User talk:Vermilion

Here are some tips to help you get started:

Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
Remember Wikipedia:Neutral point of view
Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

P.S. One last helpful hint. To sign your posts like I did above (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes)

The edit war on Death Star

It is bad manners to revert a significant edit without discussion on the page's relevant talk page. Please, before reverting my revert, look at Wikipedia:Resolving disputes and Wikipedia:Three-revert rule. Do I have to put Death star on Wikipedia:Requests for comment again? Samboy 04:41, 9 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Star Destroyer

Where are you getting your information, Vermilion, for "Imperator" and "Dreadnought" you are wrong and should stop reverting the "Star Destroyer" article page back to the wrong information and without and hint of justifying your reverts. The changes I have been making to the article are far more accurate and true with a vastly larger amount of supporting information and evidence than your weak and unsupported claim. Stop posting incorrect and false information.

Revenge of the Sith Incredible Cross-sections and Inside the Worlds of the Star Wars Trilogy. The WEG Executor size is wrong, as anyone can see just by watching the movies. --Vermilion 07:23, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The angles from which it is view are very misleading and even then ILM wasn't making the models in the films to coincide with the given information. Before the film was even released Twentieth Century Fox was distributing merchandise. Furthermore, where in the films is Imperator ever used? It is completely incorrect and you have no argument on that matter. Also look at the scale from Return of the Jedi and you'll most certainly see that it is very different from The Empire Strikes Back. Yes, the films are the ultimate canon but since the films themselves do not give numbers, fan measurements are not admissible evidence for such claims. May 28th, 2005A.D.

Wrong again. ILM specifically made smaller ISD models just to use in scenes with the Executor. Executor is always shown to be around 11 times longer than an ISD in ROTJ. "Imperial class" is also never said in the movies. What is said is "Imperial Star Destroyer." Thinking that that makes it "Imperial class" is no different than saying "American cruiser" must mean "American class cruiser" or "Japanese battleship" has to mean "Japanese class battleship." The Venator is a "Republic Star Destroyer", so are you going to start renaming it "Republic class"? --Vermilion 07:59, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The context in which Imperial Star Destroyer is used through the original trilogy is such that it does indicate the class. When C-3P0 reference the probability of successfully engaging an Imperial Star Destroyer..., he is specifically referring to the Imperial Star Destroyer chasing them, if it were a Carrack class cruiser he would have said that or if it were the Executor he would have said Super Star Destroyer. Furthermore the context of every reference to Imperial in Star Wars literature makes no mistake in indicating that it is the Imperial class. My favorite and one of the best reference collections is the entire series of Essential Guides and now the New Essential Guides, which have taken the prequels into account. In both of those sources they refer to it as the Imperial Star Destroyer, Imperial being the class designation. And since you like using the Incredible Cross Sections books so much, the original trilogy cross sections for the Imperil Star Destroyer indeed reference it as Imperial. Other ships in the Alliance fleet are referenced similarly, like Mon Calamari Cruisers. The ships share the same name as the race that built them but that does not mean that the term Mon Calamari Cruiser is simply describing the ships origins. It is the Mon Calamari class, just like it is the Imperial class Star Destroyer. If you go to any of the scenes in the Emperor’s Throne room in ROTJ you can clearly see that the Executor is indeed only five times the length of the surrounding Imperial Star Destroyers. 10:29 A.M. May 28th, 2005A.D.

Vermillion if you search for yourself on the star dreadnaught and keeper of the holocron you'll find there is no such link. whoever wrote that line of crap is not telling the truth. "Star Dreadnaught" is a fan created name. (TracksZ06 10:02, 25 January 2006 (UTC))[reply]

The name Imperator is a fan created named, Geoffrey Mandel stated Imperator is not official nor are his blueprints.

 (TracksZ06 10:02, 25 January 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:SW Executor 02.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:SW Executor 02.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 03:07, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:SW Executor 03.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:SW Executor 03.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 19:26, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Admiral piett.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Admiral piett.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Angr 19:59, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Vwing6lp.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Vwing6lp.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 20:22, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SW Executor 01.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SW Executor 01.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 06:29, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SW Executor 01.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SW Executor 01.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 04:12, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]