Talk:Darth Vader/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Stunt double Bob Anderson

Someone keeps adding Bob Anderson (David Prowse's stunt double for Darth Vader) as an actor who played Vader. Stunt doubles are never credited this way. I've mentioned in "Behind the Scenes" that Bob Anderson was the stunt double in Episodes V and VI, where the information belongs, but stunt doubles do not qualify as actors to have played the role. They are not listed as such in the credits of *any* film that I have *ever* seen, nor on IMDB, nor on Wikipedia.

The information is already present in the article; I'm not removing it. I'm just keeping it in its proper place as dictated by decades of convention. — Phil Welch 04:48, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

During the shooting on Return of the Jedi there was a interview with David Prowse in which a quote was twisted, making George Lucas think that Prowse had revealed the secret that Vader died in the third movie. After this Prowse was essentially fired from the film and Bob Anderson took over. For example, All of the footage of Vader with the Emporer is Anderson not prowse (except for when Palpitine is thrown down the reactor shaft which is prowse throwing a stunt double. Due to this Prowse has never met Ian McDiarmid. Although he is not credited, It could be stated that "Anderson was in the costume during a bulk of shooting on Return of the Jedi". Dowew 21:31, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Interesting. Good way of covering the information. — Phil Welch 00:08, 27 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Recent edits

I've been reverting virtually all of the recent edits after spending several days reviewing and repairing them. I'm not going to bother justifying any single edit unless I'm specifically asked to, but here's some rationale for most of my reversions:

First, I've pretty much removed all interpretation from the article. There are two big reasons for this. One is NPOV. Wikipedia is written according to a Neutral Point of View. Providing interpretations in the article the way they've been written so far is biased and doesn't conform. The proper way to address the issue is to attribute all interpretive or POV remarks to someone as long as those interpretations are notable. But as far as I can tell, the interpretations offered are the personal interpretations of those editing the article, which constitutes original research, which is disallowed.

Secondly, summaries are just that--summaries. The small bits at the beginning of a section or at the beginning of an article are supposed to give a general sense of the topic, not provide detailed information. Detailed information goes down below.

Thirdly, factual information. I have the DVD's of the original trilogy, and all of the quotes from the original trilogy I have either put there or verified. Recently people have been changing them incorrectly.

Finally, copyediting. Wikipedia is written in standard written English, not casual internet English. Anakin's line, written in standard written English, is "I hate you!", not "I HATE YOU!", because all-capital-letters is not a valid feature of standard written English. (There may be exceptions, but this isn't one of them). Similarly, "No" has one O, not eight. I've allowed "Nooo!" as a compromise because it expresses the meaning and sound without taking up a third of the page.

This article is pretty much near perfection, and if it wasn't for everyone's help it wouldn't be. The problem with perfection is that if you change perfection, you make it worse. In other words, any given edit to this article has a bigger chance of making it worse than improving it, just because we don't have as much room left for improvement (and a lot of room left for making it worse).

Phil Welch 00:56, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

I don't know why my edits keep getting revised, but it's annoying. All I did was to add a few images; they kept getting removed! I also added Luke's line in his conversation with Vader, which comes after Vader reveals to Luke that he is his father. "It can't be! It's impossible! Nooo!" But it was removed! Why? Scorpionman 6 July 2005 02:09 (UTC)

You don't want to clutter the page with images, and Luke's line didn't seem particularly important or relevant to the article. As I've said, the article is already close enough to perfection that most changes will be harmful, not helpful. — Phil Welch 6 July 2005 03:00 (UTC)

When did Vader first know Leia is his daughter

Return of the Jedi gives the impression that Luke betrays his sister's existence to their father, but this is hardly necessarily so. Vader's "gotcha" could be a ruse to raise Luke's emotions (especially fear), which, of course, it does very well. Vader may have felt his daughter and realized who she was before the Cloud City carbon-freezing chamber. -Acjelen 01:50, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Return of the Jedi almost certainly is the first time Vader new that Leia is his daughter. If Vader would have know about Leia, he would have turned her to the Dark Side and trained her in the ways of the Sith. Together, they would have overthrown Palpitine and become Emperor and Empress. Together they would rule the Galaxy as father and daughter. Treachery is the way of the Sith. Besides, we only know what is in movies and books. According to the books, Vader does not learn about Leia until he Return of the Jedi. --— Ŭalabio 02:34, 2005 Jun 8 (UTC)
Isn't that a plot of an alternative-storyline comic book series? Anyway, I have no need to feel limited in my analysis of the Star Wars movies by novelizations. -Acjelen 04:11, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
The comic is called Star Wars - Infinities and was published by Dark Horse Comics. The series was anagous to Marvel Comics series "Wahat If?" In Infinities - A New Hope Luke's attack failed to destroy the Death Star; instead it tempoarily disabled the Death Star's prime weapon giving the rebels time to get off the moon before it is destroyed. Meanwhile, all of the Death Star's fighters are deployed and Vader forces the Rebel ship to divert to Death Star. Luke and Han escape into Hyperspace. Vader takes Leia to Coruscant where he begins to subtly influence her. Though he is aware (possibly from his earlier sessions with her) of her strength with the Force, he is completly unaware of the fact that she is his daughter until the Emperor reveals this to him in the end. Robeykr 06:57, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I shall add this information to the article.

--

— Ŭalabio 01:36, 2005 Jun 10 (UTC)

I must have missed that comic. By all means, add it to the appropriate section . Just remember to cite your sources. In the primary timeline, Unless George Lucas says otherwise, we have no reason to believe Vader knew about his daughter.

--

— Ŭalabio 02:14, 2005 Jun 9 (UTC)

The moment after Anakin loses his limbs and left arm to Obi-Wan...

Take note that Anakin's eyes turned yellow during the moments before he got burned, and his skin started turning pale, though not as severe as Palpatine's. If you look closely, you will see that Anakin's eyes stayed Sith Yellow during the moments of his enstrandment and his near-immolation. This should be noted, since we see Anakin's anger reaching its peak.

But they were yellow before that. When he's killing everyone on the Sepratist council, his eyes are yellow in the shot before he goes through the door into the room. Dismas 19:06, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Errors found

The battle concludes on the banks of the lava river, where Anakin force-leaps toward Obi-Wan, who defends by severing Anakin's left arm and both of his lower legs. This results in Anakin becoming immobilised on the embankment.

I need to point out that Anakin slides closer to the Lava Shore.

I don't think that's a particularly necessary detail. Detail is good, minutae is not. He slides down closer, but I don't see how it's important. — Phil Welch 12:37, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

His clothing then ignites, causing him to receive severe burn injuries.

No, Anakin does not get burned until after Obi-Wan and himself finishes talking.

That's in the proper place. — Phil Welch 12:37, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Obi-Wan: "You were the chosen one! It was said that you would destroy the Sith, not join them! It was you who would bring balance to the Force, not leave it in darkness! Anakin: "I hate you!" Obi-Wan: "You were my brother, Anakin. I loved you."

I also need to point out that after Obi-Wan says "not leave it in darkness!", he picks up Anakin's lightsaber.

Yeah, I added in that he left with the lightsaber, but the specific timing of when he picked it up is minutae. — Phil Welch 12:37, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Following this, Obi-Wan leaves, rescuing Padme and departing the planet.

Obi-Wan did witness Anakin's near-immolation before he had to leave. Obi-Wan looked at disbelief as he saw the horror of Anakin's near-incineration, and before the flames stopped burning Anakin, Obi-Wan then left Mustafar, refusing to watch any further.

I guess it could be made more clear that Obi-Wan watched. I'll try and edit that. — Phil Welch 12:37, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Done. — Phil Welch 18:13, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Darth Vader: "I couldn't have! She was alive! I felt her! She was alive! It's impossible! No!"

Vader does a Force Scream before he says "No!". The medical rehab starts trembling before Vader says "No!" with a Force Scream.

It clearly states that he shook the room with the Force. — Phil Welch 12:37, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

He also damaged some of the nearby droids with said scream PlatinumTracks 16:44, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

I needed to state some discrepancies here. Anakin only got burned after he talked to Obi-Wan for the final time, with Obi-Wan taking Anakin's lightsaber before Anakin said "I hate you!".

Right. — Phil Welch 12:37, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Featured Article

I think this is getting close to FA status (criteria are available at Wikipedia:What is a featured article). What does everyone else think? I'm really pleased with how everyone has been working on the article and improving it, so I think I'm going to list at Wikipedia:Peer review and see what everyone thinks before submitting it. — Phil Welch 04:26, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Incinerated or Immolated?

I think "Immolated" made more sense than "Incinerated" IMO. Incinerate means when you die because you were immensed to the lava. Immolate means you die because you were endlessly burned. I don't think "Incinerated" makes any sense--if any of you have the Star Wars Episode III Motion Picture Soundtrack, one of the tracks is called "The Immolation Scene"--that is, that Anakin Skywalker is nearly immolated NOT nearly incinerated.

I agree. — Phil Welch 02:52, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I would say Anakin was actually immolated, and nearly incinerated, for much the same reasons mentioned above.

Not before Obi-Wan warned Anakin

The battle ends on the banks of the lava river, where Anakin, overconfident, leaps to strike his former master, only to lose his left arm and both legs to Obi-Wan's blade. Anakin is stranded on the embankment, desparately trying to claw his way up the scree with his remaining arm, as Obi-Wan watches from above.

An overconfident Anakin leaped to strike his former master, but not before Obi-Wan leaped to the slope of the hillside, trying to warn Anakin to stop attacking. Actually, Anakin ignored Obi-Wan's warning--that's how Obi-Wan managed to cut Anakin's legs and left arm off. Obi-Wan would not attack unless he actually warns, sometimes violence does not solve things.

Obi-Wan: I have the high ground!
Anakin: You underestimate my power!!!

Obi-Wan's warning of having the high ground means that Obi-Wan tried to prevent Anakin from receiving his "Darth Vader Injuries" but Anakin just totally ignored Obi-Wan's warnings. I think the fact Obi-Wan tried to warn Anakin to stop attacking should be added to this article, knowing that Obi-Wan does not believe in violence. Obi-Wan didn't cut Anakin's legs and left arm before he warned Anakin.

We don't need a blow-by-blow account of the duel. — Phil Welch 18:34, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Under Anakin!

You must put this artilce under Anakin Skywalker. The character was born and died Anakin Skywalker. Darth Vader is an AKA. Also, "the community" did not decide to put it under Darth Vader! I'm a member of "the community", and I don't want to put it under Vader! Wait! I know how to settle this! Ahem, obvserve, this is what the New Essential Guide to Characters did: Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader

I don't care either way, but your move was reverted because it was improper in two ways: it was undiscussed, and it was a copy/paste move, which had the effect of destroying the page histories of both articles. Please do not do this again. -- Hadal 02:36, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

"Darth Vader" is the name that's known better. Under Wikipedia standards, any biography article goes under the best-known name. See Chiang Kai-Shek for another example of this, or also Malcolm X. — Phil Welch 17:44, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Also, "Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader", with Mediawiki, is a subpage, and not an article. Slashes cannot be used in Wikipedia article titles for that reason. — Phil Welch 17:47, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

No it isn't, slashes in the main namespace do not create subpages, and articles can contain slashes in their titles. —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 17:56, 2005 Jun 14 (UTC)
Care to show an example? The standard copyvio subpage (for rewriting an article that's flagged as a copyvio) is located at %foo/temp with %foo being the article title, so at most it's a "not necessarily" instead of a "no". — Phil Welch 18:11, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
You're misunderstanding what a sub-page is, just because you have one page named foo and another named foo/bar it doesn't automatically mean that foo/bar is a subpage of foo, (no more than foozbar is a subpage of foo), slashes (or any other string) don't delimit subpages in the main namespace.
If you're still in doubt as to what a subpage in MediaWiki is I suggest you read the appropriate code, I have. —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 18:30, 2005 Jun 16 (UTC)
I never was "in doubt as to what a subpage in MediaWiki is". Could you try to not be so condescending? — Phil Welch 20:48, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Well you thought that "Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader" would be a subpage (it's not), and that slashes could not be used in article titles (they can). I was merely trying to help by explaining that, I didn't mean to sound condescending. —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 13:08, 2005 Jun 17 (UTC)

Additionally, I might add that with a merged article at all, we have an inherent spoiler problem with the fact that Anakin Skywalker is Darth Vader. Having an article titled Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader is a big problem for that reason. (Admittedly, so is a redirect from Anakin Skywalker to Darth Vader). — Phil Welch 18:14, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Spoilers? Who on earth DOESN'T know Anakin is Darth Vader? Ace-o-aces 19:14, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Probably well over 2 billion people. Please try not to be ethnocentric. — Phil Welch 20:35, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Anyone who doesn't know this probably isn't using the internet anyway. As for being ethnocentric, this is the ENGLISH wikipedia, written for ENGLISH speaking peoples. I doubt there are 2 Billion english speakers who don't know Darth Vader = anakin. Ace-o-aces 14:38, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
It's still a spoiler and Wikipedia still has a spoiler policy. As a young child seeing the films for the first time in the early 90's, I was surprised to learn that Vader was Luke's father. I don't want the children of the future to be deprived of that. — Phil Welch 00:38, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Time to straighten things out. Anakin lived 23 years of his life as Sith Lord Darth Vader. This warrants the article to be named under Darth Vader. Anakin lived as Anakin for only 22 years. 23 vs 22. Darth Vader wins. (anonymous edit)

Biography articles go under the best-known name, which pretty much outweighs any longevity argument. Chiang Kai-Shek is a prime example of that. — Phil Welch 04:40, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)


George Lucas's point of view over the Star Wars universe is law, and should we not follow his feelings about Anakin and Vader being two people. go to the star wars: databank, on the Starwars.com web site it states:

"As turmoil engulfed the galaxy during the transition from Republic to Empire, Anakin fell to the dark side of the Force. Consumed by evil, Anakin abandoned his past and his humanity. He became Darth Vader, Dark Lord of the Sith, apprentice to the evil Emperor Palpatine."

it also lists Anakin being in Episodes 1,2,3,and 6, if Lucas wanted them to be one person then it would have said Episodes 1,2,3,4,5,6

under the Darth Vader link on the Starwars.com site it clearly states:

" Anakin was grievously wounded in the fight. His burning anger kept him alive, and he was forever scarred not only by his wounds but also by betrayal. He abandoned his former identity. When metal coupled with flesh in the form of cyborg implants and enhancements required to sustain him, Skywalker's transformation was complete. He was no longer Anakin. He was Darth Vader."

it also lists Vader being in Episodes 4,5,and 6, if Lucas wanted them to be one person then Vader would be called Anakin Skywalker in 4,5,6 not Darth Vader.

Plus you "Philwelch" stated the point about Anakin and Vader:

 Your Words about the Bio box for Vader/Anakin to Be separate: 
    "Enough of the information changes during the transition from Anakin to Vader that having two separate boxes makes sense. The story seems to make a big point of the two being two different sides, two different personas inside the same person, so I think the separation makes sense."

the two being two different sides, two different personas sounds like two different minds in one body so Anakin should be listed as a separate person !!!!!!

                                                        (Sithlord)

Trivia Section

I'm not sure if you are aware of this, but some parts of this Darth Vader article can actually be placed under a Trivia section, which outlines some things you usually don't know (i.e. Anakin's eyes turned yellow just before he got immolated, during his pre-immolation speech with Obi-Wan Kenobi, Anakin would've been incinerated if Obi-Wan slashed all of Anakin's limbs). — Vesther 0:12 hours CDT, 18 June 2005

I don't think so. That's not "trivia" per se, just trivial details. — Phil Welch 08:44, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)


New Section Header

Should the "anakin skywalker" and "darth vader" sections be under a unified "History" section header (or "bio" or something along those lines) to make the article a little more readable? --InShaneee 22:39, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Retrieval or Confiscation?

I attempted to say that "Obi-Wan confiscated Anakin's Lightsaber", but since "confiscate" has something more to do with governmental affairs, I had to change it back to "retrieved" since confiscation has to do something with the Galactic Government as opposed to a Jedi taking a lightsaber away.

I think what should be addressed when Anakin's lightsaber became Obi-Wan's possession is kind of debatable, since confiscation is more of governmental and retrieval is more personal.

I don't think it's a big deal. "Retrieved" is better, though. — Phil Welch 7 July 2005 01:30 (UTC)

One Character Box!

I've been looking at the article, and I've noticed that there are two character boxes - one for Vader when he was a Jedi and one when he was in his armor. Should we not have one that fuses the two character boxes together. Please consider it. KFan II 12:11, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Enough of the information changes during the transition from Anakin to Vader that having two separate boxes makes sense. The story seems to make a big point of the two being two different sides, two different personas inside the same person, so I think the separation makes sense. — Phil Welch 19:13, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Dying Anakin image

When he killed the Emperor, Anakin Skywalker returned (thus the name "Return of the Jedi"), so when he was dying, he was Anakin again, not Darth Vader. Copperchair 06:10, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

George Lucas disagrees. Listen to the DVD commentaries. Also read my response on my talk page. — Phil Welch 06:19, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

And you read mine. Copperchair 06:29, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Furthermore, only changing the image caption makes it entirely inconsistent with the article text, namely the dialogue. — Phil Welch 06:20, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

I think the paragraph I added actually addresses the issue instead of speaking around it. Anyway, at least for the caption, "Vader" is shorter, and I prefer concise captions, for what it's worth. — Phil Welch 06:52, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

But you don't own the page, so the fact that YOU prefer concise captions is irrelevant. Copperchair 22:18, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

We've resolved this issue. What possible reason did you have to add a snarky comment like that? Trust me, getting upset at me doesn't help anything. — Phil Welch 22:21, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

Please check out the last paragragh of [1] to see that it should say "Sebastian Shaw as the dying ANAKIN." Copperchair 11:53, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

We already resolved this issue with a compromise. Let it sit. — Phil Welch 13:57, 30 July 2005 (UTC)