Template talk:Second Galactic Civil War

Other States

Should this template also list former and defunct Imperial satellites, such as the Imperial Outer Rim Authority (later Pentastar and now a part of Rogue Squadron) and the 12 Colonies/Chiss Ascendancy? --Alex Tylger 16:29, 24 February 2011 (GMT)

Since it's doing similar to the Galactic Alliance's members, that'd make sense. Weylin vi Cron 01:55, 25 February 2011 (GMT)

They're not GA/IU members though. That and I can't think of any major group that isn't currently outright aligned anyway. Maybe we need to make two 'Rebel-aligned' and 'Empire-aligned' general categories under the GA/IU categories. Orphaea Imperium 07:28, 25 February 2011 (GMT)

Allow me to clarify to everyone who's tried to edit the 'Other' category. This is for major factions of the Galactic Civil War. Avance is a major faction as it is very large and prominently neutral. Black Sun is a major faction due to the amount of damage it's done, particularly to the Galactic Alliance. Eidola is a major faction due to being at war with everyone and being the most significant pirate faction in history. Groups like Mando'ade, Old Republic, Anzat, etc. that are relatively minor in the galactic scale of things shouldn't be listed. If there's conflicts involving them that should be brought up, it is in the 'Concurrent' category (e.g. maybe a Mandalorian Civil War addition?). If we don't draw the line somewhere, we'll have every 'neutral' faction in the galaxy listed in the Other category. Orphaea Imperium 04:28, 27 February 2011 (GMT)

If Anzat is not listed under Other, I believe they should be listed under "Imperial aligned" with an "Until" date to indicate its period as a GE vassal state. Since Allied Tion is listed as a GCW event, one that specifically triggered NAO's period as a GE satellite, it makes sense that Anzat would be listed as well. --Alex Tylger 05:10, 27 February 2011 (GMT)

Or Allied Tion moved to 'Concurrent'. I don't know the details of that campaign, so it might well be more appropriate there than in the Imperial/Rebel conflict category. Orphaea Imperium 07:41, 27 February 2011 (GMT)

I added Anzat to the "Other States" Category, but perhaps it might be appropriate to also include Anzat as "Imperial Aligned" with a notation for the period that they were a client state.Carn`ilo` Sabosen 19:10, 27 February 2011 (GMT)

I think we're getting a little bit excessively complicated. Should we include the dates for when groups joined the GA/IU as well? Or the creation dates of TAC and Eidola? Orphaea Imperium 05:07, 28 February 2011 (GMT)

The Black Nebula you are referencing is not a state(i.e faction) and it currently links to the Black Nebula associated with Prard`al` KeyrekCarn`ilo` Sabosen 23:36, 28 February 2011 (GMT)

Seriously, if Avance is listed under "Other" so should this CIS conglomerate be. I can't recall anything from their side that would somehow mark them as a great third power bloc in the whole war. --Alex Tylger 23:39, 28 February 2011 (GMT)

I think the latest edit is a real improvement and lets us really get an idea of who all the major players are in the Galactic Civil War. Orphaea Imperium 00:47, 1 March 2011 (GMT)

If we're going to be adding former groups of the Imperial/Rebel aligned, then Kathol Republic was a city state prior to the IU forming, now defunct of course, but then TAR is also added and they're defunct as a government too. Dakha Rednax 01:29, 1 March 2011 (GMT)

To simplify the template, I have renamed "Others" to Neutrals.I think that we should not try to list all the neutral factions, but just list the conglomerates and alliances. Individual factions that have not chosen a side should not be mentioned. Carn`ilo` Sabosen 22:56, 1 March 2011 (GMT)

I'm saddened that someone took my edit adding every faction currently in the game to the template seriously.

Lets cut to the chase. What is this template about? The Galactic Civil War. What does that mean?

According to SWC's timeline (either the official one or my one, the Galactic Empire supplanted the Galactic Republic as the main claimant for ruling government of the galaxy. The war is started by opposing factions claiming that they are in fact the legitimate government. So the GCW is effectively a conflict between the Empire (and its supporters) against the major factions against its rule (these days, the GA). That takes care of who the main parties should be in the template.

Then in an 'other' category, we should include significant other parties. For example, Avance is a government rivalling several of the others in size, controls substantial technology, and is (uniquely for its size) neutral. Black Sun and Eidola, as mercurial and substantial criminal and pirate groups, should be thrown in as well.

Other groups that have nothing to do with the war over who is the 'legitimate' galactic government, like Akheton, Rothana Metal Works, or Chiss Material Extractions, shouldn't be added. And why should they? They have nothing to do with it. They're just groups in the galaxy.

Of course, there are other conflicts going on behind the scenes, e.g. Mando'ade vs Mandalore. But is this a theatre of the GCW? Not really. Maybe it's a Mandalorian Civil War, which would be a concurrent, but not the same, war (e.g. War of 1812 and the war against Napoleon - Britain was involved in them both, but that's about the extent of the connection).

Finally, we may need a separate category just for major factions that no longer exist.

Orphaea Imperium 00:58, 2 March 2011 (GMT)

I have always felt that the draft you wrote should have been adapted as the timeline, since it is a better defined version, plus it does not give the Sith as much credit.I have removed the links to all the groups who I feel should be on a template involved in the GCW. Aurodium Legion I left on for similar reason as Avance. Even though they have not chosen a side, and have declared neutrality, they are big enough to merit mentioning(as one would expect that both sides would try to court them). It also might be easier to list a group by their conglomerate name to save space.The same goes for if that group is an affiliate of a Government.Carn`ilo` Sabosen 01:15, 2 March 2011 (GMT)

Aurodium Legion is neutral, but doesn't have a whole lot of territory, and doesn't have anything unique to it. In that sense it's just another random group out in the galaxy. Avance, on the other hand, has much greater territory, is much richer, and controls a lot of important technology (weapons and ships). Anzat and Old Republic are somewhere in the middle - I'd say Anzat should be included as it was once controlled by the Empire, and Old Republic should be excluded because, while it controls tech, it hasn't ever really had any influence on a GCW scale.

I also really don't think we need all the NATs and affiliated factions listed unless they're particularly significant (e.g. CorSec, Kuat Drive Yards). The only non-faction or sub-faction group that should be listed is the Sith. Orphaea Imperium 02:28, 2 March 2011 (GMT)

Outer Rim War

Should Eidola's "Outer Rim War" be included in the list of concurrent conflicts?--Carn`ilo` Sabosen 05:46, 25 February 2011 (GMT)

If you can think of major/noteworthy events in that war that we can make articles on, we can put it in. If there's only one or two isolated events, we can stick it in with concurrent events (like we did e.g. the Hapan Black Sun Crisis). Orphaea Imperium 07:28, 25 February 2011 (GMT)

The outer rim war should have its own little sub section like the imperial civil wars etc etc. It consists of so many events that it does not do it justice as just a link. Avance's encounters with eidola alone as part of the outer rim war deserve its own section. Thoughts?Horthon Gorthy 18:02, 8 March 2011 (GMT)

Those most familiar with said events would know best to what extent it necessitates expansion of the template. How about you edit it with links to relevant events, and we can let you know how it looks? --Alex Tylger 18:09, 8 March 2011 (GMT)

Section made for it. Add what you like, but be prepared to write articles on everything you add. Orphaea Imperium 00:44, 9 March 2011 (GMT)

Other Conflicts

What other major conflicts should be mentioned?--Carn`ilo` Sabosen 05:47, 25 February 2011 (GMT)

We included some in the 'Concurrent' section. Orphaea Imperium 07:28, 25 February 2011 (GMT)

NPOV

Seeing as people are wanting to have a NPOV, Rebel-aligned should be changed to Alliance-aligned. There is no Rebel Alliance now, it's the New Republic, and all the factions are united by the Galactic Alliance. If this is from a neutral of view, that's how it should be presented. --Love ling Tresario! 01:55, 9 March 2011 (GMT)

Please read discussion before contributing. The Galactic Civil War is the Empire, and its supporters, against those opposed to its rule. Rebels, in other words. This isn't a POV issue, unless you take issue with the entire basis for Star Wars and thus SWC. Orphaea Imperium 02:41, 9 March 2011 (GMT)

I take issue with SWC Horthon Gorthy 02:46, 9 March 2011 (GMT)

And yet the Galactic Government is now the Falleen Federation. So the Galactic Empire no longer rules the galaxy, and the Galactic Alliance is not a group of rebels anymore. If the GE was the Galactic Government, I would agree with you. --Love ling Tresario! 03:05, 9 March 2011 (GMT)

I would have to agree with our patriotic colleague in the sense that the reality of SWC is that there is no rebellion, there is a new republic. and likewise the GE is infact not in power as the galactic government it is the FF. The basis of SW is the rebellion, but SWC =/= SW. Horthon Gorthy 04:14, 9 March 2011 (GMT)

And to continue on with what he said, even the in SW Canon they got to the point where the Empire was no long the power of the galaxy. So are we to believe that the people who oppose the Empire are forever to be a rebellion? At what point does the rebellion not a rebellion? Just because there is no Rebellion doesn't mean that SWC can't exist. --Jared Waymen, Love ling Tresario! 06:38, 9 March 2011 (GMT)

I have to agree. The name "Rebel Alliance" is now largely called, in many canon sources, the "Alliance to Restore the Republic." One could say the "Rebel" aspect of it, while canon, was largely a stance assumed by the Empire and its supporters (for example Thrawn would continue to refer to them as "rebels" even after the fall of Coruscant and the declaration of the New Republic.) Since the template says Galactic Alliance in any case, it makes sense, for the sake of consistency, that it would say Alliance-aligned on the second tab. --Alex Tylger 10:17, 9 March 2011 (GMT)

Purely for intellectual purposes I would argue with your point jared, year 0 day 1 takes place much before that in SWC cannon, if im not mistaken year 1 day 0 is like the day after the empire strikes back events. Horthon Gorthy

How is that, and how does it have anything to do with what my point was? My point was, 12 Years into the Canon Galactic Civil War, no one was calling the New Republic "rebels" unless they were part of the Empire or supported it. And as the Galactic Government is now the Falleen Federation, if there are any rebels, they're the Empire and the other members of the Imperial Union. --Jared Waymen, Love ling Tresario! 15:59, 9 March 2011 (GMT)

The Galactic Government status is and always has been an utterly flawed status that has little basis in "reality," as it is purely based on the populace of governed planets and nothing else. Hapes was even the Galactic Government for a while, proof enough that it makes little sense. That, and the fact that it can, and probably will change. In any case, it can be argued that while canon is the Empire vs the Rebel Alliance/Rebellion/Alliance to Restore the Republic, the wookieepedia article is called "Alliance to Restore the Republic" and refers to it primarily as the Alliance. Not that it really matters too much. It is accepted that the game has progressed in a direction of its own, diverging from canon (specifically made apparent by the Rebel Alliance becoming the New Republic without seizing Coruscant.) And while the Empire may brand the Galactic Alliance as "rebels in oppositition to Imperial rule" the fact is that the template is supposed to be a neutral representation of power blocs, other states and neutral parties, as well as significant conflicts between any and all aforementioned parties. Furthermore, as I said before, the template specifically says "Galactic Alliance" indicating that power bloc, so it makes very little sense to say "Rebel aligned." Leaving it as "Rebel aligned" leaves the wiki open for more tweaking where one "side"'s branding is apparent... for example: "Remnant aligned" rather than "Imperial aligned" if one side decides to do mass-promotion and gain common acceptance of that term. --Alex Tylger 16:17, 9 March 2011 (GMT)

I think alex's final analysis is an apt one, the only disenting is orph. do we have consent orph Horthon Gorthy 17:12, 9 March 2011 (GMT)

Afraid not. I stand by my interpretation of the GCW as being the one correct for SWC history. The Empire, as the successor to the Galactic Republic, would be the 'incumbent' government facing opposition, regardless of your consideration of the legitimacy of that incumbency. In *that* respect, it is correct to refer to it as 'Rebel-aligned'. Incidentally, if you want to argue divergence, we've never had an Alliance to Restore the Republic faction, they were always proudly Rebel Alliance until the New Republic came along (though they may have claimed the long name internally).

I also disagree on political grounds for two reasons.

One: A civil war is generally between two parties for one position. In this case, it's the Empire and RA/NR to be Galactic Government (in RP terms, not in the flawed SWC mechanic terms). The alliances, while important, are still peripheral to a greater or lesser extent to that core conflict, regardless of how much we've diverged from canon.

Two: Tresario, the only group currently (and likely to be) listed, is not Alliance-aligned (because of FF). It is, however, Republic-aligned in the same way that KDY and CorSec are Empire/Imperial-aligned rather than 'Union aligned' (and Empire/Imperial aligned is the meaning I meant for it, not Union aligned). In that respect, the term would more properly be 'Republic-aligned' (which I'd be happy with) if not Rebel-aligned (I went with Rebel rather than Republic in the beginning because of the history issue above, and the in-game historical fact that they used to be the Rebel Alliance).

Orphaea Imperium 23:18, 10 March 2011 (GMT)

Republic-aligned is acceptable. Issue is closed with me unless anyone else has something to add --Jared Waymen, Love ling Tresario! 00:58, 11 March 2011 (GMT)

Personally, I'm with Orphaea on this one, but I do think Republic-aligned is a fair compromise. I'd point out that regardless of which faction is the "official" Galactic Government by SWC mechanics, the fact of the matter is that the zeitgeist of the last 12 years is dominated by the near-mythic status of the Galactic Empire. Over the years major events have often often been evaluated, even by neutral parties, with respect or in comparison to the Galactic Empire, and it is this very orientation around and cultural obsession with the Might/Power/Dominance, be it factual or fictitious, of the Empire that makes any other individual, faction, or alliance of factions in opposition a "rebel". --Arkhaios Plaga 04:23, 11 March 2011 (GMT)