- Is there some way to get a list of all characters/individuals from this Category? That's be a good thing to have if you weren't sure how to spell the name. Thanks. - Finlayson 19:59, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
- Why is the info on Krys Ranos at the top of the Individuals page? Looks misplaced. - Finlayson 04:11, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
- It was; I've cut it. It looked a LOT like fanon, so I'm not going to put up a new article for the info; if someone else wants to and can source it, by all means they should do so. jSarek 04:46, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
- Are all other Character cats going to be replaced with "Individuals" cats? It looks odd at the minute - Kwenn 21:35, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
anagram of George Lucas ?[]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ananym includes "Filmmaker George Lucas, who made a Star Wars character named Sarcul Egoge." A web-search for "Sarcul Egoge" only shows wikipedia and sites that copy from wikipedia. Is there a character that is anagram of George Lucas? And if so what is that character's name? Thank you. --EarthFurst 21:54, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
- I think they mean Egroeg Sacul. —Silly Dan (talk) 21:59, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
From Category talk:Characters (now deleted)[]
I can understand having seperate lists for people to look up, say, political characters, but I still think that even if a character is in that category, then they should also be on the main characters page for the casual browser who may not realise that someone is a political character.
- I dont think so personally. Given the vast numbers of characters in SW, its probably best to divide them up as much as possible. Durnar 19:39, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
- We don't want the main character page to be filled with every character, and last I checked there are about 7,000 characters in canon. Please try to categorize them appropriately if at all possible. If a character is not specialized, then they can go into the main character category. -- Riffsyphon1024 19:45, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Ok, I just find it confusing when I'm trying to find someone. I know I can use search but I'm one of those people that likes to look manually, lol. And Durnar, this is all your fault - I wouldn't even be on these pages if it wasn't for you - you've stolen what little i had left of my life!
Hi, I am a casual user and I don't know that much about Star Wars and this article is really confusing. It should at least link to a more standard list, or have a better explanation at the top.
What we should do is split it up by first two letters of the name, like wikipedia does with all of it's articles. I also find this page very confusing; A-Z can make our lives easier. Trosk 01:20, 15 Jan 2006 (UTC)
Better categories[]
To have there be fewer sub-categories, should we move some of these to something like "Characters by species," "Characters by occupation" or "Characters by planet," or something? Wikipedia has a People by occupation category, a people by nationality category, etc.-LtNOWIS 01:15, 4 Oct 2005 (UTC)
- I think it would be excellent to have "Characters by species" and "Characters by affiliation". – Aidje talk 02:41, 4 Oct 2005 (UTC)
- Any other comments? If not, I'll start the "Characters by species" and "Characters by affiliation" categories when I have a chunk of spare time, probably this weekend. -LtNOWIS 04:11, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
- Sounds good to me. Let's stick with the trend of converting OOU categories into IU ones. We can still use "People by species" and "People by affiliation". --SparqMan 04:27, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
- I still can't get over calling all aliens "people" too, but then I'm probably humancentric. -- Riffsyphon1024 04:54, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
- The root definition of "people" is "those who populate", so it works. --SparqMan 07:59, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
- Ok then. People it is, regardless of how many heads or limbs they have. -- Riffsyphon1024 08:26, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
- Well, some droids fall under those categories too. Do we really want to call R3-A2 a person? Maybe "individuals" would be better-LtNOWIS 23:36, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
- Droids would be counted under that category, yes. If there were two Humans, a Dug and two droids in a room, you'd say the population was five, not three. Individuals is just longer. --SparqMan 08:31, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Well, some droids fall under those categories too. Do we really want to call R3-A2 a person? Maybe "individuals" would be better-LtNOWIS 23:36, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
- Ok then. People it is, regardless of how many heads or limbs they have. -- Riffsyphon1024 08:26, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
- I'm going to stick with Individuals on this. It's working for categories Individuals by species and planet so why not for the main category. In addition, droids should not be in the Individuals category but in the Droids category so that point is moot. We need to at least rid ourselves of OOU in the categories. -- Riffsyphon1024 07:07, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
Name[]
Shouldn't the name of this category not be "characters," since all articles linked to are written as in-universe? Adamwankenobi 11:24, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Moving all subcats and characters to Category:Individuals[]
I will try to do this over the next week or so. Help is appreciated. -- Riffsyphon1024 23:32, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- I have completed the project, and will now delete the category, but leave the talk existing. -- Riffsyphon1024 23:37, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- I must question why people are still using this category. Please reformat all articles to the new Category if you have done this. -- Riffsyphon1024 23:30, 10 April 2006 (UTC)