Talk:Coruscant

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article covers subjects of relevance to Architecture. To participate, visit the Wikipedia:WikiProject Architecture for more information. The current monthly improvement drive is Architectural history.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale.


This article is part of WikiProject Star Wars, which aims to build an encyclopedic guide to the Star Wars saga on Wikipedia. To participate, you can improve this article or visit the project page for more information.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Coruscant article.

Contents

[edit] Coruscant Population

Who said that Coruscant's Population is 1 quadrillion? The figure cited over and over in the star wars universe is 1 trillion. That's kinda a difference from a quadrillion. A factor of 1000 actually. I will revert to a Trillion until someone cites evidence that shows otherwise (and no... back-of-the-napkin calculations based on guesstimates for population density/surface area don't count).

Y'know, if Coruscant were the size of Earth, the population density would be 5076 people per square mile, which would practically make Coruscant a planet of rowhouses - unless a good portion of the people on Coruscant were fabulously wealthy and had whole chunks of skyscrapers to themselves. Of course, Coruscant might actually be a smaller world with an atmosphere that bends the light slightly. Hard to tell from Star Wars' density. But you said guesstimates like the above don't count, so why bother you? - Rickyrab

  • The population density of the poor regions near the bottom of the planet which be much, much higher than the density of areas near the top, in which wealthier people would own more land. Just like the population density of the most populated areas of Africa are higher than the population densities of the most urbanized areas in North America or Europe. bob rulz 08:58, Jan 9, 2005 (UTC)
    • Not all areas of the planet would be inhabited by the same population density. The Works takes up alot of room yet it is a manufacturing district that was abandoned. In other districts, however, say the financial, senatorial, or entertainment districts, the density could easily be over a million beings in a square mile, because the skyscrapers in those areas are more than a mile high each. Riffsyphon1024 02:22, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
      • Actually, older reference books claim 176 billion, which is almost as absurd as Trantor. Another case of canon conflicting with logic... SpaceCaptain 23:59, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
        • I will check the Inside the Worlds of... Episode II reference book to find the figure because that source will be G-canon. See also: Star Wars canon. -- Riffsyphon1024 16:05, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC)
          • Okay, if you can find the figure, put it in the table at the top, but can you leave in the section on the dispute? It is, after all, disputed frequently. SpaceCaptain 23:36, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • I could not find the section I was looking for in the Ep II, but it is in the Episode I Inside the Worlds book, stated at 1 trillion. -- Riffsyphon1024 02:33, Apr 7, 2005 (UTC)

To further back myself up, I have posted this clip from the Ep I Worlds book to cease all arguments. Star Wars canon states that these books are G-canon and outrule any contradiction. -- Riffsyphon1024 03:14, Apr 7, 2005 (UTC)

No, those books are NOT G-Canon. Actually read the article on Star Wars canon: only the movies, scripts to those movies, the novelizations of the movies, radio dramas of the movies, and direct statements from George Lucas himself is G-Canon, everything else is at most C-Canon. This has been explicitly clarified on starwars.com (http://forums.starwars.com/thread.jspa?threadID=194183&tstart=75) among other places, the misunderstanding began when the author of one of those books said that his books were "canon", which was mistaken by fans to mean "G-canon", when he spoke imprecisely. --Wingsandsword 06:25, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

The population of Coruscant is 1 trillion. The statistic of 1 quadrillion is a fan estimate. -- Heddfones 22:08, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Surface water

Somebody chaged the value from <5% to 29%. Where does that figure come from? SpaceCaptain 15:39, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Oh, sorry. I just see it in the picture. But I always thought it had very little. SpaceCaptain 15:40, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Age of the city?

I didn't think the planetwide city predated the Old Republic; I thought ground was visible in Sith War era stories. SpaceCaptain 23:00, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Source of O2

Surely a totally urbainsed planet would be uninhabitable? Where does the oxygen come from?

If I recall correctly there are massive air scrubbers underneath the surface that provide the Oxygen to the people living there. I've only read NJO, but I think I remember some of the people going down into one at some point. --Ctachme 23:16, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Subsection: The Fall of Coruscant

It might be useful to divide the History section up into subsections, which could provide easy linking to specific parts of Coruscant's history, including the Fall of Coruscant. It might also be useful to include more information on the fall of the planet. I am currently at work assembling some information on this historic event. – Mipadi June 28, 2005 15:26 (UTC)

In one story they turn off the air scrubbers, and expanded universe story...a rouge squadron one, or maybe Mara just mentioned that Palpatine enjoyed being incontroll of the air scrubbers to suffocate the population

[edit] Original surface streets

I've been curious for a long time about what's at the absolute bottom of the planet. The "surfaces" we see at the beginning of EP3, where starships crash, are far above the actual, original ones. We can see crevasses all around, so those "surfaces" we see up top are actually artificial plateaus or mesas. If one could fly down those crevasses and to the first 25 levels, what would things be like down there?

Don't say "pitch black". The airspeeder's lights are on. So are the infrareds and nightvisions. --Shultz 05:08, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Coruscant's Skyscraper Height

Since this city-planet is based in a futuristic setting their building's should be seriously high, im asking if anyone knows the average building height or the tallest in the city planet. taking in note that todays tallest Skyscraper is the Taipei (1,670)Enixspirit 23:27, 13 April 2006 (UTC)EnixSpirit


[edit] Etymology and Naming

I have heard that there may also be a connection to Khorasan. Apart from the obvious similarity of the names and pronounciation, there is also some parallels to Islamic Themes, see here: http://www.altmuslim.com/perm.php?id=1473_0_25_0_C —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.63.30.18 (talk • contribs).

I greatly doub it. That's a bit of a stretch, and a derivation from "coruscating" (or, "coruscant"; as in, "The coruscating gem was coruscant.") is much more likely. --maru (talk) contribs 02:19, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Er, life before Star Wars. The Wiki article itself says the earliest use of this word in the Star Wars universe was in a book in 1991. I know in 1996 or 1997 I received an email from a gentleman interested in starting a small, close-knit discussion community he titled "coruscant". I suppose it is indeed possible that he was pulling from SF fandom, but he didn't seem the sort... A quick check of Meriam Webster's website [1] reveals coruscant is a normal old adjective meaning 'shining' or 'glittering'. Further, Yahooligans gives a more thorough definition and confirms [2] the same etymology as found in the Wiki writeup. Finally, a Google search for phrase "the word coruscant" [3] finds several sites referring to the author E. E. Smith whose use of the word in his 1920s SF is likely what resulted in the planet's naming in Star Wars. Everything old is new again. OldMiner 15:05, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reminiscent of Earth?

Do you guys think George Lucas made Coruscant to hint the future of Earth? --KFan II 16:57, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Nah. That was Asimov. --maru (talk) contribs 20:28, 13 May 2006 (UTC)