Welcome, DKS MaXoO![] 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: General help A Wookieepedia Tutorial Wookieepedia FAQ Site policies What Wookieepedia is not User page policy User image policy Signature policy Voting policy Privacy policy Multiple account policy Other policies and guidelines Contribution help How to edit a page Sandbox for practicing editing Be bold in updating pages Manual of Style Layout Guide Sourcing Attribution Reliable sources Neutral point of view Guide to image use Things to do Glossary of common terms used on Wookieepedia Wookieepedia aspires to be a reliable source for all Star Wars fans to read and draw information from, and as such, fan-created continuity and fan fiction are not allowed within our articles. All in-universe material must be attributable to a reliable, published source. Do not remove talk page and forum comments, including your own, as they are part of the public record. Remember that you should always sign your comments on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wookieepedian! 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 21:50, October 11, 2010 (UTC)

Talk pages[]

Please do not remove comments from talk pages as they must stay as part of the public record. Thank you. Supreme Emperor (talk) 13:51, June 12, 2013 (UTC)

• You were just warned for this. Don't do it again. IFYLOFD ^{(Enter the Floydome)} 00:34, June 13, 2013 (UTC)
  • IFYLOFD, I didn't know I couldn't edit my very own user page. No need to be aggressive. I'm still learning the Wookieepedian habits and customs. DKS MaXoO (talk) 01:30, June 13, 2013 (UTC)
    • It applies to every talk page, including your own. Sorry if I came off a little aggressive, it's just that this is a somewhat common problem and I don't have a whole lot of patience for it. IFYLOFD ^{(Enter the Floydome)} 01:36, June 13, 2013 (UTC)
      • Apology accepted. Maybe these two articles/quotes can help you understand why I should have the right to edit my own talk page as I want:
• Wikipedia: Removal of comments, notices, and warnings :

"Policy does not prohibit users, whether registered or unregistered users, from removing comments from their own talk pages, although archiving is preferred. The removal of material from a user page is normally taken to mean that the user has read and is aware of its contents. There is no need to keep them on display and usually users should not be forced to do so."

• Wikipedia: Don't restore removed comments :

"If a user removes a comment from their own talk page it should not be restored. By removing the comment the user has verified that they have read it. The comment is still in the page history, so it is not necessary to keep it visible just to show that the user received the message. It is also wrong to force them to keep it there as a sort of "Badge of Shame"." DKS MaXoO (talk) 02:42, June 13, 2013 (UTC)

• Wookieepedia is not Wikipedia. Their rules don't apply here. Cade Calrayn 02:46, June 13, 2013 (UTC)

• Supreme Emperor, I was about to respond to you on your page. I deleted my comment on the Yavin's Caprice talk page as it was not answered and hence became completely useless after I edited the page. I didn't know it was considered as an act of vandalism to remove my very own comments. Anyway, thank you for looking over my shoulder. Feel free to change the article back to the way it was if you think the Yavin's Caprice should not be considered as a Gymsnor-3 light freighter. DKS MaXoO (talk) 01:30, June 13, 2013 (UTC)

Atrivis sector[]

Hello; basically, I undid you edit for the following reasons. Atrivis sector is a Featured Article, which is ascertained by the star tag in the upper right corner. As such, the page has gone through peer review and has to adhere to certain qualities and standards. Your edit introduced at least one unsourced item into the battle section, which is not allowed for Featured Articles. Also, there is no standard layout guide as to how sector battles are laid out in the sector article but the current format of Atrivis was neater in terms of infobox space. The general rule of thumb is to follow the examples laid down in FAs. Granted, this only amounts to two articles - Atrivis and Bozhnee - but these should set the example. Hope that helps. - Sir Cavalier of One^{(Squadron channel)} 21:06, August 17, 2013 (UTC)

• Hi, thank you for your explanation. I have reviewed every known sector for the last few weeks and they now all have the same layout. The Atrivis sector is the only remaining sector which isn't like the others regarding the sector battles. The current format is not that neat, nor is it in chronological order like it is for the others. I'm going to edit this section again, but this time with all the items correctly sourced, since that is required for a Featured Article. As a Featured Article, the Atrivis sector should be seen as the example to follow, not as the odd one. Best regards. DKS MaXoO (talk) 13:27, September 1, 2013 (UTC)

Rhen Var battles[]

Hi there, I went ahead and removed the merge tag from Attack on Rhen Var. The source specifies that there was two separate events. Cheers, Corellian Premier^{The Force will be with you always} 14:04, August 31, 2013 (UTC)

Minor edits[]

Hey, DKS, if you're going to go on those major category-adding sprees, which is great, it'd be awesome if you could set those edits to minor while doing so so that they don't clog the RecentChanges. You can toggle all edits to minor in Preferences. Cade Calrayn 17:41, September 21, 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks, I'll do that.--DKS MaXoO (talk) 17:44, September 21, 2013 (UTC)

Good work[]

501st dogma(talk) has awarded you a Wookiee Cookie! For fixing a slew of category issues, I think you deserve more than a pat on the back

Warning[]

If you're going to change a ton of categories, then I suggest that you pay close attention to the details. Per WP:LG, you must adhere to DEFAULTSORT, which automatically sorts out of the categories. I had to correct two of your errors already. I'm sure there's more, so I suggest that you stop changing more categories and fix your mistakes. Failure to do so would result in a temporary block from editing. Thanks, JangFett ^(Talk) 13:46, February 3, 2014 (UTC)

• Hi. I'll use DEFAULTSORT from now on.--DKS MaXoO (talk) 13:52, February 3, 2014 (UTC)
  • You're still not utilizing it properly. Look here: [1]. It should be Bespin, Raid on not Bespin 4 for the DEFAULTSORT. You have to use the actual article name, not some other name. When you use DEFAULTSORT, do not use the formatting for alphabetizing [[Category|Format]]. Just use the category and DEFAULTSORT. JangFett ^(Talk) 14:17, February 3, 2014 (UTC)
• Please also pay attention to your formatting. There should not be a blank space between DEFAULTSORT and the category. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 14:54, February 3, 2014 (UTC)
• You have been blocked from contributing for 1 week for continuous insertion of poor quality edits. DKS, during your time off, I strongly encourage you to look around at various articles, our policies and its consensus updates. You continue to overlink, even in status articles, you rarely pay close attention to your mistakes. Making quick short edits won't help you at all. I shouldn't nor should others clean up after you.. To contest this block, please contact the blocking administrator with the reason you believe the block is unjustified. JangFett ^(Talk) 22:28, February 3, 2014 (UTC)

Explanation[]

Hello. Apparently, you didn't see the point of these multiple short edits and misunderstood my intentions, so I wanted to explain myself.

First of all, I started these edits in order to clean up the categories for the Battles/Missions of the Galactic Civil War and the Clone Wars. The missions of these two conflicts used to be all mixed up within:

- Category:Battles of the Clone Wars

- Category:Battles of the Galactic Civil War

Missions are usually kept separated from battles when they are too many. This is why I cleaned that up. They are now in the right categories, where they should be:

- Category:Missions of the Clone Wars

- Category:Missions of the Galactic Civil War

Also, these categories and their subcategories are now alphabetized. I alphabetized several other categories too, including the following:

- Category:Missions

- Category:Battles

- Category:Battles of the Yuuzhan Vong War

- and several other subcategories in Category:Battles by conflict

Secondly, I started alphabetizing these categories using the [[Category|Format]] system because it is widely used by users. I was just following the commonly used system. Like probably most of the users, I didn't even know about the DEFAULTSORT system before you told me about it. When you told me about it, I started to use it right away. I believe this was proving my good will in these edits. And after Toprawa and Ralltiir told me not to leave a blank space between DEFAULTSORT and the category, I also started to do so right away.

As you can see on my user talk page, I was awarded a Wookiee Cookiee by 501st dogma for a similar work on Category:Imperial starships, which also consisted of hundreds of quick edits to divide everything into the right subcategories.

I believe my edits in this new project were good. If they weren't, they would have been massively undone by other users. And yet you decided to block my account hours after I was done with this long project. I was quite surprised. As you can imagine, this work was very time-consuming and for the benefit of Wookieepedia. I didn't do it in order to receive some kind of reward, but I really feel like I didn't deserve a blame for it.

Anyway, I'm moving on so I won't do these kinds of multiple short edits again if that annoys you. Understandably, I don't want to get into more trouble because of that. --DKS MaXoO (talk) 21:32, February 11, 2014 (UTC)

WEG[]

Please do not reuse WEG if you come across it. The template has been deprecated, and should be replaced with {{WEGCite}}. Cade Calrayn 21:05, May 13, 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks for the info. I'll change my last edits.--DKS MaXoO (talk) 21:08, May 13, 2014 (UTC)

Categories[]

FYI, if a ship is in a subcat of another category, like a ship in Category:Galactic Republic starships, it does not need to also be in Category:Starships. It is actually already in the category thanks to Category:Galactic Republic starships. Trip391 (talk) 05:21, December 15, 2014 (UTC)

• I will soon go through Category:Starships to remove anything redundant. Thanks for your help. --DKS MaXoO (talk) 05:28, December 15, 2014 (UTC)

Starships[]

ProfessorTofty (talk) has awarded you the Pit Droid Award of Diligence! for your tireless work in categorizing starships.

ProfessorTofty (talk) 03:08, February 5, 2015 (UTC)

No "???"[]

Do not add "???" to articles. Also, there should not be a space under an infobox. Trip391 (talk) 06:03, July 7, 2015 (UTC)

• I'll change it right now.--DKS MaXoO (talk) 06:06, July 7, 2015 (UTC)
  • Also, make sure you close the italics for The Unknown Regions when you use it in a reference, not like this. Trip391 (talk) 06:10, July 7, 2015 (UTC)

Hy i need some help with my post thanks

Not sure if you knew[]

But Prelude to Rebellion 0, which you list on your user page, was recently collected for the first time in Star Wars Legends Epic Collection: Rise of the Sith Volume 2.--ZapikCZ (talk) 16:02, January 8, 2018 (UTC)

• Thanks!--DKS MaXoO (talk) 16:05, January 8, 2018 (UTC)

Wookieepedian of the Month[]

Congratulations, you've been elected Wookieepedian of the Month for February 2018! Feel free to add {{User WotM}} to your userpage. Cheers, 1358 ^(Talk) 00:14, February 1, 2018 (UTC)

• Hurray! Thank you very much! --DKS MaXoO (talk) 00:58, February 1, 2018 (UTC)
  • Congrats! --Lewisr (talk) 01:00, February 1, 2018 (UTC)

A Trooper's Tale question[]

I noticed the changes that you were making related to the date referncing of "A Trooper's Tale". Does that source state that it occurs in 22 BBY? If so, how does the source state this?--Exiled Jedi (talk) 16:29, March 4, 2018 (UTC)

• This story is set before "Heroes on Both Sides" (21 BBY), which marks the debut of revamped appearances for several main characters. Considering that the comics featured in Star Wars Comic UK are published in chronological order, and that "Burn the Behemoth!" is the first comic in the series to feature the new character models, it can be concluded that "A Trooper's Tale" takes place in 22 BBY.--DKS MaXoO (talk) 16:37, March 4, 2018 (UTC)
  • From what you are saying, that date cannot be sourced directly to "A Trooper's Tale." I am also not sure how this means that it has to take place in 22 BBY. Couldn't it take place in 21 BBY as well?--Exiled Jedi (talk) 17:52, March 4, 2018 (UTC)

Backup links[]

Hello! Thanks for your addition to the Trigalis/Legends article! Please note, however, that, per our Sourcing policy, citation templates with external links in them must always include a permanent archival link. Thanks, Imperators II^(Talk) 06:18, October 2, 2019 (UTC)

DEFAULTSORT[]

Hello. Please be aware that conjecturally-titled articles should not be capitalized in the DEFAULTSORT template. For example, the "invasion of Tervissis" is an unofficial title and is thus not capitalized as a formal name. Please go back and revise all of your changes in this regard. Thank you. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 14:23, February 18, 2020 (UTC)

• Hello. You might have noticed I'm currently adding more content in the categories Category:Battles by sector and Category:Battles by planet. Concurrently, I'm also correcting the DEFAULTSORT templates of many battles to sort them by alphabetical order in their categories. I accomplish this task by copying and pasting the titles of these articles in the DEFAULTSORT template.
  Please understand it's a huge and monotonous task, so I'm not checking if every single title is conjectural or not. I'm just putting the battles in the right categories, and I sort them by alphabetical order. I'm simply replicating what is commonly done everywhere else on Wookieepedia.
  Also, I was not aware of that very specific rule regarding the DEFAULTSORT template in conjecturally-titled articles. I'll be more careful when I edit comprehensive/good articles in the future. I've just changed "invasion of Tervissis" and "raids on Tervissis" in this regard. However, I won't be able to do that for every ordinary article. This task is already very time-consuming as it is, and changing a capital letter for a small letter simply won't change anything for sorting the articles by alphabetical order in their categories.
  If one of my edits is not to your liking, feel free to improve it. Regarding the "debacle on Ord Torrenze", it's debacle "on", not debacle "of". Please go back and revise your change in this regard. Thank you.--DKS MaXoO (talk) 16:15, February 18, 2020 (UTC)

Archive link[]

Thanks for contributing to Wookieepedia! Please note that your edit to File:Cadinth_Run.jpg added an external link without including a backup link. Our Sourcing policy mandates the inclusion of a permanent archival link in all external links. Instructions for doing this can be found on the respective citation template pages. Thanks! NanoLuuke^{Cloning facility} 09:16, May 8, 2020 (UTC)

Edit summaries[]

Thank you for contributing to Wookieepedia! When editing, please remember to provide an edit summary more often. This helps your fellow Wookieepedians, particularly those patrolling the Recent changes, understand what changes you are making and why you are making them. Thanks! JediMasterMacaroni(Talk) 23:11, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

File names[]

Hello. Just a heads up that using apostrophes in file names should be avoided. JediMasterMacaroni^(Talk) 02:22, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

3600s BBY[]

Hey there. I just want to check with you whether 3600s BBY, to which you've been adding links across various articles, falls outside the scope of the Wookieepedia:Notability_policy#Centuries_and_decades policy. OOM 224 16:38, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

• Hello there. Sorry it took me so long to answer, I just saw the notification for your message.
  
  I believe the authors of The Essential Guide to Warfare wrote "the Sith Wars of the 3600s BBY" for two reasons. First, to differentiate these Sith Wars from the Old Sith Wars and the New Sith Wars. Second, because at the time of writing, Star Wars: The Old Republic was still releasing new content, meaning that they didn't know the precise end date of the events featured in the game.
  
  To answer your question, I'm not sure whether 3600s BBY deserves an article or not regarding this policy. I think it would add more clarity regarding the other Sith Wars (Old and New). And also, it seems to imply that the events featured in the game are confined to this century only.
  
  To continue on the same topic, articles have been rightfully created for 10,970s BBY, 9400s BBY, 9200s BBY, 7700s BBY, 5130s BBY, 900s BBY and 690s BBY.
  
  I believe articles should be granted to the following centuries, since they are both explicitly named in The Essential Guide to Warfare and have one event assigned to them that does not have an explicitly identified date: 11,600s BBY, 11,500s BBY, 7500s BBY, 6700s BBY, 6100s BBY, 4100s BBY and 2500s BBY.
  
  200s BBY (mentioned twice), 150s BBY and 30s BBY (mentioned three times) may also need their own articles.
  
  Regarding 11,820s BBY and 11,100s BBY, I believe articles are not necessary, since the dates "c. 11,820 BBY" and "c. 11,100 BBY" both appear on the map of Contispex's Crusades (page 26).
  
  —DKS MaXoO (talk) 02:17, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

References[]

Hello DKS MaXoO, I noticed your edit to Uogo'cor suppression, and I wanted to let you know that we do not mention page numbers in references like this: Crisis of Faith, p. 3 (for example) We only link the source, without adding which page says what. Thanks! Cheers, Samonic 20:21, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Clone Wars Comic UK[]

Do you happen to remember your source for saying that the Clone Wars Comic UK stories were published in chronological order in edits like this a few years back? I'm trying to clean up the Clone Wars chronology on Timeline of Legends media and I'm having a hard time getting verifiable placements for those comics. RogueWhistler (talk) 16:37, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Nice work![]

'Fan26' (Talk) has awarded you a Wookiee Cookie! I've seen you in the recent changes lately doing a lot of good work re-categorising Legends battle articles by location etc etc. Thanks for all the effort with this monotonous but essential chore. Fan26 (Talk) 03:00, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Categories[]

Hey DKS. Heads up that you should always be sorting categories with {DEFUALTSORT}, like so. JediMasterMacaroni^(Talk) 00:14, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

• Hey. It would be great if a bot could take care of that change. I would have used the {DEFAULTSORT} if it had been present in these categories four years ago, when I started copying and pasting them to create new ones.—DKS MaXoO (talk) 02:33, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Yeah I do think a bot can make those changes, I've left Cade a message on Discord (which you're totally welcome to join by the way (Wookieepedia:Discord), we'd love to have you!). JediMasterMacaroni^(Talk) 04:57, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Battle of Aargonar[]

Hey, quick question! Where did you find a mention of Battle of Aargonar (Clone Wars) in Star Wars: The Clone Wars: Episode Guide? I looked a while ago but could not find anything, which was part of the reason Battle on Aargonar was split off to be its own thing (nothing i could find links the TCW mentioned battle and the comics battle as the same event) Editoronthewiki (talk) 02:47, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

• Hi! Just an error on my part when I edited the article. This line was actually meant for Aargonar's article. Nothing indicates a connection between the two battles (that would be cool though).—DKS MaXoO (talk) 03:16, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Destruction of the Pakuuni Pirates[]

Given how First Battle of the Pakuuni system is now Destruction of the Pakuuni Pirates, are you going to move Second Battle of the Pakuuni system and Third Battle of the Pakuuni system to differently named articles? Rakhsh (talk) 22:47, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

• Hi! I don't intend to do that, but these articles could definitely use better titles!—DKS MaXoO (talk) 23:54, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

Fact File 2014[]

Hello there! Thank you for the heads-up about the content on Faran in the Fact File remake series. I've noted that for implementation after the editors currently working on formulating a concrete policy on how we're treating the canonicity of this Canon-and-Legends-mixing series have done so, and I'd recommend that you hold off on adding content from those issues to other pages for now as well. Imperators II^(Talk) 09:57, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Chandrila[]

Hey there! When you have a chance would you be able to look at your objection on Chandrila here please? Vergence appears to have addressed and responded a while back. Thanks! Lewisr (talk) 05:26, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

• Done. I'll write a few more when I have the time to get back to it. — DKS MaXoO (talk) 10:24, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
  • Thanks so much! Lewisr (talk) 21:21, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Pius Dea Crusades categorization[]

Hi! I'd like to ask about your reasoning behind this change. The way I see it, the articles on the individual Pius Dea Crusades should still be in the "Pius Dea Crusades" category, no different than, say, having the articles on individual humans be in Category:Humans. I know that categories like that one that fulfill a strictly "these are all the known X" function are only one type of categories that Wookieepedia employs, the other type being "portal"-like categories such as Category:Chiss culture, which instead contain all pages related to a given topic, and I also realize that the Pius Dea Crusades category serves both functions, but it fulfilling the second purpose doesn't mean that it shouldn't also be used for the first purpose, i.e., listing all the known Pius Dea Crusades. Imperators II^(Talk) 07:34, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

• Hi! The main idea is to separate battles, missions and campaigns. However in some rare occasions, such as for Category:Pius Dea Crusades and Category:Alsakan Conflicts, the main conflict is actually divided into several conflicts, not several campaigns. It appears more clearly for the Alsakan Conflicts, which has both "conflicts" and "campaigns."
  But more than that, I want to avoid having an article listed twice in the same line of categories.
  For instance, if you put all the different Pius Dea Crusades in Category:Pius Dea Crusades, then you'll have the Twelfth Pius Dea Crusade article listed both here and in the sub-category Category:Battles of the Twelfth Pius Dea Crusade. You could decide to put the Twelfth Pius Dea Crusade only in the sub-category Category:Battles of the Twelfth Pius Dea Crusade to avoid this, but then Category:Pius Dea Crusades would list all the Pius Dea Crusades except the Twelfth, which is not very good for a user who would like to see all of them at once.
  It's the same thing for the Alsakan Conflicts. If you put all the different Alsakan Conflicts in Category:Alsakan Conflicts, then you'll have the First, Fourth, Seventh, Tenth and Seventeenth articles listed both here and in sub-categories. You could decide to put these Alsakan Conflicts only in their respective sub-categories to avoid this, but then Category:Alsakan Conflicts would list all the Alsakan Conflicts except the First, Fourth, Seventh, Tenth and Seventeenth, which again is not very good for a user who would like to see all of them at once. —DKS MaXoO (talk) 10:29, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
• Another solution would be to create Category:Twelfth Pius Dea Crusade so that all Pius Dea Crusades appear in Category:Pius Dea Crusades without having the same article listed several times in the same line of categories. However, I find it sort of strange to have such a category with only one sub-category within it (Category:Battles of the Twelfth Pius Dea Crusade). Same thing for the Alsakan Conflicts, for which Category:First Alsakan Conflict, Category:Fourth Alsakan Conflict, Category:Seventh Alsakan Conflict, Category:Tenth Alsakan Conflict and Category:Seventeenth Alsakan Conflict could be created.
  On a related note, there is also the category Category:Conflicts of the Old Sith Wars to distinguish them from the other conflicts of the era, but not related to the Old Sith Wars (Category:Conflicts during the Old Sith Wars), since the Old Sith Wars are the name of both a conflict and a period of history. —DKS MaXoO (talk) 11:10, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
  • I think it makes much more sense to have the individual Crusades in the "Pius Dea Crusades" category but place the "Battles of the Twelfth Pius Dea Crusade" category in the {{RelatedCategories}} template, as mandated here. Imperators II^(Talk) 13:10, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
    • Done. —DKS MaXoO (talk) 15:25, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Metharian Nebula Territories[]

Your recent edits to Metharian Nebula Territories omitted the fact that the region includes all of the Danjar sector/Legends, Elrood sector/Legends, and Tantra sector. Rakhsh (talk) 19:35, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

• Hi. That's because the HoloNet News does not clearly establish that the Danjar and Tantra sectors are located within the Metharian Nebula Territories.—DKS MaXoO (talk) 21:15, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the info. Rakhsh (talk) 00:28, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

The sources you removed from the Legions of Lettow article[]

Why did you remove The Emperor's Pawns, The New Essential Guide to Characters, and The Jedi Path from the sources list for Legions of Lettow? All those sources mention Xendor's followers. Darklordoftech (talk) 21:30, 2 June 2024 (UTC)Darklordoftech

• Hi! I put them back with the {{Imo}} template. —DKS MaXoO (talk) 16:57, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Ninn[]

Hi DKS MaXoO, could I ask where in Far Horizons is Ninn mentioned so that I can update the article if needed? Thanks, Ayrehead02 (talk) 16:48, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

• Hi! Ninn is mentioned on page 14. "A Politico may start life as a preacher for one of the galaxy’s many faiths. He might be from the bantha-worshipping Dim-U monks, the trendy, female-empowering Zealots of Psusan, the frontier- minded Children of Mani, the serious Order of the Ffib, or one of the chaste Priests of Ninn." —DKS MaXoO (talk) 11:40, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
  • Ah, excellent thanks. Doesn't sound like there's any new info for the page then. Ayrehead02 (talk) 12:45, 6 September 2024 (UTC)