Talk:Human (Star Wars)

message: on the grounds that nobody likes them  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.1.143.172 (talk) 05:34, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Can we expunge all references to midichlorians

message: Any "proposed storyline" that isn't official canon at the very least needs to be cited. As it is, it appears suspiciously close to original research. --BinaryTed 15:14, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: From http://starwars.wikicities.com/wiki/Alien_Exodus, I can find these links: http://www.sfwriter.com/alienout.htm, and http://www.sfwriter.com/alien.htm. --maru  (talk) contribs 16:56, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

text: At the very least, the inclusion of the "Human Exodus" storyline is unencyclopedic.  Wikipedia is for facts, not for random citations of creative work.  An external reference to the "Human Exodus" story would be perfectly legit, but writing it out in this article turns the article itself into a story. Darcyj 05:38, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This "Exodus" theory is total rubbish and should be removed. It flies against Star Wars canon at the most basic level "a long time ago in a galaxy far far away". I'm removing it, completely non-canonical, goes against canon and is unencyclopaedic. Ben W Bell 08:01, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

text: It's also something that was never published and is simply some fanboi's pipe dream with absolutely no basis within the Star Wars universe whatsoever. It's completely unencyclopaedic. Ben W Bell talk 07:03, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is the source for the "Human Exodus" storyline? 

message: Sorry for being picky, but, in Star Wars, what exactly is a extraterrestrial? I also don't understand "alien". technically there are no aliens in Star Wars movies (except maybe that one in EP.II), or extraterrestrials. I know in the new Jedi Order that "Y" species would be aliens though. I say that because I don't know how to spell it, sorry. Anyway, could some editor remove it? I'm not a member although I know I can still, I just would feel better if an editor did it. Thank you-S. Rodgers
: The term "alien" is inaccurate, but it has generally been used by writers to denote non-human species. – Mipadi 16:59, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extraterrestrials 

message: For Starters the statement that Mandalorians have rapid regeneration is as far as I know falsely based on the knights of the old republic in which there is a Mandalorian that has had cyber tech to upgrade his healing. It's not a racial trait. Two the humanoid Madalorians are the second set of mandalorians acording to some sources. The first was decidedly not of human stock.
Mirialan have purer eye color? What is meant by purer? Facial tatoos are a cultural feature not a species inherant trait.
Sith being tan skinned and white haired? what's the source? As far as I know Human beased sith were just humans, and the actual sith were already humanoid with red skin and yellow eyes.
Zeltrons actually secrete a pheromone that causes lust deprave behaviours in other people.
Anzati have extending proboscis that are used to eat the brains of intelligent people through their nose.
Both the alternative races for the Duros and Quermians are said to be created by another race (I believe that was in the Star Wars essential guide to alien races)
As for the Alien Exodus thing. I question wether it was ever given any look by Lucas and his staff. The Information on the Hutts alone contradicts everything else ever printed about them. Gammoreans are discussed in a way that contradicts their given history to date. As does the Rodian bit.
Any proposal sent to Lucas' people with this outline would have ( or at the very least should've) been shot out of the water on first sight.
: Unless a very good reason is given to keep it I'm going to remove the Exodus thing again. It's unencyclopaedic, non-Star Wars, flies in the face of everything else written for it, and is something that was never published and therefore has no weight. Ben W Bell talk 08:14, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just so many things wrong with that 

message: Is the presence of midichlorians the only difference? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 218.215.135.181 (talk) 05:04, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "mostly biologically identical to real life humans" 

message: The part about Corellians having records of their origins somewhere other than Corellia sounds off to me. It's known that the planet Corellia itself came from somewhere else, but not that the people on it came from a planet other than Corellia. There's even some things that suggest Corellia could be the Human homeworld, it's probably the second most popular origin idea, after Coruscant.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.176.105.84 (talk) 10:43, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Corellia 

message: According to the Tatooine article, it is implied as being the human homeworld in Knights of the Old Republic. If this is true it should be added here, if not it should be removed there. 194.27.165.140 (talk) 08:27, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tatooine