Talk:Droid (Star Wars)

message: This article is not about droids in general, this is about Star Wars Droids, in particular, C-3PO and R2D2. -- Joecool94 11:41 PM, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
:I agree - this is what struck me when I read the opening paragraphs to this article, which I expected to be about "intelligent" robots in general.  From the text, it appears that the word originated from a contraction of "android", which first appeared in a Star Wars novel.  I move that this article be generalised more, as I think the word has entered common usage. Leevclarke (talk) 23:43, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This independent article should stay because of the extensive advertising of the Verizon Droid smart phone and the citing of Lucasfilm's ownership of the word at the end of each of these commercials.  In my opinion, the article should transform to address this interesting ambiguity more directly. Simkiott (talk) 10:49, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is not a general Droid article 

message: Has anyone else noticed the current disambiguation message is humorously similar to the often quoted, "these are not the droids you're looking for" line from the movie? Was this intentional, and if so does it break the "serious" theme that Wikipedia has come to be known for? Just a thought. --Aethumus 08:13, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would be surprised if it was unintentional. I wouldn't change it because it does make sense. --Lyght 23:02, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguation Message 

message: This -and variations of it - is a famous and widespread catch-phrase. That should be mentioned somewhere.  Das Baz, aka Erudil 19:43, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: "Not the droids you are looking for"

message: the changes on 16 December appear to be vandalism, most likely accidental, if there is no objection I will remove it after seven days time.  I have sent a message to the user asking them to clarify or remove the edit.--Kent Witham 04:26, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: unable to find user as it seemed to be an anonymous edit.  Therefore I justremoved it, if the original editor would like to add what they were attemting to add they could certainly do so.--Kent Witham 04:38, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism? 

message: :Image:A new hope 2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 04:26, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:A new hope 2.jpg

message: "A philosophy held by many fans of the original Star Wars Episode IV is that a droid by definition is a servant robot completely devoted to its sentient master; any robot not so devoted was simply a robot." I have been a fan of the original Star Wars for 30 years, and this is the first time I have ever heard of this. This is not a "a philosophy held by many fans". -- 76.104.46.56 (talk) 03:40, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Unsourced bizarre comment

message: "Droid" is an abbreviation of "Android", which literally means "like a man". This term can only be applied to humanoid robots, and R2-D2 clearly does not fit that definition. Regardless of the terminology Lucas mistakenly used, it is simply a fact that the term "android" does not apply to R2-D2. Since this is an encyclopedic website, I feel that the information should be accurate. SpACatta (talk) 17:20, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it not correct that "droid" as used by Star Wars is an invention of the work in the sense that the audience is expected to assume this is an idiomatism unique to the SW universe, like BSG's frak? If so then in fact the term "droid" applies precisely because Lucas chose to use it, regardless of what etymology you may propose. "Droid" is first and foremost the name SW gives to robots, and R2-D2 is referred to by it as a(n astromech) droid, numerous times.--Ar-Pharazôn (talk) 21:41, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

text: "Android" refers to the body, i.e. Asimo and C3PO are androids, R2D2 is not. "Droid" in the Star Wars context just means "robot", but sounds cooler/more scifi. 79.232.82.116 (talk) 13:20, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: R2-D2 is not a Droid

message: Although it is most likely that previously any queries regarding "droid" would pertain to Star Wars, with the introduction of Motorola's eponymous (is this the right prefix by the way?) phone this is bound to change. Usage of "droid" is not prevalent in science fiction (although it has been used in certain prevalent science fiction) and is usually self explanatory. I think the majority of people entering "droid" in the search field nowadays are expecting to (or possibly will expect to in the near future) arrive at the article regarding the phone.
The phone article is also more complete.
I'm not sure what exactly wikipedia policies regarding this are, but it seems logical to have "droid" redirect to either "Motorola Droid" or "Droid (disambiguation)". Thoughts/comments/objections? --Ar-Pharazôn (talk) 21:25, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Why yes. ep- is the prefix, obviously. ;-) --Ar-Pharazôn (talk) 11:37, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should not be the default result for "Droid" 

message: I added: 
:The use of the circumcised android to droid, originated in the first of the Star Wars series of movies back in 1977.droid, The Word Guy. (November 9, 2009).
98.231.142.70 (talk) 00:09, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: 1977 star wars info

message: The context of the link clearly indicates that it is speaking about the Android operating system.  However, the word "Android", in this context, is a hyperlink to the robotics article "Android", not the Operating system.  Can this be fixed?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.56.102.154 (talk) 20:16, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Link to Android operating system article

message: Sorry if I did this all wrong, but I copied all the article and discussion to a newly created "Droid (robot)" article, then turned the original article into a redirect to the disambiguation.  Now some bots think this article is a duplicate.  Guess there's a better way to go about this, but either way it seems to work fine.  There's no way searching for "droid" should take you directly to a Star Wars page now that it has become such a commonly used term, especially relating to phones using the Android operating system.Rob Hingle (talk) 18:05, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moved page to Droid (robot), redirected "Droid" to disambiguation 

message: , I'm not understanding your edit summary, what is it you think is more appropriate about this image? The primary droid shown is (as far as I can tell) an abstract version of a Star Wars droid. This article is about the franchise, so representative images should be of replicas that illustrate what the article is talking about. The other image has not only a canon-looking R2-D2, but also an R5-D4 in the foreground.— TAnthonyTalk 16:42, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: This image is not, to my knowledge, in use anywhere else in Wikipedia. Are you saying the the white and orange droid in the image (known as R5-D4) is pictured in another article? I do not see it illustrated in the Episode IV article. In any case, the point I was trying to make is that (though I'm no droid expert LOL}, I do not recognize the blue R4 droid in the foreground of your image from a film. I know it is "incomplete" in that you can see the guts, but as far as I can tell the R4s in the films have been other colors but not dark blue, and the only blue one is in Star Tours (though that's a lighter blue). I see some dark blue R4s as toys but I haven't seen a designation or attribution to a film. I think I'd rather use droids from canon works before we go into derivative ones. Also, I don't 100% agree with your suggestion that we should always use "new images", we should use the best available image to illustrate a topic within an article. If that happens to be one used elsewhere, so be it. Images are readily available online for those seeking to find them, our goal is not to provide a varied repository of images of a topic. That said, once we identify your droid, I don't see why we can't have gallery of available Commons images of droids in the article.— TAnthonyTalk 22:35, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Image

message: . The second video has star wars droids in them, fully active.--NadirAli نادر علی (talk) 21:30, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which one of these videos should we use? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Droid (robot). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081023174856/http://www.starwars.com:80/databank/droid/fourlom/ to http://www.starwars.com/databank/4-lom
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
 — TAnthonyTalk 04:27, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:23, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: I check pages listed in :Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of :Droid (Star Wars)'s orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "recycledstarwars":
From List of Star Wars Rebels characters: 
From List of Star Wars characters: 
Reference named "TNY":
From List of Star Wars characters: 
From Rogue One: 
From Jyn Erso: 
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 09:58, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphaned references in [[:Droid (Star Wars)]] 

message: https://copyvios.toolforge.org/?lang=en&project=wikipedia&title=Droid+%28Star+Wars%29&oldid=&action=search&use_engine=1&use_links=1&turnitin=0 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moxy (talk • contribs) 
:Looks more like a copy-and-paste by the cited site rather than the other way around. --EEMIV (talk) 12:22, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: It even days it's reusing Wikipedia material on the page. oknazevad (talk) 13:12, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  copyright violations?