Talk:Universe of Star Wars

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Universe of Star Wars redirect.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Reverted info

How is this bogus? If some sources say that the galaxy is 120,000 lightyears across and that it's called the Voydarian Beltway, why shouldn't it be in here?Kuralyov 9 July 2005 14:03 (UTC)

What is bogus is that someone keeps deleting it without a vote. It seems relevant enough that others want it here. They shouldn't delete it just becuase they don't like it. Instead, we should a vote here to see if most (who even really care about it) want it kept here. SkeezerPumba 23:07, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should be removed. It's a cool name though, but sadly I think the "Voydarian Beltway Galaxy" is just one of those things made up by Supershadow - the infamous disinformation blogger who claims he has inside info on Star Wars and is a personal friend of George Lucas. Everyone who has investigated this guy has uncovered that he's a liar with nothing to do with Lucasfilm. He even goes so far as claim that he gave Lucas most of his ideas. Why Lucasfilm hasn't sued this guy and forced him to take his BS website down is beyond me.

However... I can't say for sure that he is the source because the name also appears on several other fan websites including one for Star Wars Galaxies the video game. I have heard the name before reading Supershadow's site, so where it actually comes from I can't say. None of these sites are official though, and the name could have just leaked in from Supershadow because many fans still think he's a legit source of Star Wars info.

If someone wants to take the time and look it up, I think it should be confirmed. Until then, it's just fan fiction and not an official name. Cyberia23 23:28, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, I added an article despute message, lets see what happens. SkeezerPumba 00:06, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I did some looking into the matter, and it does seem that the "Voydarian Beltway Galaxy" and its distance from the Milky Way are just BS invented by Supershadow. It should be removed form this article, or at least have a disclaimer that Supershadow made it up. Kuralyov 16:39, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad that anon deleter was so willing to discuss it. NOT! SkeezerPumba 20:54, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That's another supershadow/jedipurge's misinformation. If noone can quote an official source that confirms it (and I bet noone can), this shall be deleted. I don't see a point in leaving a misinforming text just because someone is not sure whether it is a lie or not... NLoriel 20:42, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think Andromeda is the star wars galaxy .

hi, i don't really know what to call the galaxy. My grievance is in the distance. We know that the Milky Way is about 100 light years in length and is one of the largest spiral galaxies that we've been able to see. We also know that by every law of physics that is standard in the universe, the speed of light cannot be eclipsed. Now, we all love the science fiction idea that the Falcon can zip around from system to system, but shouldn't we perhaps suggest that the Star Wars Galaxy be redefined as a very small spiral galaxy. This way, the relatively sort times that it takes for Star Wars distances to be bridged can be halfway explained away by the idea that this particular galaxy is quiet small. Clearly it shouldn't be 120 lightyears and I think that it should be considerably smaller than our own, perhaps as small as 50 light years. This way, it would at least be somewhat plausable. Of course this is assuming that we wish to give Star Wars Astronomy some realism. Realize that at 300,000 km a second, (the speed of light), a Star Wars Galaxy, at a meeger 50 light years; it would take somewhere around 40 to 50 years to go from Yavin to Hoth. Therefore, assuming that hyperspace technology somehow bends the laws of physics, and allows vessels to travel up to 100 times the speed of light, something like 3 X 10to the 5th power multiplied by 100, so something like 30,000,000 km per sec., it would still take like 5 or 6 months to get for Yavin to Hoth, still not bad, but not what we want. So, i think we can see that the number of 120 light years is far to large, even for a science fiction dynasty . Yet maybe it would be better if we leave these things out of our Star Wars psyche.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but your numbers are WAY off. The Milky Way galaxy is over 100,000 light years across. -- Riffsyphon1024 05:42, September 12, 2005 (UTC)

You absolutely right, i forgot some zeros there didn't I? Thanks for calling me on it. Therefore, 120 light is a very small galaxy. Yet, we think that we have found a Galaxy close to the Milky Way that's about 75 light years in size. I'd love to make believe that that's the Star Wars Galaxy.

You still couldn't fit 3,000 planets in a space 75 light years in diameter unless it was Omega Centauri. -- Riffsyphon1024 09:57, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kardashev type III?

This seems very unlikely, as to be Type III one has to either have

a) built a Dydon sphere around every star in the galaxy in question -- and what's more, fully populated, or at least be collecting all the energy from their surfaces -- which clearly is not the case;
b) be doing something else generating an equivalent amount of available power -- which there's no reason to suppose.

If someone could show me the error in my thinking, or at least point out some notable source for such an assertion (which should then be put in that context, not stated as being true), I'd be most grateful. Alai 06:12, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The Death Star outputs more energy than Sol does in a long time- that could be an example of Kardaschev-level energy utilization. --Maru (talk) Contribs 00:57, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The Star Forge in Knights of the Old Republic was able to take pure energy from stars and convert it into matter, such as creating armies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.26.240.121 (talk) 04:54, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Planets with sentient life

Can someone verify the "official" number of planets that contain sentient life? 1/1000th of 10% of 400 billion is 40 million, not 20 million. One of the numbers is wrong. --Shinyplasticbag 05:14, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly it's just leftover from some SuperShadow-inspired text. NLoriel 13:34, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's from officially released material. Such as chronologies and sourcebooks. -- Crevaner 14:03, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're ignoring the part that says "Around half of these [stars] have planets that can support life". Half of 400 billion is 200 billion, divided by ten is 20 billion, divided by a thousand is 20 million

However, that particular number (20 million planets with intelligent life) assumes that each of those stars that have planets that can support life have only one such planet, which is a big assumption. Because of that, I have removed the 20 million part. Kurt Weber 17:39, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, 20 mil have sentient, how many sapient?

I think it would be nice if someone well versed in Star Wars knowledge added a little bit to the end of the 2nd paragraph with something to the effect of "but of those 20,000,000 stars, only 1/(here's where I'm not sure: maybe at least 2,000 to a max of 15,000?) held at least 1 planet that at some point developed 1 or more self-aware, or otherwise reasoning/self-aware species." That would be great little piece of info for insight and perspective to Star War's grand scheme of things.

Sb?

According to the map, it seems to be a barred spiral galaxy, so it can't be Sb. - Sikon 13:20, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note to anyone intending on splitting off a section

This page has been processed by N-Bot, which, for browsing convenience, changes links to redirects to lists to links to the relevant list sections: e.g. [[Unknown region]] is changed to [[Star Wars galaxy#Unknown Regions|Unknown region]].

As a result, anyone who intends to split a section out of this page should be aware that, as of 16 June 2006, the following sections were linked to from the following pages:

~~ N-Bot (t/c) 03:06, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Other Maps?

I liked there being a map of the star wars galaxy. But it looked like it only showed a time peroid after Star Wars Original trilogy.

Are there any maps showing what the star wars galaxy looked like during the clone wars and the time during the empire? It would be nice to show what the star wars galaxy looked like during the movies.--Scott3 01:21, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One must understand that there wouldn't be that much change on a map between the Clone Wars and the Imperial Era. Considering that there are millions of planets going around hundreds of billions of stars in any given galaxy, and only focusing on 3,000 planets that the Star Wars universe has created, there might be a few planets destroyed here and there like Alderaan, but overall not much change on this scale. -- Riffsyphon1024 09:54, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- True, but while the planets don't change a whole lot, borders and regions do. At the very least, a map showing the boundaries of the Empire would be appreciated, since that is relevant to arguably the most well-known era of Star Wars, that being that of the classic movies. Of course, that being said I've yet to actually find a map from that era. Most aggravating. Xiphe 22:07, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wild Space

What exactley is it? it obviosuly is more than a chunk of space separting the civilised galaxy from the unknown regions there is after all a whole galactic arm called Wild Space Jamhaw 16:30, 6 March 2007 (UTC)jamhaw[reply]

"Merge"

User:A Nobody "merged" (read:copy-and-pasted) AfDed material about the Hapan Consortium to this article, complete with a "sources" section smack in the middle of the article. The content retains plot summary, trivia, uncited generalizations/OR and general cruft from its original Wookieepedia article. I've reverted the copy-and-paste -- was going to paste it all here, but the edit history is instead visible here. Those of us who actively edit in the Star Wars wikiproject, please take a look and take a gander to see whether anything is worth merging. My own opinion is, nothing needs to come over: the paragraph/blurb currently here is appropriately weighted in comparison to other sections (both of the article, and of the Star Wars galaxy), especially in comparison to regions of the SWG that play a more significant role throughout the EU. --EEMIV (talk) 04:43, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Remember, Wikipedia:Do not call things cruft. Anyway, we can use at least these hits and these hits to verify and cite the information in some capacity. If someone wishes to try a stab at it before I give it another go around, by all means, please help. Thanks! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 05:45, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How star wars' galaxy is possible? Does it fit into the basic physic laws?

For example, the Deep Core, it says "It has countless stars packed together in a relatively small area", does it mean Byss and Khomm (look at the deep core's bottom angle) are located on different solar systems? Otherwise this map doesn't make any sense. 95.59.83.67 (talk) 02:52, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]