedi officers. Actually, they didn't seem to care one way or the other about Order 66. In the ROTS novelization, CC-2224's only thought about executing Order 66 on Obi-Wan Kenobi was "wishing the order had come through before he gave him back the bloody lightsaber. In "Order 66: A Republic Commando Novel," CC-1138 expressed how glad he was about killing Ki-Adi-Mundi. But this stuff you're bringing up is so pointless and ridiculous. But before you make any more assumptions, you really ought to do some more research than simply drawing your own (and false) conclusions. Pong Krell's article conforms with the NPOV. You are the only one who seems to have a problem with it, all because it's not too "Pro-Clone" for you. Enough now. Unless you have something relevant to add, not your opinions, then just drop it. JRT2010 23:32, October 30, 2011 (UTC)
      • Well as far as the EU goes, like it or not (and I don't) Lucas and the Clone Wars show seem intent on broadcasting the message that it isn't canon. Killing off Even Piell even though he was alive for "Coruscant Nights", for instance. As for the "Order 66" novel, since this is Karen "There were only 3 million clones, no more" Traviss we're talking about, I tend to take anything she writes with a grain of salt. But if you like the EU, you would probably agree that Grand Admiral Thrawn was a very good leader, and if you do then let's talk about the "insubordination" again. Thrawn not only questioned Palpatine's orders, he outright disobeyed them once. Go back and read Zahn's books, and you'll come across a scene where Thrawn tells the story of how Palpatine ordered him to attack a certain place. Thrawn looked at the situation and said "No, I won't do that. It would be suicide and I won't throw away my men's lives like that." Palpatine was pissed and had somebody else attack the place. It was a disaster, as Thrawn predicted it would be. After that, Palpatine was a lot more willing to listen to Thrawn's advice. Which just goes to show that sometimes questioning orders and even refusing to follow them is justified and right. (But hey, if you're gonna despise all the clones no matter what because of something in the EU that the show has been contradicting the hell out of, I suppose that's your right.)--HanShotFirst 23:52, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

The GeneralEdit

To address your last point on Krell's Talk Page: There's more to being an effective general than low casualty numbers. Krell was right at the end; large-scale death is often a price for victory in major wars. Now if he had a record for extremely high casualties, but no victories, then yes—we could objectively say that he was incompetent. But the fact that he was responsible for many key victories in the Clone Wars balances out the high casualty rate in his record. To me, he seems like the Star Wars version of General Patton, who was not very well liked for his methods or personality. Nevertheless, he was respected as a leader who got results. JRT2010 15:40, November 7, 2011 (UTC)

• No, I'm sorry, I disagree. And I just got done asking you why you liked him on your own talk page before I saw this, so I'll leave it up to you where you'd like to have this conversation. For now, as I said before, there's more to it than winning or losing. Let's say that Krell--or any other general for that matter--was given a choice of two strategies. One strategy could achieve victory with few losses. Another strategy could achieve victory with many losses. If the general decides to put more of his troops at risk than he needs to, then he is not being responsible. He is being, as the narrator said in the episode, "reckless". He is wasting resources. And perhaps you don't know about Pyrrhic Victories, so I'll tell you a bit about them. Or rather, I'll just quote from the Wikipedia entry: "...it is said, Pyrrhus replied to one that gave him joy of his victory that one more such victory would utterly undo him. For he had lost a great part of the forces he brought with him..."--HanShotFirst 02:25, November 8, 2011 (UTC)
  • Thanks, but I know all about Pyrrhic Victories. What surprises me is the way you're applying it to Star Wars in the same way it's applied to reality. In the Star Wars "universe," clones can be generated as fast as ten years (one through Spaarti cloning cylinders), not to mention the fact that if Coruscant has a population of one trillion beings, we can only guess the total population of the Galactic Republic. Hence, manpower is one of the last things that the Republic needs to worry about. Pyrrhic Victories are only applicable in scenarios in which the victor lost too much in terms of military resources (e.g. manpower) to the point where they are either irreplaceable or would take too long to replenish. To be blunt, it is illogical to assume that the deaths of several thousand clones would make any difference to the Grand Army of the Republic. By the end of the war, roughly two-thirds of the original army was dead. This could have made the Clone Wars a Pyrrhic Victory for the Republic/Empire, but the fact that millions of Spaarti-grown clone troopers supplemented the GAR ranks meant that basically it did not matter how many clones died; many more could be created to replace them. Plus, the introduction of enlisted stormtroopers under the Empire, combined with millions of cloned stormtroopers, virtually eliminated the shortage of manpower as a concern altogether. JRT2010 06:28, November 8, 2011 (UTC)
  • To address your previous point about the differences between the EU and the films & tv show—it is all basically one storyline under Star Wars canon. Some sources contradict others, and are sometimes addressed with retcons. Yeah, a lot of things in Clone Wars doesn't match up what has been done in the EU, but unless stated otherwise in an official capacity, everything that counts as canon still continues to do so. JRT2010 06:28, November 8, 2011 (UTC)

KrellEdit

• To your first point: It doesn't matter how many people do not like Krell. Wookieepedia articles are supposed to be neutral, and some of the early, first edits were anything but neutral, insinuating a negative—personal—view of Pong Krell. Just for the record, I'm not the only one who doesn't see the general in a disapproving way (http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=575605&page=3). But even if I were, to be honest I am not moved by the reasons of many of those who can't seem to stand Krell. Some of those reasons seem to be: His strategies are reckless, maybe he's secretly gone over to the dark side, etc... But the most common reason for those who dislike Krell is undoubtedly his view and treatment of the clone troopers. This show has, in my opinion, gone overboard with trying to "humanize" the clones (funny how the stormtroopers never got the same kind of "sympathetic" treatment that the clone troopers have received). Knowing what they go on to become during and after Episode III, if you're the type who supports the protagonist "good guys" of the story, than the clones are definitely not the ones you want to root for, or sympathize with since they seemed to be quite content with their new roles under the Empire. JRT2010 07:05, November 8, 2011 (UTC)
• Well before you go any further cheering Rex, it's true that he cares about his fellow clones, but not to the point where he's too sentimental about it. He ordered Kix to leave other clones to die, justifying this as an act of necessity (save the most by sacrificing the few). He also shot to death an Umbaran creature and a wounded Umbaran soldier, so we know that he is perfectly capable of killing animals and injured enemy combatants in cold blood. Now I am not criticizing Rex here. I'm just merely pointing out the fact that he has the makings of a good stormtrooper (minus his earlier tendency to question orders a little too much).
• That group of clones who disobeyed Order 66 were the clone commandos of Ion Team. Clone commandos were bred with much more independence than your rank-and-file clone trooper, thus they had a greater capacity to disobey an order that seemed wrong to them. The average, standard clone's independence is heavily diminished, meaning that he can be strategic and think "out of the box" when the occasion calls for it, but only to an extent. For all intents and purposes, he might as well be a flesh-and-blood battle droid who would never dream of disobedience or leaving the military. Slick and Cut are exceptions, but that's only two ordinary clone troopers out of millions more who went on to serve the Empire. These philosophic debates on the morality (or lack thereof) of following orders are all well and good for theorist discussions, but in essentially any real world military organization, excusing disobedience is not an option. Entire empires have been ruined because the governments could no longer control their soldiers. Any nation would rather have an obedient, ordered army rather than one that believes it can bend or break the rules when ever they feel like it. JRT2010 07:05, November 8, 2011 (UTC)
  • As far as Kix goes, Rex didn't sacrifice anybody by holding Kix back; he told Kix that if Kix tried to help them, he'd just get shot up too. Which looked about right. There's no point in trying to rescue people if you just end up getting yourself killed before you can help them. As for the rest of it...dude, if you're seriously arguing that the lives of the clones don't matter because there's an unlimited supply, then I have nothing else to say to you. That is fucked up.--HanShotFirst 19:54, November 8, 2011 (UTC)

Krell (again...)Edit

First of all, let's keep our debate to our own respective talk pages. If you have an issue with me, than address it to me. In response to what you wrote on CC7567's talk page, as I recall, you neglected to mention that the clones, particularly Rex and Fives, were too busy arguing about Krell's tactics. They only scanned the area after a mine went off. The point is that your edit made it appear as though the operation was compromised only because of Krell. I admit that my previous edits made the clones appear overly incompetent, and I have rectified this in my later edits. As for the narration in The General, the comments are canon (I only believed that they belonged in the Behind the scenes section because I thought they were OOU - Out of Universe - comments). Nevertheless, we still have to write the article in a NPOV perspective. Those comments (e.g. "disastrous defeat" and "reckless strategy") are subjective, implying too much that it was all Krell's fault and the clones were blameless. I changed it to put a more neutral tone in the article. A similar problem occurred for me once on Palpatine's article. Even though many official, canon sources explicitly state that Palpatine is evil, another user pointed out that the word was too subjective, and thus he wanted that fact put in the Behind the scenes section. We eventually compromised so that the Personality section stated how "In Palpatine's mind, he was evil incarnate"—therefore making it neutral by pointing out how (from an in-universe perspective) Palpatine was "evil incarnate." The point is that even if canon sources are not being given with a NPOV spin, we still have to present the facts without prejudice on Wookieepedia. JRT2010 19:13, November 9, 2011 (UTC)

• I'm not interested in talking to you about this. Not only are you not objective, you lost me when you said that the clones' lives were all worthless and expendable. I'm going to leave this in CC's hands. Now kindly avoid leaving any future comments on this page.--HanShotFirst 22:48, November 9, 2011 (UTC)
  • Any attempts to continue this site-wide dispute will result in severe administrative action. I'm disappointed in both of your conduct, and I hope that this will not continue to be the case in the future. CC7567 ^(talk) 04:21, November 10, 2011 (UTC)