Talk:Sifo-Dyas

message: I've removed the notability flag since it is clearly not a reflection of this discussion page. If someone want to argue that this page is not notable they must bother to argue it here - not just posting deletion flags.
Secondly, I'd like to express a personal opinion about the use of the word "encyclopedic." It is not NPOV to use that term as a blanket statement to complain about style. Wikipedia will never have uniform writing style and that is its strength. While this article should be improved to improve some more non-fictional perspectives that should be in the form of some supplimentary indraductory sections and conclusions rather than complete reworking to read like somewhere else. When discussing fiction is is useful for even an austerely written encyclopedia to engage in the fictional universe otherwise the topic is only superficially discussed. This article is very interesting and engages that fiction as it is written. Only minor improvements are necessary in my opinion. I am not at all expert in the subject. However, I have strong feelings on this because I am sick of finding releif in wikipedia as I discover a nice, engaging, article on an obscure topic that would be hard to find (for a non-starwars fan such as myself) only to have the page ruined by a long list of idiotic disclaimers at the top which state that esoteric knowledge is now somehow against wikipedia policy and that the style of writing must be changed to be totally boring otherwise it will be deleted. (whew.)
OK, sorry about the rant. I've just read the 'war on wikipedia' article in the newspaper and you can tell I've taken the non-deletion side. It represents something I've been thinking about for a while. It use to be that wikipedia was where you could get the dirt - uncensored - and find out what the real story was for some dirty corporation or cultural story. Now that wikipedia is in the limelight so much - a lot of it gets dumbed down. This starwars section which I've only noticed recently is refreshing. The uber-geek nature of the subject has allowed it to maintain that air of authentic amatuer knowledge that now gets covered up by pretensious pseudo 'expertise' all too often.
Thanks for listening.Rusl (talk) 13:40, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable 

message: Can we get a concrete source for Esiken being his homeworld?  I've searched google, but the only place I find that information is the same sentence copied onto several blog posts ... "(Sifo Dyas was an Ogdarian born on the asteroid world of Esiken, and discovered by the Jedi when he moved to Allistare.)" —Skope (talk) 23:32, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Planet of origin

message: Is Syfo-Dyas just a cover-front for Sidious??? The article was kinda vague... Was Palpatine ever a Jedi? I don't read any of the external comics, etc. so I wouldn't know...
Supergirl42 15:30, 2 April 2007
:No, Sifo-Dyas was completely distinct character. EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:37, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sifo-Dyas = Sidious??? 

message: I added that this article appears to contradict Jedi. This article states that "Supreme Chancellor Palpatine secretly sends Sifo-Dyas to Kamino to place the order for the clone army", while Jedi states that "Tyranus selected a bounty hunter, Jango Fett, as the template for a clone army he ordered for the Galactic Republic under the guise of the deceased Sifo-Dyas." MoraSique 01:38, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed! David 22:35, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Contradiction with Jedi

message: Anyone seriously interested in improving the article should consider adding some real world related info, e.g. regarding the concept, creation, and/or function of the character within the Star Wars narrative etc. Please consult our writing about fiction guideline, which also includes a list of exemplary articles.
There are currently three featured articles on Star Wars characters: Palpatine, Padmé Amidala, and Jabba the Hutt. What sets them aside from most of the other SW character articles is the effort to write from the real world perspective. Pay particular attention to paragraphs like Jabba the Hutt#Concept and creation, Palpatine#Concept and creation, and Padmé Amidala#Characterization.
Also take a look at Darth Vader, which despite its lack of reliable, published third-party secondary sources features interesting sections on e.g. #Character creation and concepts and Darth Vader as a #Cultural figure.
Even though reliable sources may be tough to come up with, any effort to introduce coherently written real world aspects will be greatly appreciated, because it contributes to the depth of the article and accurate coverage of the topic, and thereby makes for an improved reading experience and increases the encyclopedic value of the article.
—AldeBaer 15:57, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  In-universe 

message: Did the same person write this as wrote the article on the Star Wars wiki?  If not, it needs to be trashed and replaced, as it is a  direct word-for-word copy.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.148.42.30 (talk) 05:16, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wookiepedia 

message: "Sifa-Dyas" has cropped up in a particular section of the article; someone knowledgable in this guy please change where appropriate (since I do not know in what instances an "a"-variant may have cropped up in). T.J. Fuller, Jr. (talk) 00:26, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of "Sifa-Dyas"