Talk:List of Star Wars films/Archive 1

1848:

especially since Lucasfilm indicated that there is a bit of truth in Legends (referencing how aspects of Legends have been brought back into the canon). 2. While I concede that previous non-canon stories also are branded under Legends, most Legends material did in fact form a coherent story (hence the previous canon hierarchy) and Lucasfilm did an excellent job keeping it consistent. 3. I believe it is irrelevant that Legends also includes previous non-canon works given that Legends is the official classification for such material (not to mention to the best of my knowledge none of the Legends movies and TV shows were regarded as non-canon prior to the Legends rebrand).

130:, hello! There is not a specific policy that states this, but in actors and filmmakers' filmographies, we only add films once filming has begun. This is because for them, they can be attached to multiple films that will not get past the development stage. I think that logic can apply here as well. For example, the Boba Fett film appears to have been delayed and perhaps may not made. How about a different approach to identifying such films in development, perhaps list them in bullet form right below the table? A sentence above the bullets can state that these films are in development. 3984:

of marketing. "...referred to as the 'Skywalker saga' or, colloquially, the 'Star Wars saga'" this is not really a true statement as "colloquially" does not mean "the only thing used for almost 40 years before some marketing guy re-branded it." Just so it's clear, I don't object to it being called the "Skywalker saga" (it's nice that it now has a name to distinguish it from the other works in the universe), but an encyclopedic article should include when it took on that name, and should not imply that any naming before this particular branding is a colloquialism.

4767:

soon. Also related is the recent buzz around Kathleen Kennedy's renewal at Lucasfilm, which I think was leaked (since it also lacks high quality sources) to counteract any perceived blame on her for RS's delay. There are countless SW projects in the works, so what gets announced gets announced. Thanks BTW for pointing out the lack of reliability regarding Screen Rant and IGN on occasion; their articles can be clickbait-y and have to be considered on a case-by-case basis.

31: 477:, look amateurish and cheesy. Really, thinking in it, we don't need a separate column for the story order. If anything, the distinction between main series films and anthology films, which is a distinction made by both producers and press, should be recognized by putting them is separate charts, with the placement of the anthology films in the timeline covered by the notes column. It's pretty straightforward and objective. 660:"Released" on some of the films (because that's important to some people), and maybe an additional color to indicate which films were distributed by Fox vs. Disney (because some people might care), and add colors to highlight the TV networks (ditto), and.... no. No, we shouldn't. Maybe the canon status is so specially super important to you personally that you feel it needs this kind of 1617:

level 4 being canonical aspects of otherwise non-canon media, and level 5 being non-canon "what if" stories". Wookiepedia treats Canon and Legends as two separate universes. There are now basically two universes, Legends and the current Canon. One interview about the re-branding as Legends someone from Lucasfilm even said that Legends could be just considered an alternate universe.

572:, I would expect an article about Star Wars films also to contain information about the release dates, producers and distributors. I came to this article hoping to find out who had directed each film, and was really surprised/disappointed that this article didn't contain any of that information – how Knowledge can have an article about Star Wars films that doesn't even mention 179:, thank you for your response, and what you say makes sense. I will create a new section that lists "planned films" and make a note that they have not started filming yet. I was also thinking that it might make sense to change the name of the article to "list of Star Wars films and television series" so that it covers all Star Wars works on the screen. 3893:. The difference is the MCU section is talking more about the major inconsistency with their timeline and has reliably sourced details and commentary from people working on the films about the subject. This is not the case with the current SW timeline section, nor does it warrant such in depth commentary. - 4334:

I've undone those edits. I believe it's time to cut bait and have Rosvel92 topic banned from Star Wars articles. His failure to abide by consensus, plus the gross incompetence of many of his edits, make working with him impossible and create too much of a mess for other editors to clean up. In short,

3732:

One way to improve the table, other than providing references, would be to remove the 'Canon' column and replace it with a color code legend. A simple color for "Yes" or "No" would be more in line with Lucasfilm's views. But as a compromise, I'm not entirely opposed to removing the non-canon content.

1862:

The yes/no canon is simply "is it part of what Lucasfilm has called canon"? If it isn't, then the column says "No". It isn't a judgement commentary as to whether or not there's "truth" to canon, and things in Legends being brought back into canon nor whether or not Legends forms a coherent story have

1785:

They were more than "modestly successful." I've noticed almost as many minor continuity errors in the new canon material as in the old EU. I have not seen the Legends banner printed on any non-EU work. Every time I've seen it it was on a reprint of a novel or comic that was part of the EU. In fact

1658:

Legends is an alternate universe as evidenced by a statement from someone from Lucasfilm. Wookiepedia treats most Legends material (admittedly including stories not canon with either canon) as an alternate universe, with many subjects such as main characters getting two articles, one for the current

1282:

of redundancy between the two. Frankly, many of the credits in the moved over chart are unneeded in an overview article and probably shouldn't have been in the chart to begin with. The ones that are important are actually already in the chart that was already here, so I'm thinking we can just get rid

1202:

Personally, I think the tables should have: title, first aired, last aired, creators, network. That's it. That, in my opinion, encompasses all the basic facts of a television series. The tables I threw together in the subpage I linked above is more a compromise position. And as far as the film table,

213:

Maybe the "Planned films" section can be a subsection under the "List of feature films" section? As for the TV shows, I had been thinking about creating a separate list article for these (especially to list the canon ones as well as older non-canon ones). Why do you think combining films and TV shows

3983:

This and other Star Wars pages (but the redirect comes here) name the 9 main films as the "Skywalker saga" which is the current marketing label as applied by Disney. But, it is done in such a way as to imply that this was always the name of the series of films. An encyclopedia should not be a mirror

1832:

I believe the purpose is to have the term "Legends" used instead of "non-canon" in the charts. I disagree, as the term is a) a marketing label, and b) not really a cohesive thing; the former "what if"-type comic stories originally released under the "Infinities" banner have also been reprinted under

1257:

It was intended as a parodic look at the franchise. It was canceled before completion due to the sale to Disney. Frankly, I don't think it even needs to be mentioned. At the least, the header should just be "unfinished series", with no comment on its content; that's what the separate article is for.

4766:

Highly doubt the status of Johnson's trilogy has changed; this has been repeatedly rumored before and debunked. Since it has a title, Rogue Squadron isn't "unspecified" and there's been no announcement as yet from Lucasfilm as to any change regarding its development. I'm sure more will be announced

4464:

They refer to two different things. "Star Wars saga" is the entire story within the Star Wars universe. "Skywalker saga" is the part of the Star Wars saga that just concluded which revolves around the Skywalker clan. Future films will still be about the Star Wars story but not part of the Skywalker

4222:

Now that the tv section was split, it should be discussed to merge the prequel, original, and sequel articles back here, when they were split was because of the tv content, but now all articles are a repeat of portions of this one (the sequel trilogy may be better split but the original and prequel

4065:

in principal; the article is rather long and splitting by medium is a natural and logical way to organize the material. That said, the one caveat I have is regarding the Ewok films, as they were cinematically released in some countries, so although the were produced as TV movies, they are films and

3756:

is justifiable grounds, particularly because the timeline itself isn't even that complicated. It's just one era, a prequel era of things set before that, and a sequel era of things set after that. And, frankly, the ABY/BBY dating format isn't even consistently used across works—or even consistently

1800:

It's currently unclear to me what the goal of this discussion is. Does this thread have an ultimate goal of making a change to the page, which is just a straight listing of all films and television series in the franchise, with only minor notes to the canon continuity, or is it just a discussion of

1770:

Of whichrhey were only modestly successful, a factor in choosing to drop it for the new canon. But the core point remains that stating "the EU (now Legends)" is incorrect. The "Legends" banner includes material that was never considered canon under the old system of hierarchies of canons, so it was

1741:

Not really. Outside of the fan-created Wookieepedia and similar projects, there's no current attempt to keep a coherent "Legends universe", especially within Lucasfilm themselves (they have their hands full with the canon universe). "Legends" is a marketing banner giving them a way to keep in print

1187:

Absolutely agreed. It's the same thing with the movies. Too much information. It's supposed to be a simple list of movies and shows, not a detailed breakdown and comparison. There's individual articles for each film and series where the information is available a single click away. It should not be

1165:

to be listed here, if the table will then link to the subarticles? Is production company really necessary when it's all effectively Lucasfilm? And if producers are listed, is that just straight "producer" or does that include "executive producer" (they're different roles)? How much is necessary? We

636:

As is said in my edit summary, no other section of the article has need for such contrast. A small use of color to aid readers unfamiliar with the subject in quickly identifying which series have that attribute is a valid use of color. Maybe make it lighter, but no need to remove it, as it AIDS the

491:

If the .5 or .9 designations is made up then the same would hold for the Story order number used before which according to you is WP:OR. While Episode numbers are not made up thus not OR. Rogue One is objective directly before Episode IV thus objectively 3.9 (which I original used). .5 is "between"

4397:

I find this quote "The sequel trilogy features Kylo Ren (Ben Solo), a major antagonist and eventual Supreme Leader of the First Order, and son of Leia, nephew of Luke, and grandson of Anakin" quite appalling as the third trilogy most of all features Rey "Skywalker", a daughter of the same family.

3728:

placeholder, but it helps to keep it there because we can also improve the content intead of removing the whole section. Yes, it discusses in-universe material, but is clearly labelled so, and is justifiably of interest to those reading about a list of fictional films which, though set in the same

1324:

I largely followed your suggestions, as they mirrored my ideas pretty well. I left the full release dates, though, as they don't take up much room, and, since not all films have been released, are of current interest. While I was at it, I also removed the almost completely empty line for the third

4750:

There's been mulitple sources recently claiming that Rian's trilogy and Rogue Squadron have been scrapped. While Screen Rant and IGN are not the most reliable sources, I do think this is a development to keep a close eye on. Second(if we're keeping Rogue Squadron), with production and the release

1616:

Legends is essentially an alternate universe. Before Lucasfilm/Disney chose to dump the EU Lucasfilm did try to keep everything in the EU consistent with a hierarchy of canon: level one being the movies and statements by Lucas, level 2 being the Clone Wars, level 3 being almost everything else,

457:

Episodes are factual and direct numbering having to do with Star Wars. What do you mean by ".5 desi agora"? Since you reject episode numbering then what do you mean by "direct" numbering. While the story order numbering was clear at some point the movies particularly the anthology/story films may

415:

I switched it to Episode order as a bold attempt to use the existing built in numbering system. Thus additional films would be given arbitrary fractional Episode numbers based on when that movie occurs. I gave Rogue One episode number 3.9 as in directly proceeds Star Wars Episode IV (A New Hope),

4194:

proposed at the top. Oppose splitting further by live action vs animated. There is no reason for that and feels like splitting for style reasons rather than an organization or need reason. Merging the trilogy articles is a different conversation, I think, because the sequel article is definitely

4153:

I agree. The trilogy pages don’t really add much value besides repeating what’s already included in the list of films page and in the individual films pages. They can be merged into the movies article. TV films can go to the TV article. It would be nice if we found a structure that puts all live

3850:

The timeline is complicated outside of the episodic films, not helped by the inconsistent naming of specific Knowledge articles. The placement of multiple stand-alone films and TV series aren't self-evident from their titles, and it feels like digging to read paragraphs of prose scattered across

2860:. This article is a list of entries in Star Wars films and television installments. I don't really see how a list of changes in subsequent re-releases, which isn't even a timeline of re-releases anyway, is appropriate to have linked here. It's present in the navbox at the bottom anyway. ~Cheers, 2755:

on television series, I edited the article, to reflect this. Is the way author and owner of the intelectual property, Lucasfilm, categorizes the works, and it reflects how it wants the works to be interpreted. Not reflecting the authors intended interpretation of the works leads to an incomplete

1847:

Oknazevad is correct as to my purpose. However I respectfully disagree with his position. 1. it is not a marketing label so much as a classification used by the company itself, so I think it would be beneficial for Knowledge to use the official classification label rather than say "non-canon",

1601:

My understanding is that "Legends" is essentially a branding label used for all non-canon material, and Legends doesn't represent a unified, alternative canon. I think it's probably simpler and less confusing for the average reader to say "non-canon" instead of "Legends." But I can see how using

3509:

The notability level for an article and for an item in a list article are different. Also, categories are pretty useless for this. It's good for things that aren't really related, like "action films" or "best film academy award winners", but when you want to read an article that talks about the

3368:

per Gonnym. It's very cart before horse, UpdateNerd is radically changing the article while the discussion is going on and cart before horse is exactly what comes to mind. For example, like, the article should not BE more than a list, but right now, because of mass migration of information from

1112:

Nothing in the article should be organized via a canon/Legends divide. That doesn't serve any useful purpose on this page, and I know that the reasons why it shouldn't be have been explained several times to you, specifically, Rosvel. I threw together some example tables about how I propose the

2684:

Please create new sections instead of inserting into old ones, especially those that are two years old. Also, it has been explained to you dozens of times: no article should organize information based on canonicity. Lucas himself can come and comment on this page to tell us he doesn't want the

4030:

I think the page (and the TOC) looks disorganized trying to combine both films and TV shows. Since both sections have enough content to deserve their own pages, I propose separating them. This page would become "List of Star Wars films" and a new page for "List of Star Wars television series"

1912:

In my opinion we should list it like this, because this way acknowledges that Lucasfilm does not consider them canon. I mean George Lucas, deeply hates the Holiday Special, and I mean is not to much of a unholy wikipedia guidelines deviation, the legends tv things, would be still under the tv

1635:

non-canon item is labeled as "Legends" regardless of its former level of canon status. So, whereas what you say about the G- T- C- etc canon levels used to be true, it no longer is, and the "Legends" banner does not represent a single, unified alternate universe. (The same is also true in the

1585:

Is it really accurate to list some of the shows are Non-canon? Legends should be the term used because there are two Star Wars canons: Legends canon and the current canon. The three shows listed as non-canon are part of the Legends canon and thus are canon within that universe, but are not

1298:

I think the "status" column can flat out go. I also am in support of removing "executive producer(s)". I think that "writer(s)" and "screenwriter(s)" can be merged. I wouldn't miss "distributor" if it was gone, but I wouldn't necessarily advocate for its removal; I'm ambivalent about it. It's

659:

needed there, any more than it's needed elsewhere in the article. Seriously: It Is Not Needed. The word "Yes" conveys the information quite well by itself. By the logic you seem to be using, we should add some special color to the word "No" as well. And maybe we should add color to the status

4413:

Watch the film. Spoiler: She is not in the Skywalker family but just adopts the name at the end. The paragraph is about the Skywalker family and also omits Han Solo. Rey is mentioned elsewhere in the article, including: "The sequel trilogy focuses on the journey of the orphaned scavenger Rey

4318:

contents. I don't wish to edit war, but normally we wait for discussions to conclude before acting on such proposals. Since the only other editor to respond to your proposal has been myself, against your proposal, you don't have the proper consensus. I strongly recommend that you revert your

620:

canon don't have color added to draw attention to that fact, either. Because it's unnecessary. Anyone literate enough to read the charts can see from the word "Yes" that these two items are canon; they don't need color added to make it clear. It makes those two data cells the hey-look-at-me

244:

Good idea about the subsections. A separate article about the tv series would be fine but combining them could make sense given that there aren't that many movies and tv series, and that the line between tv and film isn't always clear. E.g. Star Wars Rebels has released two longer episodes,

2818:

I have noticed many people adding content or changing the article style without an edit summary or a post on the talk page. This needs to be done so we don't have the chaos of different people continually changing the style of tables, etc. Also, addition of "Untitled Boba Fett Film." is

416:

Clone Wars film 2.5 since it general takes place between episodes 2 & 3 and the Han Solo movie 3.5. With out clear guidance like with Rogue One most Anthology/Story movies should probably use #.5 to show which episodes the movie is between (0.5 if anytime before The Phantom Menace).

4031:

created. I don't see any real advantage of keeping everything in one page. It just creates clutter and lack of order. This format makes some movies like "Rogue One" lose TOC visibility. MCU pages are much cleaner because they're not mixing things with completely different formats.

4066:

do belong here. They're currently listed under the television header. If a split is carried out, they should remain in this page. The Holiday Special, however, is strictly television (and an atrocity on the level of the destruction of Alderan, but that's besides the point).

3609:, since it's been explicitly defined as such by official sources, before and after 2014. We could remove the unnecessary "(Legends continuity)" description from pre-2014 works. I'd further suggest linking to the holocron & displaying full names of the levels as below: 3344:

are exactly like that. I think it's a misconception that a list article is a pure list. That's more of an index. A list of stuff will contain prose, but the scope of the article (i.e. List of) means that each time is given a very short paragraph in the larger picture.

2685:

Holiday Special lumped in with the rest of the films, but it does not change that we cannot and should not change how we organize information. The article should not separate things based on what's canon and what isn't. This has been explained numerous times. ~Cheers,

428:

changed Rogue One to 3.5 (2) and the Han Solo movie to 3.5 (1) with out a reason. Godwin1996, care to explain as it doesn't make sense in the Episode numbering as Anthology/Story movies are not suppose have their own numbering system given it isn't the main saga.

2958:

As it currently stands, I think they belong together. There's too much similarity between TV specials and series to justify splitting articles. One way to shorten the article would be to better incorporate data, e.g. the critical response percentages in the film

611:

Somebody added bright yellow highlighting to exactly two data items on this page: the canon status of two TV series. I cannot understand why. There's no other color used elsewhere in the charts on the page. There are several other items on the page which are

1771:

not part of the EU, and stating that the two terms are equal is incorrect. That's the point you keep missing. "Legends" is a marketing banner that means, explicitly, not-part-of-the-current-canon material, not that they form a coherent alternate continuity.

472:

Sorry, I blame autocorrect. That's supposed to read ".5 designations". Iindicating the placement of the anthology films in regard to the main series episodes is what the note column is for. Regardless, ".5" numbers, which are indeed made up, and therefore

153:, the "See also" link I added was just one approach, but we can include more detail in the approach I suggested above. I only prefer to make a distinction between films that are very certain to come out (those that started filming) and those that may not. 3925:

Note that I have removed the lower level of canon to simplify the table, as I suggested as a compromise. This removes a column and also causes the section to no longer be named "in-universe", as this is simply the "Canon timeline", not unlike the

4102:

Support: How about, instead of splitting between movies and TV, the article is split between live-action and animated projects? (The Clone wars film would sort of have to be mentioned in both articles I suppose, though.) I support either kind of

3376:

this discussion was opened, it went from a list article to something very different. That very state of flux and how the article looks very different between every not!vote is making it very unclear about how best to handle the article. ~Cheers,

3851:

multiple sections when a simple table communicates that much more efficiently in one place. The dating format is pretty straight-forward and explained in a note upon the first occurence of both BBY/ABY. The fact that these dates aren't used

1234:

I'll admit that I know very little about Detours, but is it really considered a parody series? There's nothing on its article to suggest that it is, so why is it organized under a parody heading rather than under television series? ~Cheers,

311:"List of feature films" has an extraneous column that provides very little useful information; one could easily say in a sentence above it that one studio distributed the first two trilogies and that another started with the latest trilogy. 4227:

article, rather each trilogy on it's own. I can see the sequel trilogy article not being merged back, but the original and prequel don't have enough content to justify not being merged back in (unless someone expanded those articles).

1711:

universe. Regardless - anything Legends has been rendered non-canon, in order to free up the complex timelines and interactions so that the studio can make movies without getting tangled in the pre-Lucasfilm merger 'extended universe'

1119:. I think anything that would be in the notes section in any other proposals should instead be outlined in a prose section lead before each table. The article needs prose anyway to better contextualize the tabled information. ~Cheers, 2889:

no, it's not. It should be removed immediately. We need to start coming to the talk page for weird edits like this. This article has alot of views and if there are hundreds of edits with no communication, it's going to get worse. -

4434:

The Star Wars film seried has, in recent time, also become fairly widely known as the "Skywalker saga" though for most of its history it was predominantly known as the "Star Wars saga" or the "Star Wars series" and those wordings

2782:

and prioritizes in-universe continuity. The articles are organized in publication order, which is a more straightforward and less retroactive organization than the application of largely marketing and continuity based terms like

2978:, and I don't see any opposers, although they may not have read through the lengthy discussion. (I now also support the split, as the article is too long). Note my suggested titles no longer refer to the new articles as lists. 4542:, all of which are also Star Wars series. The main thrust though is that "Star Wars series" refers to the franchise as a whole, not any one particular subset of it, even the main number films. I think you're overthinking it. 2941:

I feel like the television series should be on a separate page. This should be "List of Star Wars films" and there should be a "List of Star Wars television series". This article is currently pretty crowded. Just a thought.

88:

has a similar list in one of its sections, but I thought a stand-alone list separate from franchise content (thus making the list of films more visible) would be appropriate for direct information and navigation. Thanks,

3317:

Why is keeping "List" in the title at all necessary, since this is becoming the main article for all things SW in film? This is more than a list, as it includes prose overviews, and is self-evidently more than a list.

1166:

shouldn't overburden this article. I'm not sure about the producer column, but I do think production company should go. Distributor should be network because that's more appropriate for television series. ~Cheers,

330:

articles are prose-heavy. This list should be a way to simply list the films for readers, especially with the start of anthology films. They shouldn't be left to go through prose or table bloat to figure that out.

377:

My personal opinion is that the second column in "list of feature films" is probably unnecessary bloat, at least in its most current state. I don't have a particularly strong opinion about the other things.

512:

I could agree to that as it is just an unneeded fork. Unlike the novels video games and comics, which are legion. There's only been 7 movies and a few TV projects, not really enough for a separate page.

1756:

Not quite correct. Prior to 4/25/14 Lucasfilm did keep the EU (now Legends) pretty coherent. They had procedures to maintain continuity with only George Lucas being able to override prior material.

3078:

as evidenced by the clear confusion of scope pertaining to all top level Star Wars articles, none of which are even close to GA level, and for good reason. Agree with Cnbrb that the names should be

3808:, but even that is somewhat in-universe, as is any timeline organized by in-universe years. This article is not the place for such a timeline. Mention the relative placement, such as saying the 2718:

of the franchise - would be correct, constructive, and insightful to any and all readers of the article. There really is no guidelines anywhere stating that this cannot be done. In my opinion,

3804:

ABY/BBY is fan jargon based on in-universe material. It is inappropriate, period. This is Knowledge, not Wookiepedia. Plus, it's not what Lucasfilm uses, anyway, as they now date relative to

3682:

series) were still canon. Anything else is just fanboy obsession that does not belong in a general interest encyclopedia. I vociferously oppose any mention of the old levels of canon at all.

2908:

I mean, lmao, if it's self-evidently not fitting in with the scope of the list and is "pointless" as you point out in your edit summary, it's not necessarily a "weird" edit, is it? Also, the

4046:

Agreed. This was discussed back when it was a simple list but didn't have enough support then. Now that it's a much more dense article I'd imagine the split would be more strongly favored.

3469:

Somewhat oppose - after reviewing the article, I think the whole "parody" section (which is just amazingly mistitled) should be split of, as it doesn't fit the scope of the article(s). --

3907:

Although I disagree with much of the reasoning that's been used, I do think removing the table and including clear relational data in the description of the titles would suffice. Peace

3242:

To address some confusion about whether this is a move requiring a split, or a rename, I've modified the request to only be a rename. The split discussion should be handled separately.

3961: 4265:

Perhaps we should make a separate article for the novelizations, and then merge those articles into it. They're rather short, and I think we only have them for the original trilogy.

492:

number and the Clone War objective occurs between Episode 2 and 3 and objectively 2.5 is between 2.0 and 3.0. So with a list of Star Wars movies and TV shows that you prefer at the

4751:

date of Rogue Squadron being pushed back, would it make more sense to move Rogue Squadron under unspecified standalone movies? The movie isn't in active development at the moment.

1727:

Actually I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that a Lucasfilm executive once said Legends could be seen as an alternative universe. As a practical matter that is how if functions.

4592: 3648:

content 'Expanded Universe', since that's closer to what it was at the time released. I think we should include the holocron continuity levels to avoid making it appear that the

1303:

lists only Director, Writer, Producer, Composer. Our own Music ought to be renamed Composer as well. I think the "Release date" column should be simplified to the year. ~Cheers,

3761:

territory. Could not this be communicated effectively within the summaries of each work on the page explaining where the work comes relative to other titles, i.e. "set between

1278:

Now that material has been moved over as part of the reworking of the main Star Wars article, we really need to do a better job integrating the first two charts, as there's a

4283:" article, which would include all the extra content from the ST page and other extraneous details. That would be a better way to consolidate the redundancy of articles IMO. 3337: 1472:

Absolutely not. That's not how inflation works at all. I have reverted your changes. Please do not make them again, as they introduce blatant factual errors in the article.

2823:

and I will remove it at every instance and issue a warning. The film has not been officially announced. We should start reverting edits without an edit summary, as well. -

191:

already exist, so I think it would make sense to have an article for movie and tv series and it seems like it would make sense to combine the two. Would that work for you?

3491:? While there are enough works to justify such a list, I'm not sure they all have Knowledge pages or that such a list meets Knowledge notability requirements. There is a 1703:--- I know I'm late to this discussion...but Lucasfilm has never stated that Legends is anything but non-canon now. It is not 'alternate universe' but perhaps literally 286:

The organisation of the list it's your opinion, please submit on this page before a sense change, considering the amount of users that has been contributed to this list.

3128:: I don't oppose what you are mean (I think), as I'm all in favor as previously discussed, but I'm not sure exactly what you are trying to do now. Do you want to move 3670:

I think we shouldn't include it at all in the charts, as this isn't a fan site and it's a not a critical detail. In other words, let's stop obsessing over canon, per

1399: 1395: 1381: 4319:

additions until other editors state their support. Otherwise, you put the cart before the horse and make a mess of a previously well-organized article. Thanks,

3129: 1351: 443:

Clearly it's to indicate which one takes place first, based on what we know. That said, the .5 desig agora are cheesy and fanboyish. Just use direct numbering.

4084:

The Ewok movies had crossed my mind. I think a passing mention in prose is enough on the film page (which is how they're mentioned in that section currently).

3700:

the tables were to be included. Their removal seems to be preferred, but we should wait for more responses to clarify that before reverting/rereverting again.

2570: 4440: 3299:. This article is in the midst of both a scope change and a re-write. Changing a name now and then again in a short while just causes unnecessary disrupt. -- 3021:- the article seems fine as it is, no need to split. The headings do their job, surely? I see no benefit from a split. As a comment I would add that if you 1983: 772: 545:

currently the thrid anthology film is listed as boba fett. this is only rumored not officially confirmed by disney or lucasfilm. this should be removed.

1805:

is and its continuity without some sort of goal of articulating a change? In the former case, what changes are being suggested? In the latter case,

697: 400:

The cell of Story Order it's seems some confussing. We can fix on another form? The cell that i retitled "Appearance" might be use for those notes.

3927: 3882: 3733:

Although they all belong at specific points on the timeline, no newcomer to the franchise will miss them (with the exception of the worthwhile 2D

3333: 2912:

process exists and is the reason I came here to discuss it. But, I do agree about discussing making changes to established style first. ~Cheers,

4661:

I know a lot of people think these are stupid, but I really think they should be mentioned somewhere since they are officialy licenced products.

664:

attention-seeking treatment. But is isn't. It's just one more piece of data, and should be presented as such, without any subjective emphasis. -

2243: 1786:

the interior of reprinted Legends novels states, "Timeline of Legends Novels" indicating that they are a coherent continuity with each other.

1008: 4626:

the main films from the article. I get it, there's a lot to cover on this page—but this needs more discussion/consensus. The article's title,

3991: 1667:

and anything else made after 4/25/14, but Legends is an alternate story as the Legends material was worked together as a continuing story.

4478:

Fair enough, I've amended my edit above to include the "Star Wars series" and have edited the opening of the article section to read, "The

1602:

Legends instead would have the advantage of sticking with Lucasfilm's terminology, so long as we explained what Legends means on the page.

1497: 1458: 1457:

All Star Wars films should be adjusted to 2005 prices or else it it inconsistent. I made the changes P+T reasonpe B4 making changes thanks

1283:

of the second chart, but I'd like some input as to which, if any, positions should be integrated into the top chart from the crew chart.

4760: 4727: 4681: 4564: 4206: 3794: 3441: 3388: 3030: 2923: 2871: 2798: 2696: 1878: 1820: 1542: 1314: 1246: 1214: 1177: 1130: 592: 577: 1511:

The word you're looking for is "why", not "how". The answer to that question belongs at that talk page. And it's one I'm going to ask.

1367: 82:

to provide a simple list that would show the release years and the story order with notes as applicable. I recognize that the article

4374: 3612: 1377:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

4223:

articles should definitely be added again is just a paragraph of difference). But even if they get re-split, it should be within a

3954: 2857: 1562: 458:

occur at overlapping or partially overlapping times or unclear to each other but clearly exist between one Episode and another.

1565:

on the film chart, as they filmed a large portion of a film, before being fired? It could even be listed with an "< hr : -->

4490:

film series consists of a trilogy of trilogies, colloquially known as the "Skywalker saga", ..." There's also a redirect for

1325:

anthology film, as there's nothing to report there, what with the original plans (Josh Trank directing) have been scuttled.

314:

Poor merging of planned films into the main list of films, because trying to sort by "Story Order" screws up the table badly

4441:

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=GB&q=skywalker%20saga,star%20wars%20saga,star%20wars%20series

4328: 3737:). The important thing is to discuss, try to make it work, and see what consensus dictates after the appropriate duration. 2714:

can just be labels as far as Knowledge is concerned. Dividing the materials into the two divisions as has been done by the

2628: 2116:

works, including television films, animated series, videogames, novels and comics produced since the originating 1977 film

1864: 1566:" break and be written in subscript. If not that, at leas an "efn" note acknowledging their original roles would be nice.-- 2947: 2404: 2196: 1636:

inverse, as there's no distinction in canon level made between the films and computer animated TV series anymore, either.

188: 184: 3855:

in-universe is irrelevant from the fact that they are used by Lucasfilm to date the works in relationship to each other.

3224:, and replacing that section with an overview of the development of the films (i.e. less plot summaries). Same thing for 621:

most-conspicuous items in the whole article, and they should not be. It's poor data presentation and should be removed. -

3969: 3530: 3277: 1442: 681:

Adding to the discussion I suggest for the Table of Films on this article to be exactly the same as the one in the main

47: 17: 3834:

ABY/BBY comes from within Lucasfilm publishing/story group, not fans. Where have the dates ever been tracked from TPM?

2597: 3259: 2778:

It is consensus across the entire family of articles that items are NOT separated by continuity because that violates

2706:

So if the creator of the franchise told us what he wants - we would ignore it? Nah, that sounds like ignorance to me.

2517: 2425: 2069: 1659:

canon and one for Legends. I am well aware that the former canon hierarchy does not apply to current media and that

1631:

The former attempts at unified continuity in "Legends" have been tossed out, though, following the canon reboot, and

3554:

It makes sense in general to sort out and deprecate this section, as it's not really what the article is about. The

616:

canon, but they aren't flagged in bright yellow to highlight this fact... because they don't need to be. Items that

3597:

designation of canon for the episodic films. As far as older TV productions, it adds more context to designate pre-

1300: 364: 340: 223: 162: 139: 98: 38: 4280: 4356:

I think we should make an article for the novelizations, and then merge all of those individual articles into it.

3995: 2739: 2481: 2328: 1717: 1571: 4398:

Maybe this particular phrase was not updated after the launch of the most recent movie "The Rise of Skywalker"?

3488: 1398:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

4168: 3341: 2943: 1501: 1487: 1462: 3510:

history of parody, homages, tributes, etc. of Star Wars, that is something you cannot read from a category. --

3879:

This is set between so and so. OR The film/series is set several months before/after the events of so and so.

3133: 3107: 1546: 596: 581: 4709: 4634:, really demands a significant amount of prose related to the primary nine films. Otherwise, it's more of a 4495: 4446: 4201: 3965: 3789: 3436: 3383: 3026: 2918: 2866: 2793: 2691: 2263: 2109: 1873: 1815: 1433: 1359: 1309: 1241: 1209: 1172: 1125: 569: 352: 180: 75: 2606: 1355: 4247:

Maybe the novelization articles and the special edition articles can be merged into the trilogy articles?

4735: 4445:

I hope that the history of this series can be presented and that names that have more recently become a

4419: 4036: 3296: 1417:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

1405: 669: 626: 405: 291: 1358:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit 2846:

Is it really appropriate to have the re-releases section? It's currently just an empty section with a

4772: 4689: 4647: 4382: 4363: 4324: 4288: 4270: 4237: 4176: 4089: 4051: 4015: 3987: 3935: 3912: 3860: 3839: 3742: 3705: 3671: 3661: 3631: 3578: 3500: 3456: 3420: 3323: 3247: 3233: 3199: 3159: 3115: 3062: 2983: 2965: 2898: 2831: 2779: 2735: 1853: 1791: 1761: 1732: 1713: 1672: 1622: 1591: 1567: 1538: 1493: 423: 4596: 1368:

https://web.archive.org/web/20101013001327/http://www.starwars.com/fans/media/newseries_announcement

691:

hasn't allowed me to do as he keeps reverting the article back. Also should we re-title the article

4547: 4340: 4305: 4248: 4167:

The trilogy articles allow for more detailed overviews of those specific groups of films. E.g. the

4134: 4104: 4071: 3825: 3725: 3687: 3641: 3537: 3492: 2996: 2757: 2729: 2003: 1914: 1838: 1776: 1747: 1649: 1516: 1477: 1330: 1288: 1263: 1193: 1146: 1094: 1046: 811: 722: 702: 642: 518: 482: 448: 3757:

within the works themselves. I also have a concern that such granular dating details crosses into

4752: 4721: 4705: 4571: 4522: 4506: 4455: 4252: 4196: 4138: 4108: 3870: 3784: 3678:

important detail is that, after the Disney purchase, only the main works (the then-six films and

3541: 3431: 3378: 3154:

No, "Star Wars in television" should be an entirely new article, and the content migrated there.

3000: 2913: 2884: 2861: 2788: 2761: 2721: 2686: 2497: 2381: 2258: 1918: 1868: 1810: 1304: 1236: 1204: 1167: 1150: 1120: 1034: 726: 706: 496:

franchise page, perhaps we are better off filling a AfD for this article as this is just a fork.

4776: 4739: 4713: 4693: 4670: 4651: 4608: 4600: 4574: 4551: 4525: 4509: 4473: 4458: 4423: 4407: 4386: 4367: 4344: 4292: 4274: 4256: 4241: 4211: 4180: 4162: 4142: 4112: 4093: 4075: 4055: 4040: 4019: 3999: 3973: 3939: 3916: 3902: 3864: 3843: 3829: 3799: 3746: 3709: 3691: 3665: 3635: 3582: 3545: 3536:, I feel it would work out without requiring a new article, and could easilly be done right now. 3519: 3504: 3478: 3460: 3446: 3424: 3393: 3354: 3327: 3308: 3286: 3251: 3237: 3203: 3181: 3163: 3145: 3119: 3091: 3066: 3042: 3004: 2987: 2969: 2951: 2928: 2903: 2876: 2836: 2803: 2765: 2743: 2701: 1922: 1883: 1857: 1842: 1825: 1795: 1780: 1765: 1751: 1736: 1721: 1676: 1653: 1626: 1611: 1595: 1575: 1550: 1520: 1505: 1481: 1466: 1447: 1402:

before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template

1334: 1319: 1292: 1267: 1251: 1219: 1197: 1182: 1154: 1135: 730: 710: 673: 646: 630: 600: 585: 554: 522: 505: 486: 467: 452: 438: 409: 387: 368: 344: 295: 262: 227: 200: 166: 143: 121: 102: 1418: 688: 4666: 4403: 4259: 4145: 4115: 3548: 3007: 2768: 2174: 1925: 1607: 1069: 894: 838: 383: 258: 196: 117: 4642:. I'm not totally opposed to splitting up the article somehow, but it needs to be discussed. 4482:

film series, which developed into a trilogy of trilogies and which has been rebranded as the

3696:

I actually agree, I should clarify my above comment is just concerning how it should be done

2657: 1371: 4756: 4731: 4556: 4499: 4491: 4466: 4415: 4315: 4155: 4126: 4032: 3898: 3758: 3753: 3515: 3474: 3350: 3304: 3281: 3177: 3141: 3087: 2217: 2118: 2030: 1535:

Two of the films are listed as #7 all time in North America - The Last Jedi, And Rogue One

963: 805: 665: 622: 550: 401: 321:; this redundancy is unnecessary, and the section can be linked to in the "See also" section 305: 287: 1425: 112:

Hi Eric, please point me to the policy that says that we don't add future films to tables.

4768: 4685: 4643: 4604: 4515: 4378: 4359: 4320: 4311: 4284: 4266: 4233: 4172: 4122: 4085: 4047: 4011: 3931: 3908: 3890: 3856: 3835: 3738: 3701: 3657: 3627: 3574: 3496: 3452: 3416: 3319: 3264: 3243: 3229: 3195: 3155: 3111: 3058: 3038: 2979: 2961: 2891: 2824: 2463: 2268: 2127: 2008: 1849: 1806: 1787: 1757: 1728: 1690: 1668: 1618: 1587: 1051: 816: 661: 501: 463: 434: 4591:

Can someone please add the Skywalker Saga logo? I don't know how to do it properly. It's

3430:

I don't oppose but like... This isn't a split request. This is a merge request. ~Cheers,

3950:

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

3186:

The proposed split would require this article to no longer be titled "List of Star Wars

1742:

older material without having to fit it in with new works that it inherently conflicts.

576:

is beyond me. I see no policy-based reason not to have the information that I included.

4677: 4560: 4543: 4336: 4130: 4067: 3874: 3821: 3775: 3683: 3567: 3409: 3405: 3103: 2975: 1834: 1772: 1743: 1698: 1645: 1512: 1473: 1384:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by 1326: 1284: 1259: 1189: 1098: 638: 514: 478: 444: 360: 336: 219: 158: 135: 94: 2668: 1424:

If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with

4568: 4519: 4503: 4452: 2909: 2850: 2350: 857: 3529:

I oppose too, how about just moving all the parodies section in-depth coverage into

4704:

Literally the only completely good Star Wars film series and it's not in the list.

4662: 4399: 4218:

Merging the original trilogy, prequel trilogy, and sequel trilogy articles back in

3779: 2820: 2636: 2345: 2341: 1603: 1040: 931: 920: 864: 474: 379: 301: 254: 192: 150: 127: 113: 4232:

IMO we should focus on expanding those articles, rather than merging pointlessly.

351:

In addition, in regard to table size, please consider mobile views. I've notified

4171:

has a long production history that wouldn't be appropriate for a 'List' article.

4619: 3894: 3771: 3511: 3470: 3346: 3300: 3272: 3173: 3137: 3083: 2473: 2045: 1998: 1913:

section. But this way is better because it explains their place in the universe.

1391: 1081: 799: 546: 46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

3593:

I'm actually fine with this if done the right way. The wrong way is to include

3034: 2468: 2394: 1390:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than 1088: 497: 459: 430: 4414:

following in the footsteps of the Jedi with the guidance of Luke Skywalker."

3573:. In fact, most of them are already on that page; this is just a redundancy. 3563: 3370: 3225: 3217: 3053: 2439: 2105: 2051: 989:

George Lucas, Raymond Jafelice, Dale Schott, Writers: Bob Carrau, Paul Dini

940: 924: 870: 683: 493: 356: 332: 318: 281: 215: 176: 154: 131: 90: 84: 4121:

Also I gotta add, I only support the split as long as the articles for the

1145:

separation, but let's write the other technical information into the table.

4358:

I think they would fit together easily once the unsourced fat is trimmed.

3216:

Worth clarifying that the proposal includes incorporating the majority of

3168:

But this is a move request. This is for when you want to move the article

3106:, this article should be moved. Afterwards, a new one should be made for 2543:

A dark grey cell indicates the information is not available for the film.

992:

George Lucas, Miki Herman (1985), Cliff Ruby (1986), Elana Lesser (1986)

3783:

for comments as they've made reversions related to this topic. ~Cheers,

1113:

tables should be laid out and how the overall page should be organized,

4498:

on the view that there's the series/Skywalker saga and spin-offs. ping

2191: 2086: 936: 820: 4154:

action films together without live-action TV shows or animated films.

308:'s version to be extremely bloated. It is faulty in a number of ways: 2734:, and completely agree with the argument you brought up months ago.-- 1865:

The official news item about the creation of the canon-Legends divide

1833:

the "Legends" banner, clearly marking it as not a single continuity.

3566:, but I really think anyone looking for the Lego series would go to 2751:

Since is clearly a two against one for separating between canon and

4514:

Then again perhaps it should be a navigation page also referencing

4728:

List of Star Wars television series#The Mandalorian (2019–present)

2293: 735: 3946:

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

2995:

I support spliting this into two articles, films and television.

3881:

is more than enough. In regards to the fact that the MCU has a

1867:

is pretty clear: there is canon and there is Legends. ~Cheers,

2355: 945: 25: 568:, "The individual articles contain that info." Sure, but per 3674:, and keep it to the real-world production perspective. The 3451:

I've made the change to the template and this talk section.

1091:, Matthew Senreich, Producers: Seth Green, Matthew Senreich 693:

List of Star Wars Films, Television and Home Media Releases

4310:

You just made two large edits which supposedly 'merge' the

3025:

split the article, the logical article names would then be

3057:

article, as most of the information exists there already.

2658:

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/star_wars_holiday_special

1372:

http://www.starwars.com/fans/media/newseries_announcement/

1362:

for additional information. I made the following changes:

4335:

he's a time sink and actively making the articles worse.

2974:

There are 3 additional editors who support this over at

4623: 4007: 3886: 3602: 2548:

No critical consensus has been reached for either film.

1115: 565: 4567:, to any listing related to games and anything else. 4745: 4559:

could provide links to the original film series, the

2140: 1949: 4746:

Rian Johnson's trilogy/Rogue Squadron being scrapped

717:

Create a decent table for animated television series

326:

Overall, the version suffers from scope creep. Most

3338:

List of Marvel Cinematic Universe television series

2669:

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_ewok_adventure

2164: 1973: 1394:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors 927:, Raymond Jafelice, Clive A. Smith, Ken Stephenson 1161:My question is, how much technical information is 3820:, but keep it about real-world production order. 1043:, Producer: Genndy Tartakovsky, Shareena Carlson 863:Executive Producers: Dave Filoni, Simon Kinberg, 4726:It's not a film series but a TV series. It's at 3408:. The appropriate home for these productions is 3051:An alternative is to merge all TV back into the 1863:any bearing as to whether or not they're canon. 1203:I think the status column can go too. ~Cheers, 867:, Producers: Kiri Hart, Athena Yvette Portillo 4279:Another solution that has been proposed is a " 3960:Participate in the deletion discussion at the 3271:this RM). This is more than a list article. -- 3102:With some consensus for a split both here and 2571:"Disney and Random House announce relaunch of 1586:confirmed as canon within the current canon. 1380:This message was posted before February 2018. 4133:were to be merged back into the film article. 3656:are in the same category as everything else. 3130:List of Star Wars films and television series 2048:(Season 1-2) & Justin Ridge (Season 3-4) 1352:List of Star Wars films and television series 8: 4449:can also be regarded in historical context. 4026:Split Films and TV Shows into Separate Pages 3729:universe, were released anachronistically. 3605:. The only title listed with two levels is 3033:(both of which exist as redirects anyway). 591:No discussion, I'm making the change back. 3985: 2456: 1930: 1536: 1491: 1350:I have just modified one external link on 1807:this isn't a forum for general discussion 4377:would be a more natural place for this. 4298: 3291:Since this is moving on I'll officially 698:List of changes in Star Wars re-releases 3334:List of Marvel Cinematic Universe films 2562: 1933: 1299:probably worth mentioning the chart at 304:, can you compare the versions? I find 4496:List_of_Star_Wars_films#Skywalker_saga 3878: 3110:and the appropriate content migrated. 2011:(Season 1-5) & Netflix (Season 6) 317:"Reception" was stolen wholesale from 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 4006:Thanks for the suggestion. I've made 3769:to properly ground the work? Pinging 3644:, one solution might be to label the 3601:canon. You can see a version of this 1301:Harry Potter (film series)#Production 655:aid the reader. It distracts. And it 7: 4430:"Star Wars saga" or "Skywalker saga" 3267:discussion, which should wait until 253:, that were described as tv movies. 4682:List of Star Wars television series 4565:List of Star Wars television series 4299:Rosvel92's preemptive merge attempt 3332:Because 3 Featured List articles - 3172:, from one title to a new title. -- 3031:List of Star Wars television series 2633:Expanded Universe Turns a New Page" 2596:McMilian, Graeme (April 25, 2014). 1561:Just a thought - should we include 1039:Executive producers: George Lucas, 804:Executive Producers: George Lucas, 637:reader. That's our goal as always. 3562:specials are already mentioned at 3495:to auto-create such a collection. 24: 4614:Inclusion of Skywalker saga films 4375:Star Wars expanded to other media 3589:Inclusion of canonicity in tables 2598:"Lucasfilm Unveils New Plans for 1354:. Please take a moment to review 3260:Star Wars in film and television 3098:Requested move 28 September 2018 2858:Changes in Star Wars re-releases 1563:Phil Lord and Christopher Miller 1557:Phil Lord and Christopher Miller 695:and merge the whole info on the 29: 4494:which I think should arrive at 2937:Television Series Separate Page 2756:article, from my point of view. 701:at the bottom of this article? 4680:article, which is linked from 3546:15:14, 30 September 2018 (UTC) 3520:23:43, 29 September 2018 (UTC) 3505:22:50, 29 September 2018 (UTC) 3479:10:12, 29 September 2018 (UTC) 3461:23:02, 28 September 2018 (UTC) 3447:22:43, 28 September 2018 (UTC) 3425:22:06, 28 September 2018 (UTC) 3394:00:16, 30 September 2018 (UTC) 3355:23:40, 29 September 2018 (UTC) 3328:22:55, 29 September 2018 (UTC) 3309:15:58, 29 September 2018 (UTC) 3287:15:25, 29 September 2018 (UTC) 3252:00:27, 29 September 2018 (UTC) 3238:21:59, 28 September 2018 (UTC) 3204:21:47, 28 September 2018 (UTC) 3182:21:46, 28 September 2018 (UTC) 3164:21:41, 28 September 2018 (UTC) 3146:21:40, 28 September 2018 (UTC) 3120:21:26, 28 September 2018 (UTC) 3092:10:10, 29 September 2018 (UTC) 3067:02:41, 29 September 2018 (UTC) 3043:23:51, 28 September 2018 (UTC) 3005:18:52, 27 September 2018 (UTC) 2988:01:16, 27 September 2018 (UTC) 2577:. StarWars.com. April 25, 2014 1663:is on par with the movies and 1: 4777:07:02, 17 November 2021 (UTC) 4761:04:36, 17 November 2021 (UTC) 4609:17:04, 13 February 2020 (UTC) 4424:16:20, 28 December 2019 (UTC) 4408:01:58, 28 December 2019 (UTC) 4351:Destination for novelizations 3487:Are you proposing a separate 3295:- this is really putting the 2702:05:44, 13 December 2017 (UTC) 2290:television films and specials 2104:With the 2012 acquisition of 1942:-==Television and internet== 1923:05:27, 13 December 2017 (UTC) 1612:04:36, 22 December 2015 (UTC) 1596:03:51, 20 December 2015 (UTC) 1448:12:14, 27 December 2017 (UTC) 1268:16:42, 17 December 2016 (UTC) 1252:15:34, 17 December 2016 (UTC) 1220:15:33, 17 December 2016 (UTC) 1198:13:53, 17 December 2016 (UTC) 1183:23:40, 16 December 2016 (UTC) 1155:22:57, 16 December 2016 (UTC) 1136:18:29, 16 December 2016 (UTC) 731:09:58, 16 December 2016 (UTC) 711:05:11, 15 December 2016 (UTC) 674:04:40, 14 December 2016 (UTC) 647:04:21, 14 December 2016 (UTC) 631:04:18, 14 December 2016 (UTC) 607:Pointless random highlighting 523:20:34, 24 December 2015 (UTC) 506:18:23, 24 December 2015 (UTC) 487:16:17, 24 December 2015 (UTC) 468:15:59, 24 December 2015 (UTC) 453:15:08, 24 December 2015 (UTC) 439:14:41, 24 December 2015 (UTC) 410:13:45, 21 December 2015 (UTC) 388:04:46, 22 December 2015 (UTC) 369:04:01, 22 December 2015 (UTC) 345:03:58, 22 December 2015 (UTC) 296:03:47, 22 December 2015 (UTC) 263:18:43, 26 November 2015 (UTC) 228:17:18, 26 November 2015 (UTC) 201:17:15, 26 November 2015 (UTC) 189:List of Star Wars video games 185:List of Star Wars comic books 167:15:05, 26 November 2015 (UTC) 144:14:45, 26 November 2015 (UTC) 122:14:33, 26 November 2015 (UTC) 103:18:35, 13 November 2015 (UTC) 4694:17:49, 22 October 2020 (UTC) 4671:10:51, 22 October 2020 (UTC) 4387:05:12, 12 October 2019 (UTC) 4281:Star Wars production history 3710:06:19, 5 November 2018 (UTC) 3692:03:00, 5 November 2018 (UTC) 3666:02:55, 5 November 2018 (UTC) 3636:15:46, 19 October 2018 (UTC) 2453:Critical and public response 1531:Box office performance Error 1521:23:21, 19 January 2018 (UTC) 1506:22:49, 19 January 2018 (UTC) 1482:18:07, 19 January 2018 (UTC) 1467:15:43, 19 January 2018 (UTC) 18:Talk:List of Star Wars films 4575:13:48, 7 January 2020 (UTC) 4552:13:37, 7 January 2020 (UTC) 4526:13:25, 7 January 2020 (UTC) 4510:12:58, 7 January 2020 (UTC) 4474:10:08, 7 January 2020 (UTC) 4459:09:52, 7 January 2020 (UTC) 4368:07:25, 4 October 2019 (UTC) 4345:07:55, 19 August 2019 (UTC) 4329:06:31, 19 August 2019 (UTC) 4195:better separated. ~Cheers, 3955:Vader at Dragoncon 2010.jpg 3583:05:59, 1 October 2018 (UTC) 3404:This has been discussed at 2970:05:59, 19 August 2018 (UTC) 2952:20:23, 18 August 2018 (UTC) 2929:01:50, 31 August 2018 (UTC) 2904:01:21, 31 August 2018 (UTC) 2877:01:04, 31 August 2018 (UTC) 2837:00:26, 31 August 2018 (UTC) 2814:Editing patterns as of late 2070:Star Wars Forces of Destiny 1707:within the galaxies of the 1677:03:12, 5 January 2016 (UTC) 1654:17:36, 2 January 2016 (UTC) 1627:05:18, 2 January 2016 (UTC) 930:George Lucas, Miki Herman, 856:George Lucas, Dave Filoni, 4793: 4740:02:05, 22 April 2021 (UTC) 4714:01:47, 22 April 2021 (UTC) 4465:saga, if that makes sense. 3940:18:26, 19 March 2019 (UTC) 3917:02:28, 20 March 2019 (UTC) 3903:01:55, 20 March 2019 (UTC) 3885:since it was mentioned in 3865:18:21, 19 March 2019 (UTC) 3844:18:16, 19 March 2019 (UTC) 3830:15:36, 19 March 2019 (UTC) 3800:23:14, 18 March 2019 (UTC) 3747:02:02, 18 March 2019 (UTC) 3724:I restored the table as a 3489:List of Star Wars parodies 3218:Star Wars#Theatrical films 2128:non-canon to the franchise 1551:06:46, 31 March 2018 (UTC) 1411:(last update: 5 June 2024) 1347:Hello fellow Wikipedians, 1335:11:08, 1 August 2017 (UTC) 1320:04:10, 1 August 2017 (UTC) 1293:04:04, 1 August 2017 (UTC) 882: 555:15:14, 12 April 2016 (UTC) 355:about these two versions. 4700:Where is the Mandalorian? 4293:04:38, 23 July 2019 (UTC) 4275:06:59, 17 July 2019 (UTC) 4257:01:47, 17 July 2019 (UTC) 4242:00:33, 17 July 2019 (UTC) 4212:23:13, 22 June 2019 (UTC) 4163:17:31, 22 June 2019 (UTC) 4143:17:07, 22 June 2019 (UTC) 4113:17:02, 22 June 2019 (UTC) 4094:04:01, 21 June 2019 (UTC) 4076:03:36, 21 June 2019 (UTC) 4020:00:30, 21 June 2019 (UTC) 4000:23:25, 20 June 2019 (UTC) 3564:Star Wars#Cultural impact 2534: 2482:Star Wars Holiday Special 2444:Jim Wheat & Ken Wheat 2423: 2418: 2408: 2403: 2379: 2374: 2369: 2354: 2326: 2319: 2210: 2195: 2190: 2167: 2161: 2158: 2155: 2152: 2149: 2146: 2143: 2023: 2002: 1984:Star Wars: The Clone Wars 1976: 1970: 1967: 1964: 1961: 1958: 1955: 1952: 1640:is just as much canon as 1274:Better integration needed 1067: 1050: 1045: 1006: 961: 944: 935: 892: 869: 836: 815: 810: 773:Star Wars: The Clone Wars 770: 4676:These are listed at the 4652:07:22, 18 May 2020 (UTC) 4530:Only is it also include 4486:, ..." previously: "The 4181:02:12, 1 July 2019 (UTC) 4056:21:37, 5 June 2019 (UTC) 4041:21:10, 5 June 2019 (UTC) 3974:07:21, 17 May 2019 (UTC) 3342:List of James Bond films 2804:04:10, 9 June 2018 (UTC) 2766:03:33, 9 June 2018 (UTC) 2744:05:41, 27 May 2018 (UTC) 1884:19:26, 6 June 2018 (UTC) 1858:12:30, 6 June 2018 (UTC) 1843:18:09, 5 June 2018 (UTC) 1826:15:51, 5 June 2018 (UTC) 1796:15:36, 5 June 2018 (UTC) 1781:19:27, 4 June 2018 (UTC) 1766:17:51, 4 June 2018 (UTC) 1752:16:02, 29 May 2018 (UTC) 1737:14:40, 29 May 2018 (UTC) 1722:05:33, 27 May 2018 (UTC) 1576:05:43, 27 May 2018 (UTC) 808:, Producer: Cary Silver 601:10:32, 18 May 2016 (UTC) 586:08:53, 11 May 2016 (UTC) 4010:to handle this better. 3263:(ignoring the separate 3134:Star Wars in television 3108:Star Wars in television 3027:List of Star Wars films 2446:Story by: George Lucas 2411:The Empire Strikes Back 2401:Story by: George Lucas 2366:The Empire Strikes Back 2264:Cartoon Network Studios 2112:, most of the licensed 2110:The Walt Disney Company 1343:External links modified 687:article something user 181:List of Star Wars books 3869:Completely agree with 3812:series is set between 2607:The Hollywood Reporter 2375:Ewok television films 247:Spark of the Rebellion 108:Future Star Wars films 3406:Talk:Star Wars#Drafts 3297:Cart before the horse 2244:Star Wars: Clone Wars 2156:Supervising Director 1965:Supervising Director 1087:Executive producers: 1009:Star Wars: Clone Wars 42:of past discussions. 3979:The "Skywalker saga" 3814:Attack of the Clones 3767:Attack of the Clones 3400:Merging Lego section 3226:Star Wars#Television 2521:The Battle for Endor 2498:Caravan of Courage: 2429:The Battle for Endor 2382:Caravan of Courage: 2275:Attack of the Clones 2016:Attack of the Clones 1581:Non-Canon or Legends 1392:regular verification 1058:Attack of the Clones 827:Attack of the Clones 721:Use this as a start. 541:Third Anthology Film 4587:Skywalker saga logo 3818:Revenge of the Sith 3531:Cultural Impact of 3220:to this article on 2944:TheMysteriousEditor 2842:Re-releases section 2575:Adult Fiction line" 2279:Revenge of the Sith 2203:Revenge of the Sith 2159:Production company 2058:Revenge of the Sith 2020:Revenge of the Sith 2004:Lucasfilm Animation 1968:Production company 1382:After February 2018 1095:Lucasfilm Animation 1047:Lucasfilm Animation 812:Lucasfilm Animation 798:George Lucas & 757:Production Company 3966:Community Tech bot 3806:The Phantom Menace 3763:The Phantom Menace 3192:television series" 2726:is off-base here, 2602:Expanded Universe" 2435:November 24, 1985 2415:Return of the Jedi 2391:November 25, 1984 2338:November 17, 1978 2259:Genndy Tartakovsky 2236:Return of the Jedi 2122:were rebranded as 1436:InternetArchiveBot 1387:InternetArchiveBot 1230:Detours and parody 1035:Genndy Tartakovsky 997:Return of the Jedi 4002: 3990:comment added by 3877:. Simply stating 3285: 2680: 2679: 2555: 2554: 2549: 2545: 2539: 2537:List indicator(s) 2507:25% (12 reviews) 2501:An Ewok Adventure 2450: 2449: 2385:An Ewok Adventure 2306:Screenwriter(s) 2284: 2283: 2175:Star Wars: Droids 2124:Star Wars Legends 2095: 2094: 1908:Legends revisited 1553: 1541:comment added by 1508: 1496:comment added by 1412: 1109: 1108: 1070:Star Wars Detours 979:December 13, 1986 969:September 7, 1985 900:September 7, 1985 895:Star Wars: Droids 839:Star Wars: Rebels 67: 66: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 4784: 4725: 4557:Star Wars series 4492:Star Wars series 4484:"Skywalker saga" 4471: 4447:WP:official name 4373:I just realized 4316:original trilogy 4309: 4209: 4204: 4199: 4160: 4127:original trilogy 3797: 3792: 3787: 3782: 3623:Television canon 3619:Continuity canon 3444: 3439: 3434: 3391: 3386: 3381: 3366:Oppose right now 3275: 3258:support move to 3013:Split discussion 2926: 2921: 2916: 2901: 2896: 2888: 2874: 2869: 2864: 2855: 2849: 2834: 2829: 2801: 2796: 2791: 2733: 2725: 2699: 2694: 2689: 2671: 2666: 2660: 2655: 2649: 2648: 2646: 2644: 2639:. April 25, 2014 2625: 2619: 2618: 2616: 2614: 2593: 2587: 2586: 2584: 2582: 2567: 2547: 2541: 2535: 2522: 2502: 2487:43% (7 reviews) 2457: 2438:Jim Wheat & 2430: 2386: 2333: 2294: 2218:Star Wars: Ewoks 2141: 2091:Across all eras 2031:Star Wars Rebels 1950: 1935:Extended content 1931: 1881: 1876: 1871: 1823: 1818: 1813: 1702: 1694: 1488:james Bond films 1446: 1437: 1410: 1409: 1388: 1317: 1312: 1307: 1249: 1244: 1239: 1217: 1212: 1207: 1180: 1175: 1170: 1133: 1128: 1123: 1118: 1031: 1029: 1021: 1019: 1014:November 7, 2003 986: 984: 976: 974: 964:Star Wars: Ewoks 917: 915: 907: 905: 851: 849: 806:Catherine Winder 795: 793: 785: 783: 736: 570:WP:Summary style 427: 285: 63: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 4792: 4791: 4787: 4786: 4785: 4783: 4782: 4781: 4748: 4719: 4702: 4659: 4616: 4589: 4516:The Mandalorian 4467: 4432: 4395: 4353: 4303: 4301: 4220: 4207: 4202: 4197: 4156: 4123:prequel trilogy 4028: 3992:185.156.172.186 3981: 3962:nomination page 3948: 3883:similar section 3795: 3790: 3785: 3770: 3722: 3650:Holiday Special 3591: 3442: 3437: 3432: 3402: 3389: 3384: 3379: 3100: 3015: 2939: 2924: 2919: 2914: 2899: 2892: 2882: 2872: 2867: 2862: 2853: 2847: 2844: 2832: 2825: 2816: 2799: 2794: 2789: 2736:DisneyMetalhead 2727: 2719: 2697: 2692: 2687: 2681: 2676: 2675: 2674: 2667: 2663: 2656: 2652: 2642: 2640: 2629:"The Legendary 2627: 2626: 2622: 2612: 2610: 2595: 2594: 2590: 2580: 2578: 2569: 2568: 2564: 2520: 2500: 2464:Rotten Tomatoes 2455: 2428: 2384: 2332:Holiday Special 2331: 2321:Holiday Special 2292: 2269:Cartoon Network 2139: 2137:animated series 2130:in April 2014. 2102: 2009:Cartoon Network 1948: 1946:Animated series 1936: 1910: 1879: 1874: 1869: 1821: 1816: 1811: 1714:DisneyMetalhead 1696: 1688: 1583: 1568:DisneyMetalhead 1559: 1533: 1455: 1440: 1435: 1403: 1396:have permission 1386: 1360:this simple FaQ 1345: 1315: 1310: 1305: 1276: 1247: 1242: 1237: 1232: 1215: 1210: 1205: 1178: 1173: 1168: 1141:Ok, ignore the 1131: 1126: 1121: 1114: 1084:, George Lucas 1052:Cartoon Network 1027: 1025: 1017: 1015: 1004:25 (20 Shorts) 982: 980: 972: 970: 913: 911: 903: 901: 875:5 years before 847: 845: 844:October 3, 2008 817:Cartoon Network 791: 789: 781: 779: 778:October 3, 2008 760:Distributor(s) 719: 609: 562: 543: 421: 398: 279: 277: 251:Siege of Lothal 110: 72: 59: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 4790: 4788: 4780: 4779: 4747: 4744: 4743: 4742: 4701: 4698: 4697: 4696: 4678:Lego Star Wars 4658: 4655: 4640:spin-off films 4615: 4612: 4588: 4585: 4584: 4583: 4582: 4581: 4580: 4579: 4578: 4577: 4561:Skywalker saga 4532:The Clone Wars 4512: 4439:predominate. 4431: 4428: 4427: 4426: 4400:Simon Grönlund 4394: 4393:Skywalker Saga 4391: 4390: 4389: 4352: 4349: 4348: 4347: 4300: 4297: 4296: 4295: 4277: 4245: 4244: 4225:Skywalker Saga 4219: 4216: 4215: 4214: 4188: 4187: 4186: 4185: 4184: 4183: 4169:sequel trilogy 4131:sequel trilogy 4119: 4118: 4099: 4098: 4097: 4096: 4079: 4078: 4059: 4058: 4027: 4024: 4023: 4022: 3980: 3977: 3958: 3957: 3947: 3944: 3943: 3942: 3923: 3922: 3921: 3920: 3919: 3867: 3848: 3847: 3846: 3752:I don't think 3721: 3718: 3717: 3716: 3715: 3714: 3713: 3712: 3680:The Clone Wars 3626: 3624: 3622: 3620: 3618: 3616: 3610: 3607:The Clone Wars 3590: 3587: 3586: 3585: 3527: 3526: 3525: 3524: 3523: 3522: 3482: 3481: 3466: 3465: 3464: 3463: 3401: 3398: 3397: 3396: 3362: 3361: 3360: 3359: 3358: 3357: 3312: 3311: 3289: 3254: 3240: 3213: 3212: 3211: 3210: 3209: 3208: 3207: 3206: 3149: 3148: 3104:Talk:Star Wars 3099: 3096: 3095: 3094: 3072: 3071: 3070: 3069: 3046: 3045: 3014: 3011: 2993: 2992: 2991: 2990: 2976:Talk:Star Wars 2938: 2935: 2934: 2933: 2932: 2931: 2843: 2840: 2815: 2812: 2811: 2810: 2809: 2808: 2807: 2806: 2749: 2748: 2747: 2746: 2678: 2677: 2673: 2672: 2661: 2650: 2620: 2588: 2561: 2560: 2556: 2553: 2552: 2551: 2550: 2544: 2532: 2531: 2529: 2527: 2525: 2519: 2513: 2512: 2510: 2508: 2505: 2499: 2493: 2492: 2490: 2488: 2485: 2477: 2476: 2471: 2466: 2461: 2454: 2451: 2448: 2447: 2445: 2442: 2436: 2433: 2427: 2421: 2420: 2417: 2407: 2402: 2400: 2397: 2392: 2389: 2383: 2377: 2376: 2372: 2371: 2368: 2358: 2353: 2348: 2339: 2336: 2330: 2324: 2323: 2317: 2316: 2313: 2310: 2307: 2304: 2301: 2298: 2291: 2285: 2282: 2281: 2271: 2266: 2261: 2256: 2253: 2250: 2247: 2239: 2238: 2232: 2230: 2227: 2224: 2221: 2213: 2212: 2209: 2199: 2194: 2189: 2187: 2184: 2181: 2178: 2170: 2169: 2166: 2163: 2160: 2157: 2154: 2151: 2148: 2145: 2138: 2132: 2101: 2096: 2093: 2092: 2089: 2084: 2082: 2079: 2076: 2073: 2065: 2064: 2054: 2049: 2043: 2040: 2037: 2034: 2026: 2025: 2022: 2012: 2006: 2001: 1996: 1993: 1990: 1987: 1979: 1978: 1975: 1972: 1969: 1966: 1963: 1960: 1957: 1954: 1947: 1944: 1938: 1937: 1934: 1929: 1909: 1906: 1905: 1904: 1903: 1902: 1901: 1900: 1899: 1898: 1897: 1896: 1895: 1894: 1893: 1892: 1891: 1890: 1889: 1888: 1887: 1886: 1686: 1685: 1684: 1683: 1682: 1681: 1680: 1679: 1665:The Clone Wars 1582: 1579: 1558: 1555: 1532: 1529: 1528: 1527: 1526: 1525: 1524: 1523: 1498:82.132.238.252 1459:92.232.119.244 1454: 1451: 1430: 1429: 1422: 1375: 1374: 1366:Added archive 1344: 1341: 1340: 1339: 1338: 1337: 1275: 1272: 1271: 1270: 1231: 1228: 1227: 1226: 1225: 1224: 1223: 1222: 1139: 1138: 1107: 1106: 1103: 1101: 1099:Stoopid Monkey 1092: 1085: 1078: 1076: 1073: 1066: 1062: 1061: 1054: 1049: 1044: 1037: 1032: 1024:March 25, 2005 1022: 1012: 1005: 1001: 1000: 993: 990: 987: 977: 967: 960: 956: 955: 948: 943: 934: 928: 918: 908: 898: 891: 887: 886: 880: 879: 873: 868: 861: 860:, Carrie Beck 854: 852: 842: 835: 831: 830: 823: 814: 809: 802: 796: 786: 776: 769: 765: 764: 761: 758: 755: 752: 749: 746: 743: 740: 718: 715: 679: 678: 677: 676: 666:Jason A. Quest 623:Jason A. Quest 608: 605: 604: 603: 561: 558: 542: 539: 538: 537: 536: 535: 534: 533: 532: 531: 530: 529: 528: 527: 526: 525: 418: 417: 397: 394: 393: 392: 391: 390: 372: 371: 348: 347: 324: 323: 322: 315: 312: 276: 273: 272: 271: 270: 269: 268: 267: 266: 265: 235: 234: 233: 232: 231: 230: 206: 205: 204: 203: 170: 169: 147: 146: 109: 106: 71: 68: 65: 64: 52: 51: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 4789: 4778: 4774: 4770: 4765: 4764: 4763: 4762: 4758: 4754: 4741: 4737: 4733: 4729: 4723: 4722:Warlightyahoo 4718: 4717: 4716: 4715: 4711: 4707: 4706:Warlightyahoo 4699: 4695: 4691: 4687: 4683: 4679: 4675: 4674: 4673: 4672: 4668: 4664: 4656: 4654: 4653: 4649: 4645: 4641: 4639: 4633: 4631: 4625: 4621: 4613: 4611: 4610: 4606: 4602: 4598: 4594: 4586: 4576: 4573: 4570: 4566: 4562: 4558: 4555: 4554: 4553: 4549: 4545: 4541: 4537: 4533: 4529: 4528: 4527: 4524: 4521: 4517: 4513: 4511: 4508: 4505: 4501: 4497: 4493: 4489: 4485: 4481: 4477: 4476: 4475: 4472: 4470: 4463: 4462: 4461: 4460: 4457: 4454: 4450: 4448: 4443: 4442: 4438: 4429: 4425: 4421: 4417: 4412: 4411: 4410: 4409: 4405: 4401: 4392: 4388: 4384: 4380: 4376: 4372: 4371: 4370: 4369: 4365: 4361: 4357: 4350: 4346: 4342: 4338: 4333: 4332: 4331: 4330: 4326: 4322: 4317: 4313: 4307: 4294: 4290: 4286: 4282: 4278: 4276: 4272: 4268: 4264: 4263: 4262: 4261: 4258: 4254: 4250: 4243: 4239: 4235: 4231: 4230: 4229: 4226: 4217: 4213: 4210: 4205: 4200: 4193: 4190: 4189: 4182: 4178: 4174: 4170: 4166: 4165: 4164: 4161: 4159: 4152: 4151: 4150: 4149: 4148: 4147: 4144: 4140: 4136: 4132: 4128: 4124: 4117: 4114: 4110: 4106: 4101: 4100: 4095: 4091: 4087: 4083: 4082: 4081: 4080: 4077: 4073: 4069: 4064: 4061: 4060: 4057: 4053: 4049: 4045: 4044: 4043: 4042: 4038: 4034: 4025: 4021: 4017: 4013: 4009: 4005: 4004: 4003: 4001: 3997: 3993: 3989: 3978: 3976: 3975: 3971: 3967: 3963: 3956: 3953: 3952: 3951: 3945: 3941: 3937: 3933: 3929: 3924: 3918: 3914: 3910: 3906: 3905: 3904: 3900: 3896: 3892: 3888: 3884: 3880: 3876: 3872: 3871:TenTonParasol 3868: 3866: 3862: 3858: 3854: 3853:by characters 3849: 3845: 3841: 3837: 3833: 3832: 3831: 3827: 3823: 3819: 3815: 3811: 3807: 3803: 3802: 3801: 3798: 3793: 3788: 3781: 3777: 3773: 3768: 3764: 3760: 3755: 3751: 3750: 3749: 3748: 3744: 3740: 3736: 3730: 3727: 3719: 3711: 3707: 3703: 3699: 3695: 3694: 3693: 3689: 3685: 3681: 3677: 3673: 3672:WP:INUNIVERSE 3669: 3668: 3667: 3663: 3659: 3655: 3651: 3647: 3643: 3640: 3639: 3638: 3637: 3633: 3629: 3615: 3614: 3608: 3604: 3600: 3596: 3588: 3584: 3580: 3576: 3572: 3571: 3565: 3561: 3557: 3556:Robot Chicken 3553: 3552: 3551: 3550: 3547: 3543: 3539: 3535: 3534: 3521: 3517: 3513: 3508: 3507: 3506: 3502: 3498: 3494: 3490: 3486: 3485: 3484: 3483: 3480: 3476: 3472: 3468: 3467: 3462: 3458: 3454: 3450: 3449: 3448: 3445: 3440: 3435: 3429: 3428: 3427: 3426: 3422: 3418: 3414: 3413: 3407: 3399: 3395: 3392: 3387: 3382: 3375: 3372: 3367: 3364: 3363: 3356: 3352: 3348: 3343: 3339: 3335: 3331: 3330: 3329: 3325: 3321: 3316: 3315: 3314: 3313: 3310: 3306: 3302: 3298: 3294: 3290: 3288: 3283: 3279: 3274: 3270: 3266: 3262: 3261: 3255: 3253: 3249: 3245: 3241: 3239: 3235: 3231: 3227: 3223: 3219: 3215: 3214: 3205: 3201: 3197: 3193: 3189: 3185: 3184: 3183: 3179: 3175: 3171: 3167: 3166: 3165: 3161: 3157: 3153: 3152: 3151: 3150: 3147: 3143: 3139: 3135: 3131: 3127: 3124: 3123: 3122: 3121: 3117: 3113: 3109: 3105: 3097: 3093: 3089: 3085: 3081: 3077: 3074: 3073: 3068: 3064: 3060: 3056: 3055: 3050: 3049: 3048: 3047: 3044: 3040: 3036: 3032: 3028: 3024: 3020: 3017: 3016: 3012: 3010: 3009: 3006: 3002: 2998: 2989: 2985: 2981: 2977: 2973: 2972: 2971: 2967: 2963: 2960: 2956: 2955: 2954: 2953: 2949: 2945: 2936: 2930: 2927: 2922: 2917: 2911: 2907: 2906: 2905: 2902: 2897: 2895: 2886: 2885:TenTonParasol 2881: 2880: 2879: 2878: 2875: 2870: 2865: 2859: 2852: 2841: 2839: 2838: 2835: 2830: 2828: 2822: 2813: 2805: 2802: 2797: 2792: 2786: 2781: 2780:WP:INUNIVERSE 2777: 2776: 2775: 2774: 2773: 2772: 2771: 2770: 2767: 2763: 2759: 2754: 2745: 2741: 2737: 2731: 2723: 2722:TenTonParasol 2717: 2713: 2709: 2705: 2704: 2703: 2700: 2695: 2690: 2683: 2682: 2670: 2665: 2662: 2659: 2654: 2651: 2638: 2634: 2632: 2624: 2621: 2609: 2608: 2603: 2601: 2592: 2589: 2576: 2574: 2566: 2563: 2559: 2546: 2542: 2540: 2538: 2533: 2530: 2528: 2526: 2524: 2523: 2515: 2514: 2511: 2509: 2506: 2504: 2503: 2495: 2494: 2491: 2489: 2486: 2484: 2483: 2479: 2478: 2475: 2472: 2470: 2467: 2465: 2462: 2459: 2458: 2452: 2443: 2441: 2437: 2434: 2432: 2431: 2422: 2416: 2412: 2406: 2398: 2396: 2393: 2390: 2388: 2387: 2378: 2373: 2367: 2363: 2359: 2357: 2352: 2351:Bruce Vilanch 2349: 2347: 2343: 2340: 2337: 2335: 2334: 2325: 2322: 2318: 2314: 2311: 2308: 2305: 2302: 2300:Release date 2299: 2296: 2295: 2289: 2286: 2280: 2276: 2272: 2270: 2267: 2265: 2262: 2260: 2257: 2254: 2251: 2248: 2246: 2245: 2241: 2240: 2237: 2233: 2231: 2228: 2225: 2222: 2220: 2219: 2215: 2214: 2208: 2204: 2200: 2198: 2193: 2188: 2185: 2182: 2179: 2177: 2176: 2172: 2171: 2153:Release year 2142: 2136: 2133: 2131: 2129: 2126:and declared 2125: 2121: 2120: 2115: 2111: 2107: 2100: 2097: 2090: 2088: 2085: 2083: 2080: 2077: 2074: 2072: 2071: 2067: 2066: 2063: 2059: 2055: 2053: 2050: 2047: 2044: 2042:2014–present 2041: 2038: 2035: 2033: 2032: 2028: 2027: 2021: 2017: 2013: 2010: 2007: 2005: 2000: 1997: 1994: 1991: 1988: 1986: 1985: 1981: 1980: 1962:Release year 1951: 1945: 1943: 1940: 1939: 1932: 1928: 1927: 1924: 1920: 1916: 1907: 1885: 1882: 1877: 1872: 1866: 1861: 1860: 1859: 1855: 1851: 1846: 1845: 1844: 1840: 1836: 1831: 1830: 1829: 1828: 1827: 1824: 1819: 1814: 1808: 1804: 1801:what exactly 1799: 1798: 1797: 1793: 1789: 1784: 1783: 1782: 1778: 1774: 1769: 1768: 1767: 1763: 1759: 1755: 1754: 1753: 1749: 1745: 1740: 1739: 1738: 1734: 1730: 1726: 1725: 1724: 1723: 1719: 1715: 1710: 1706: 1700: 1692: 1678: 1674: 1670: 1666: 1662: 1657: 1656: 1655: 1651: 1647: 1643: 1639: 1634: 1630: 1629: 1628: 1624: 1620: 1615: 1614: 1613: 1609: 1605: 1600: 1599: 1598: 1597: 1593: 1589: 1580: 1578: 1577: 1573: 1569: 1564: 1556: 1554: 1552: 1548: 1544: 1543:50.90.127.254 1540: 1530: 1522: 1518: 1514: 1510: 1509: 1507: 1503: 1499: 1495: 1489: 1485: 1484: 1483: 1479: 1475: 1471: 1470: 1469: 1468: 1464: 1460: 1452: 1450: 1449: 1444: 1439: 1438: 1427: 1423: 1420: 1416: 1415: 1414: 1407: 1401: 1397: 1393: 1389: 1383: 1378: 1373: 1369: 1365: 1364: 1363: 1361: 1357: 1353: 1348: 1342: 1336: 1332: 1328: 1323: 1322: 1321: 1318: 1313: 1308: 1302: 1297: 1296: 1295: 1294: 1290: 1286: 1281: 1273: 1269: 1265: 1261: 1256: 1255: 1254: 1253: 1250: 1245: 1240: 1229: 1221: 1218: 1213: 1208: 1201: 1200: 1199: 1195: 1191: 1186: 1185: 1184: 1181: 1176: 1171: 1164: 1160: 1159: 1158: 1156: 1152: 1148: 1144: 1137: 1134: 1129: 1124: 1117: 1111: 1110: 1104: 1102: 1100: 1096: 1093: 1090: 1086: 1083: 1079: 1077: 1074: 1072: 1071: 1064: 1063: 1059: 1055: 1053: 1048: 1042: 1038: 1036: 1033: 1023: 1013: 1011: 1010: 1003: 1002: 998: 994: 991: 988: 978: 968: 966: 965: 958: 957: 953: 949: 947: 942: 938: 933: 929: 926: 922: 919: 909: 899: 897: 896: 889: 888: 885: 881: 878: 874: 872: 866: 862: 859: 858:Simon Kinberg 855: 853: 843: 841: 840: 833: 832: 828: 824: 822: 818: 813: 807: 803: 801: 797: 788:March 7, 2014 787: 777: 775: 774: 767: 766: 762: 759: 756: 753: 750: 747: 745:Release date 744: 741: 738: 737: 734: 732: 728: 724: 716: 714: 712: 708: 704: 700: 699: 694: 690: 686: 685: 675: 671: 667: 663: 662:super special 658: 654: 650: 649: 648: 644: 640: 635: 634: 633: 632: 628: 624: 619: 615: 606: 602: 598: 594: 593:81.145.40.245 590: 589: 588: 587: 583: 579: 578:81.145.40.245 575: 571: 567: 559: 557: 556: 552: 548: 540: 524: 520: 516: 511: 510: 509: 508: 507: 503: 499: 495: 490: 489: 488: 484: 480: 476: 471: 470: 469: 465: 461: 456: 455: 454: 450: 446: 442: 441: 440: 436: 432: 425: 420: 419: 414: 413: 412: 411: 407: 403: 395: 389: 385: 381: 376: 375: 374: 373: 370: 366: 362: 358: 354: 350: 349: 346: 342: 338: 334: 329: 325: 320: 316: 313: 310: 309: 307: 303: 300: 299: 298: 297: 293: 289: 283: 274: 264: 260: 256: 252: 248: 243: 242: 241: 240: 239: 238: 237: 236: 229: 225: 221: 217: 212: 211: 210: 209: 208: 207: 202: 198: 194: 190: 186: 182: 178: 174: 173: 172: 171: 168: 164: 160: 156: 152: 149: 148: 145: 141: 137: 133: 129: 126: 125: 124: 123: 119: 115: 107: 105: 104: 100: 96: 92: 87: 86: 81: 79: 69: 62: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 4749: 4703: 4660: 4637: 4635: 4629: 4627: 4617: 4590: 4539: 4535: 4531: 4500:Starforce 13 4487: 4483: 4479: 4468: 4451: 4444: 4436: 4433: 4396: 4355: 4354: 4302: 4246: 4224: 4221: 4191: 4157: 4120: 4062: 4029: 3986:— Preceding 3982: 3959: 3949: 3928:MCU timeline 3852: 3817: 3813: 3809: 3805: 3766: 3762: 3734: 3731: 3723: 3697: 3679: 3675: 3653: 3649: 3645: 3625:—————...etc. 3611: 3606: 3598: 3594: 3592: 3569: 3559: 3555: 3532: 3528: 3411: 3403: 3373: 3365: 3292: 3268: 3257: 3221: 3191: 3187: 3169: 3125: 3101: 3079: 3075: 3052: 3022: 3018: 2994: 2957: 2940: 2893: 2845: 2826: 2817: 2784: 2752: 2750: 2715: 2711: 2707: 2664: 2653: 2641:. Retrieved 2637:StarWars.com 2630: 2623: 2611:. Retrieved 2605: 2599: 2591: 2579:. Retrieved 2572: 2565: 2557: 2536: 2516: 2496: 2480: 2424: 2414: 2410: 2380: 2365: 2361: 2346:Steve Binder 2342:David Acomba 2327: 2320: 2303:Director(s) 2287: 2278: 2274: 2242: 2235: 2216: 2206: 2202: 2173: 2134: 2123: 2117: 2113: 2103: 2098: 2068: 2061: 2057: 2029: 2019: 2015: 1982: 1941: 1911: 1802: 1712:materials.-- 1708: 1704: 1687: 1664: 1660: 1641: 1637: 1632: 1584: 1560: 1537:— Preceding 1534: 1492:— Preceding 1486:then how do 1456: 1434: 1431: 1406:source check 1385: 1379: 1376: 1349: 1346: 1279: 1277: 1233: 1162: 1142: 1140: 1116:located here 1080:Seth Green, 1068: 1057: 1041:Sam Register 1007: 996: 962: 951: 932:Peter Sauder 921:George Lucas 910:June 7, 1986 893: 883: 876: 865:Greg Weisman 837: 826: 771: 754:Producer(s) 720: 696: 692: 682: 680: 656: 652: 617: 613: 610: 574:George Lucas 573: 563: 544: 399: 327: 278: 250: 246: 111: 83: 77: 73: 60: 43: 37: 4732:PrimeHunter 4657:Lego movies 4416:PrimeHunter 4033:Starforce13 3754:it's useful 2787:. ~Cheers, 2474:CinemaScore 2329:Star Wars: 2046:Dave Filoni 1999:Dave Filoni 1809:. ~Cheers, 1082:Brendan Hay 1075:Unreleased 877:A New Hope. 800:Dave Filoni 751:Creator(s) 402:OscarFercho 396:Story order 353:WT:STARWARS 306:OscarFercho 288:OscarFercho 214:is better? 70:Simple list 36:This is an 4769:UpdateNerd 4686:UpdateNerd 4644:UpdateNerd 4540:Resistance 4379:UpdateNerd 4360:UpdateNerd 4321:UpdateNerd 4285:UpdateNerd 4267:UpdateNerd 4234:UpdateNerd 4173:UpdateNerd 4086:UpdateNerd 4048:UpdateNerd 4012:UpdateNerd 3932:UpdateNerd 3909:UpdateNerd 3889:, despite 3857:UpdateNerd 3836:UpdateNerd 3810:Clone Wars 3739:UpdateNerd 3735:Clone Wars 3726:status quo 3702:UpdateNerd 3658:UpdateNerd 3628:UpdateNerd 3613:Canonicity 3575:UpdateNerd 3560:Family Guy 3497:UpdateNerd 3453:UpdateNerd 3417:UpdateNerd 3320:UpdateNerd 3244:UpdateNerd 3230:UpdateNerd 3196:UpdateNerd 3156:UpdateNerd 3112:UpdateNerd 3059:UpdateNerd 2980:UpdateNerd 2962:UpdateNerd 2894:R9tgokunks 2827:R9tgokunks 2558:References 2469:Metacritic 2399:Bob Carrau 2395:John Korty 2362:A New Hope 2207:A New Hope 2150:Episodes 2062:A New Hope 1959:Episodes 1850:Emperor001 1788:Emperor001 1758:Emperor001 1729:Emperor001 1691:Emperor001 1669:Emperor001 1642:A New Hope 1619:Emperor001 1588:Emperor001 1443:Report bug 1089:Seth Green 1028:2005-03-25 1018:2003-11-07 983:1986-12-13 973:1985-09-07 952:A New Hope 914:1986-06-07 904:1985-09-07 848:2008-10-03 792:2014-03-07 782:2008-10-03 424:Godwin1996 74:I created 4638:Star Wars 4630:Star Wars 4563:, to the 4544:oknazevad 4488:Star Wars 4480:Star Wars 4469:Starforce 4337:oknazevad 4158:Starforce 4068:oknazevad 3875:Oknazevad 3822:oknazevad 3776:Oknazevad 3759:WP:JARGON 3684:oknazevad 3570:Star Wars 3533:Star Wars 3412:Star Wars 3371:Star Wars 3054:Star Wars 2631:Star Wars 2600:Star Wars 2573:Star Wars 2440:Ken Wheat 2147:Seasons 2119:Star Wars 2114:Star Wars 2106:Lucasfilm 2052:Disney XD 1956:Seasons 1835:oknazevad 1773:oknazevad 1744:oknazevad 1709:Star Wars 1699:Oknazevad 1646:oknazevad 1513:oknazevad 1474:oknazevad 1453:Inflation 1426:this tool 1419:this tool 1327:oknazevad 1285:oknazevad 1260:oknazevad 1190:oknazevad 1163:necessary 1157:Rosvel92 941:Lucasfilm 925:Ben Burtt 871:Disney XD 748:End date 733:Rosvel92 713:Rosvel92 689:Oknazevad 684:Star Wars 639:oknazevad 566:this edit 515:oknazevad 494:Star Wars 479:oknazevad 445:oknazevad 328:Star Wars 319:Star Wars 85:Star Wars 78:Star Wars 61:Archive 1 4663:★Trekker 4636:List of 4628:List of 4306:Rosvel92 4260:rosvel92 4249:Rosvel92 4146:rosvel92 4135:Rosvel92 4116:Rosvel92 4105:Rosvel92 4008:a change 3988:unsigned 3891:WP:OTHER 3887:a revert 3720:Timeline 3642:Rosvel92 3549:Rosvel92 3538:Rosvel92 3493:category 3278:contribs 3265:WP:Split 3008:rosvel92 2997:Rosvel92 2856:link to 2769:rosvel92 2758:Rosvel92 2730:Rosvel92 2409:Between 2360:Between 2312:Setting 2309:Network 2273:Between 2255:2003–05 2229:1985–86 2201:Between 2186:1985–86 2165:Setting 2162:Network 2056:Between 2014:Between 1995:2008–14 1974:Setting 1971:Network 1926:rosvel92 1915:Rosvel92 1539:unsigned 1494:unsigned 1432:Cheers.— 1147:Rosvel92 723:Rosvel92 703:Rosvel92 76:List of 4624:removed 4312:prequel 4208:Parasol 4192:Support 4063:Support 3796:Parasol 3780:Gadjetc 3778:, and 3654:Detours 3646:Legends 3599:Legends 3443:Parasol 3390:Parasol 3126:Comment 3080:List of 3076:Support 2959:tables. 2925:Parasol 2873:Parasol 2800:Parasol 2785:Legends 2753:legends 2708:Legends 2698:Parasol 2643:May 26, 2613:May 26, 2581:May 26, 2288:Legends 2234:Before 2192:Nelvana 2135:Legends 2099:Legends 2087:Youtube 1880:Parasol 1822:Parasol 1803:Legends 1705:Legends 1604:Orser67 1356:my edit 1316:Parasol 1248:Parasol 1216:Parasol 1179:Parasol 1143:Legends 1132:Parasol 1105:Parody 995:Before 950:Before 937:Nelvana 884:Legends 821:Netflix 742:Series 653:doesn't 651:But it 380:Orser67 365:contrib 341:contrib 302:Orser67 255:Orser67 224:contrib 193:Orser67 163:contrib 151:Orser67 140:contrib 128:Orser67 114:Orser67 99:contrib 39:archive 4753:JDA 78 4620:Brojam 4595:(from 4538:, and 4536:Rebels 4129:, and 4103:split. 3895:Brojam 3772:Brojam 3621:—————— 3617:—————— 3512:Gonnym 3471:Gonnym 3347:Gonnym 3301:Gonnym 3293:oppose 3273:IJBall 3174:Gonnym 3138:Gonnym 3084:Gonnym 3019:Oppose 2910:WP:BRD 2716:owners 2518:Ewoks 2426:Ewoks 2344:& 2315:Canon 2168:Canon 2144:Title 1977:Canon 1953:Title 1695:, and 1661:Rebels 1638:Rebels 1188:here. 1056:After 825:After 763:Notes 618:aren't 560:Revert 547:JJsCat 187:, and 4632:films 4618:User 4601:H8149 4599:). -- 4437:still 3568:Lego 3410:Lego 3374:after 3269:after 3256:I'll 3188:films 3170:title 3035:Cnbrb 2821:WP:OR 2460:Film 2297:Film 2081:2017 1490:do? 739:Ep.# 657:isn't 498:Spshu 475:WP:OR 460:Spshu 431:Spshu 275:Order 80:films 16:< 4773:talk 4757:talk 4736:talk 4710:talk 4690:talk 4667:talk 4648:talk 4622:has 4605:talk 4597:here 4593:here 4572:Kaye 4569:Greg 4548:talk 4523:Kaye 4520:Greg 4507:Kaye 4504:Greg 4456:Kaye 4453:Greg 4420:talk 4404:talk 4383:talk 4364:talk 4341:talk 4325:talk 4314:and 4289:talk 4271:talk 4253:talk 4238:talk 4177:talk 4139:talk 4109:talk 4090:talk 4072:talk 4052:talk 4037:talk 4016:talk 3996:talk 3970:talk 3936:talk 3913:talk 3899:talk 3873:and 3861:talk 3840:talk 3826:talk 3816:and 3765:and 3743:talk 3706:talk 3688:talk 3676:only 3662:talk 3652:and 3632:talk 3603:here 3579:talk 3542:talk 3516:talk 3501:talk 3475:talk 3457:talk 3421:talk 3351:talk 3340:and 3324:talk 3305:talk 3282:talk 3248:talk 3234:talk 3222:film 3200:talk 3190:and 3178:talk 3160:talk 3142:talk 3136:? -- 3116:talk 3088:talk 3082:. -- 3063:talk 3039:talk 3029:and 3001:talk 2984:talk 2966:talk 2948:talk 2851:main 2762:talk 2740:talk 2712:Saga 2645:2016 2615:2016 2583:2016 2413:and 2364:and 2277:and 2205:and 2060:and 2024:Yes 2018:and 1992:121 1919:talk 1854:talk 1839:talk 1792:talk 1777:talk 1762:talk 1748:talk 1733:talk 1718:talk 1673:talk 1650:talk 1623:talk 1608:talk 1592:talk 1572:talk 1547:talk 1517:talk 1502:talk 1478:talk 1463:talk 1331:talk 1289:talk 1264:talk 1194:talk 1151:talk 768:121 727:talk 707:talk 670:talk 643:talk 627:talk 614:also 597:talk 582:talk 564:Re: 551:talk 519:talk 502:talk 483:talk 464:talk 449:talk 435:talk 406:talk 384:talk 361:talk 357:Erik 337:talk 333:Erik 292:talk 282:Erik 259:talk 249:and 220:talk 216:Erik 197:talk 177:Erik 159:talk 155:Erik 136:talk 132:Erik 118:talk 95:talk 91:Erik 4518:. 4502:. 4203:Ton 4198:Ten 3964:. — 3791:Ton 3786:Ten 3595:any 3438:Ton 3433:Ten 3415:. — 3385:Ton 3380:Ten 3132:to 3023:did 2920:Ton 2915:Ten 2868:Ton 2863:Ten 2795:Ton 2790:Ten 2710:vs 2693:Ton 2688:Ten 2419:No 2405:ABC 2370:No 2356:CBS 2252:25 2226:35 2211:No 2197:ABC 2183:13 2108:by 2078:16 2039:68 1875:Ton 1870:Ten 1817:Ton 1812:Ten 1644:.) 1633:any 1400:RfC 1370:to 1311:Ton 1306:Ten 1280:lot 1243:Ton 1238:Ten 1211:Ton 1206:Ten 1174:Ton 1169:Ten 1127:Ton 1122:Ten 1065:39 959:35 946:ABC 890:13 834:37 367:) 343:) 226:) 175:Hi 165:) 142:) 101:) 4775:) 4759:) 4738:) 4730:. 4712:) 4692:) 4684:. 4669:) 4650:) 4607:) 4550:) 4534:, 4422:) 4406:) 4385:) 4366:) 4343:) 4327:) 4291:) 4273:) 4255:) 4240:) 4179:) 4141:) 4125:, 4111:) 4092:) 4074:) 4054:) 4039:) 4018:) 3998:) 3972:) 3938:) 3930:. 3915:) 3901:) 3863:) 3842:) 3828:) 3774:, 3745:) 3708:) 3698:if 3690:) 3664:) 3634:) 3581:) 3544:) 3518:) 3503:) 3477:) 3459:) 3423:) 3353:) 3345:-- 3336:, 3326:) 3307:) 3280:• 3250:) 3236:) 3228:. 3202:) 3194:. 3180:) 3162:) 3144:) 3118:) 3090:) 3065:) 3041:) 3003:) 2986:) 2968:) 2950:) 2854:}} 2848:{{ 2764:) 2742:) 2635:. 2604:. 2249:3 2223:2 2180:1 2075:2 2036:4 1989:6 1921:) 1856:) 1841:) 1794:) 1779:) 1764:) 1750:) 1735:) 1720:) 1675:) 1652:) 1625:) 1610:) 1594:) 1574:) 1549:) 1519:) 1504:) 1480:) 1465:) 1413:. 1408:}} 1404:{{ 1333:) 1291:) 1266:) 1196:) 1153:) 1097:, 1060:. 999:. 954:. 939:, 923:, 829:. 819:, 729:) 709:) 672:) 645:) 629:) 599:) 584:) 553:) 521:) 504:) 485:) 466:) 451:) 437:) 408:) 386:) 363:| 339:| 294:) 261:) 222:| 199:) 183:, 161:| 138:| 120:) 97:| 4771:( 4755:( 4734:( 4724:: 4720:@ 4708:( 4688:( 4665:( 4646:( 4603:( 4546:( 4418:( 4402:( 4381:( 4362:( 4339:( 4323:( 4308:: 4304:@ 4287:( 4269:( 4251:( 4236:( 4175:( 4137:( 4107:( 4088:( 4070:( 4050:( 4035:( 4014:( 3994:( 3968:( 3934:( 3911:( 3897:( 3859:( 3838:( 3824:( 3741:( 3704:( 3686:( 3660:( 3630:( 3577:( 3558:/ 3540:( 3514:( 3499:( 3473:( 3455:( 3419:( 3349:( 3322:( 3303:( 3284:) 3276:( 3246:( 3232:( 3198:( 3176:( 3158:( 3140:( 3114:( 3086:( 3061:( 3037:( 2999:( 2982:( 2964:( 2946:( 2900:⭕ 2887:: 2883:@ 2833:⭕ 2760:( 2738:( 2732:: 2728:@ 2724:: 2720:@ 2647:. 2617:. 2585:. 1917:( 1852:( 1837:( 1790:( 1775:( 1760:( 1746:( 1731:( 1716:( 1701:: 1697:@ 1693:: 1689:@ 1671:( 1648:( 1621:( 1606:( 1590:( 1570:( 1545:( 1515:( 1500:( 1476:( 1461:( 1445:) 1441:( 1428:. 1421:. 1329:( 1287:( 1262:( 1192:( 1149:( 1030:) 1026:( 1020:) 1016:( 985:) 981:( 975:) 971:( 916:) 912:( 906:) 902:( 850:) 846:( 794:) 790:( 784:) 780:( 725:( 705:( 668:( 641:( 625:( 595:( 580:( 549:( 517:( 500:( 481:( 462:( 447:( 433:( 426:: 422:@ 404:( 382:( 359:( 335:( 290:( 284:: 280:@ 257:( 218:( 195:( 157:( 134:( 116:( 93:( 50:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index