tbl1 Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 It was to Korriban that the ancient Dark Jedi fled after they were exiled by the Jedi Knights during the Second Great Schism [7,000 BBY]. Korriban was originally inhabited by the Sith race, a relatively simple, red-skinned people. The Dark Jedi amazed the Sith with their training in the Force, and soon elevated themselves to a god-like status, becoming the rulers, or "Lords," of the Sith. As the years passed, interbreeding occurred between the human Dark Jedi and the Sith, until at last the two people had become one.-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korriban Couldn't these red-skinned people be considered the 'true sith'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igyman Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 Exactly. I remember this text from Star Wars: Behind the Magic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henz Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 Maybe but they sound a bit... crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthOxyClean Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korriban Couldn't these red-skinned people be considered the 'true sith'? They definitly could. Read this from wookiepedia: The "True Sith" were a shadowy and largely unknown order of Dark Side users that according to Kreia, had been in existance for "tens of thousands of years," and were silently waiting in the Unknown Regions, during the time of the Jedi Civil War. According to Kreia, the so-called "True Sith" were millenia older than the Old Sith Empire. She and Revan believed that it was they who goaded the Mandalorians into attacking the Republic. She stated that both Malachor V and the graveyard planet Korriban had once been planets held at the edges of that mysterious empire, and that while these "true Sith" had forgotten those ancient worlds of the Dark Side, they would remember. Following the Jedi Civil War, Revan vanished from known space, supposedly to fight this order.[/Quote] The True Sith were a millenia older than the Old Sith Empire. The Old Sith Empire was around 7,000 BBY. And the True Sith were (suposedly) around before those Dark Jedi landed on Korriban. So (if this info is correct) the red-skinned Sith can not be the True Sith. But that still leaves us with the question of who they really are. Maybe the red-skinned Sith on Korriban and Ziost were descendants of a space-faring race of Dark Jedi? There was also a Dark Jedi named Adas, who lived around 28,000 BBY: Ood Bnar says Adas lived "more than two dozen millennia ago." The Old Sith Empire was established by fallen Jedi Knights around 6,900 BBY, which would preclude Adas having been part of this regime. However, given the age of the "True Sith Empire"—established in Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic II: The Sith Lords as being tens of millennia older than the current Sith Order—it's strongly probable that Adas instead belonged to this more ancient group.[/Quote] Not much else about him though. He might have been part of the True Sith. I really think that we will have to wait for KOTOR 3 to answer this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedHawke Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 Trust wikipedia, I would not! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbl1 Posted June 19, 2006 Author Share Posted June 19, 2006 It's pretty hard to make up stuff on the wikipedia. they do a good joob. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedHawke Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 It's pretty hard to make up stuff on the wikipedia. they do a good joob. I disagree... as it can be edited by anyone. No, I just don't see it that way. Edit: To below Post.... *sigh* Some people will believe anything as long as it feeds their desperate need for 'fluff' on all things Star Wars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Itchy Tasty Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 Trust Wookieepedia, I would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbl1 Posted June 19, 2006 Author Share Posted June 19, 2006 The planets controlled by that sith empire: Ambria Arkania Ashas Ree Athiss Ch'hodos Dromund Kaas Jaguada Jaguada's moon Kalsunor Khar Delba Khar Shian Korriban Korriz Krayiss II Malachor V Rhelg Thule Sivvi Vjun Ziost *** I disagree... as it can be edited by anyone. No, I just don't see it that way. Try changing something on the wikipedia to something you know is incorrect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedHawke Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 Try changing something on the wikipedia to something you know is incorrect. It isn't a good source of information... while I do agree you have your right to your opinion on this, why can't you all accept mine and move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbl1 Posted June 19, 2006 Author Share Posted June 19, 2006 Your point of view is very valid and many people do feel the same way. I didn't really want to argue about the wikipedia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthOxyClean Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 Goshdarnit, how come every time I post something, the thread goes off-topic?!?!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 Trust wikipedia, I would not! You are wise. It's pretty hard to make up stuff on the wikipedia. they do a good job.Are you kidding? It is easy to make stuff up, and it happens all the time: http://www.aspendailynews.com/article_14537 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1657588.cms http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,19501894-2,00.html http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/06/15/wikipedia_can_damage_your_grades/ http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/business/articles/0610biz-wikis0610.html http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?channelid=65&contentid=3569 etc. Even it's creator says that it can't always be trusted. http://www.trimmail.com/news/elsewhere/data/1150480413.24/ Trust Wookieepedia, I would.Wookiepedia is really fanon. While it can be a useful site to get the general idea about a topic, it can't be trusted to provide a canon source of information. Just look at the amount of editing and arguments that go on there over what is correct (you can start at Recent Changes). A lot of the time it is just fan speculation without any solid supporting evidence. Here is just one of many examples. Actually, I would suggest that the Unofficial Encyclopedia is a better source, since at least there each entry comes from specific cited sources. Try changing something on the wikipedia to something you know is incorrect.As I pointed out above, this happens constantly, and can remain incorrect for months before it is corrected, if it is at all. On-topic: But why isn't some like Palpatine or others not considered "True Sith"? The Sith order has evolved and tranformed many times. Why is one form more true than another? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedHawke Posted June 20, 2006 Share Posted June 20, 2006 You are wise. Why thank you! Debated the authenticity of wikipedia before I see! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jae Onasi Posted June 20, 2006 Share Posted June 20, 2006 The "True Sith" were a shadowy and largely unknown order of Dark Side users that according to Kreia, had been in existance for "tens of thousands of years," and were silently waiting in the Unknown Regions, during the time of the Jedi Civil War. According to Kreia, the so-called "True Sith" were millenia older than the Old Sith Empire. She and Revan believed that it was they who goaded the Mandalorians into attacking the Republic. She stated that both Malachor V and the graveyard planet Korriban had once been planets held at the edges of that mysterious empire, and that while these "true Sith" had forgotten those ancient worlds of the Dark Side, they would remember. Following the Jedi Civil War, Revan vanished from known space, supposedly to fight this order. Trust wikipedia, I would not! Trust Kreia I would not! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbl1 Posted June 20, 2006 Author Share Posted June 20, 2006 This is going to be the last thing I'm going to say about the wikipedia: wikipedia for star wars - why not? Is it any less reliable than any other information wirten by the public? Find more than one thing about KOTOR on the wikipedia that is undisputably wrong. The plot summaries are written by users on IMDB as with the episode synopsis on TV.com. Of course I would not use it as a source for an essay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime Posted June 20, 2006 Share Posted June 20, 2006 Debated the authenticity of wikipedia before I see! No really. I just put "wikipedia" in the google news search. That brings a whole bunch of stuff up. wikipedia for star wars - why not? Is it any less reliable than any other information wirten by the public?Who cares? The fact it is written by the public shows why it can't be trusted in the first place! Find more than one thing about KOTOR on the wikipedia that is undisputably wrong. Sith'ari - Anakin cannot be the Sith'ari as I explained in the Sith'ari thread, for starters. But why get us to do it for you? Pick a bunch of entries and go to the discussions tabs. There you will see all the debates about what gets added. Sometimes there will be flat out errors argued over, and others times is clear that someone adds stuff with no supporting evidence, and people call them on it. The point is, at any one time there are tons of errors and unsupported statements on wookieepedia, and thus can't be relied on for accurate canon info. EDIT: John Ostrander (writer of the Legacy series) on TheForce.net regarding the Imperial Knights: "Wookiepedia has it wrong. When the Jedi fled to Ossus, the offer was made for them to serve the Empire as the IK do. The involvement of Sith precluded that. Issue 1 will throw some light on your speculations." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbl1 Posted June 21, 2006 Author Share Posted June 21, 2006 ^Touche. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arátoeldar Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 It isn't a good source of information... while I do agree you have your right to your opinion on this, why can't you all accept mine and move on.While Wiki isn't perfect. I remember read an article stating that Wiki average 7 inconsistencies per article and the Online Encyclopedia Britannica averages 8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedHawke Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 While Wiki isn't perfect. I remember read an article stating that Wiki average 7 inconsistencies per article and the Online Encyclopedia Britannica averages 8. Wikipedia, and especially Wookieepedia, might have a comparable number of errors to a standard encyclopedia, but they have way more conjecture and opinions. Much of the stuff on there might not be technically wrong in the sense that there is hard proof against it, but in many cases there isn't any evidence supporting it either. (Again Prime saves me some typing... Thanks Prime! ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hormoz111 Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 remember the ancient droid in kotor1 and what he said about star forge i think the true sith made star forge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthSion101 Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 remember the ancient droid in kotor1 and what he said about star forge i think the true sith made star forge Its made abundantly clear in the first game, that the Star Forge was created by the Rakata, and not the True Sith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 (Again Prime saves me some typing... Thanks Prime! )Anytime. I'm not saying wiki/wookieepedia is complete **** (although sometimes it is ), I'm just saying that you have to be aware that it isn't always entirely correct. It is important to also look at the discussion and history sections as well to see where the information came from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthOxyClean Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 I'm not saying wiki/wookieepedia is complete **** (although sometimes it is ), I'm just saying that you have to be aware that it isn't always entirely correct. It is important to also look at the discussion and history sections as well to see where the information came from. I agree. After my post led to this thread going off-topic, I went to Wookiepedia and read many articles. Much of the information I found there made me sit there and say YEAH RIGHT. If you read through some of their artiles, it is quite easy to find false info. They are usually near the end of the article. But some articles (i.e. Adas) are completely false. But I think that you can get more info (even if it is false) about Star Wars on Wookiepedia than StarWars.com. Starwars.com mostly focuses on the films, while many fans would like to get the general info about EU characters without having to go buy the book/game. (I know that they have a whole section on EU, but alot of the EU info is not there, and many articles are unfinished) Now, many will argue that the reason for Starwars.com focusing on films is because EU is not canon, and the films are. Well, if LucasFilms, Lucasarts, or LucasBooks creates a character/event/etc, then it is canon. That includes the Clone Wars miniseries, because Lucas approved the idea and created the plot for it. BS like Infinities is not canon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Source Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 Trust wikipedia, I would not! Agreed. On the Kreia note: I don't remember any mention of a Sith Race. Sounds like more EU invention. From what I understand, the Sith are fallen Jedi who come from a divirsity of species. Novel/Game Canon vrs. Movie Canon I hate when novels go against what is established in movies. Gr... My point of view: What is developed on the big screen is main canon, and it is the foundation to the Star Wars universe. Anything that contridicts the movies, I don't consider it to hold any weight on Lucas's vision. What is developed for games and novels, I consider them to hold no weight on the overall picture. Game/Novel canon is like another dimension, which is entertaining in its own right. However, I don't take what I read/see in novels or games as a legit historical record on Star Wars. This is just my opinion. EU writter are very creative and entertaining, but they hold no bearing on my movie perspective. Sith species. What the hell were they thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.