Talk:Lightsaber

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Lightsaber article.
Article policies
Archives: 1
Star Wars Portal
This article is part of WikiProject Star Wars, which aims to build an encyclopedic guide to the Star Wars saga on Wikipedia. To participate, you can improve this article or visit the project page for more information.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. Please rate the article and leave a message on the talk page to explain the ratings and to identify possible improvements to the article.

Archive 1


Contents

[edit] In Need of Serious Cleanup

This page is crap: bloated, repetitious, and yet strangely devoid of interesting details. One example: it says about eight times that red is the preferred color of Sith lightsabers, giving no real reason. There's a good survey of canon and extended universe examples, but the attempts to justify things logically are empty handwaving (the entire section on blade color never makes clear what difference color makes, or if there's a real difference at all). If it's not clear why something is the way it is (with reference to the movies or books), the article shouldn't mention it.

Someone needs to print this out and take a red pen to it. The actual content justifies something maybe half as long. 24.84.49.76 06:16, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
I couldn't agree more. The article seemed full of typical überfan-nitpicking. I'd say there might be perhaps 1-2 paragraphs worth of content in all of this mess. In addition to the ridiculousness, there's an evenly long Lightsaber combat page which is completely redundant and should be merged into this article. These kind of nerdish fan articles are among the fundamental reasons why Wikipedia is having credibility problems in the "real world". I'm not a SW fan so I'm requesting for someone "more qualified" to clean this up. piksi (talk) 06:30, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Has anyone noticed

This article doesn't actually have a picture of a turned-on lightsaber? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.203.156.23 (talk) 23:37, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Physics

The physics in this wiki is so incredibly bad. It should be cleaned up or removed. I mean come on guys. Your reference to photoelectric effect is straight up wrong. The photoelectric effect is when a photon ejects an electron. Not something that emits light. Wsduvall 20:24, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Alright I was re-reading the detailed under the section: Construction details. I'm a sophomore physics undergrad and I know that what is here is flat wrong. If nobody has any objections, I'm going to remove the incorrect parts (aka most of it). Wsduvall 04:50, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Real lightsaber???

Is it possible that a real lightsaber could be made within the relatively near future? I heard that to actually make one there would be several violations of the laws of physics regarding light or energy; could a real lightsaber ever be made? The closest thing that I've ever seen to a real lightsaber is the neon light replica that reinactors often have at Walmart or some other place selling photo-ops in costume; obviously, they are nowhere near a real lightsaber that could cut anything. Any oppinions? Has a working lightsaber ever been constructed? Thanks

Answer: NOOOOO!!! Obviously the lightsaber violates ever law of physics known to man. I real lightsaber could not be constructed because reality follows these laws we call physics. For starters, lasers extend for very long distances, until there light is absorbed. So that rules out laser for a lightsaber. I have heard people say that a cylinder is rotated at near c (thats the speed of light...) and at those speeds, virtual photons are emitted. But that violates conservation of energy. To move even electrons at those velocity requires a good deal of energy, and to rotate a sphere at that speed would require ridicules amounts of energy (more on this later). Since infinite power supplies don't exits and violate physics so many ways, this is impossible. If the lightsaber where to be converted into pure energy (using antimatter) it still wouldn't have enough energy to function for any amount of time. Also, if two objects moving at near c touched, the torques would be ridicules. Wsduvall 19:01, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Actually yes, some say that lightsabers (or lightsaber-like weapons) can be made in the future, just not now. I saw a program on the History Channel about Star Wars Tech, and it said that it's possible, but it cannot use light. Since light beams go on infinetly until it is blocked (or something like that), it couldn't just stop after like 4 feet. BUT, plasma (such as neon)can be held in a tube and put at an extremely hot temperature and have the same effect as a lightsaber. It just coudn't shoot out when you press a button. Abcw12 06:15, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Abcw12, thats a plasma saber, not a lightsaber. Wsduvall 18:55, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

well if you made a high focused laser emited from a handel and is then recieved from a "laser reciever" if you will. you could possibly cut items. i got the i dea from the videogame NO MOre Heros.

Engineering A Real Lightsaber / Lightsaber Theory

I think engineering a real lightsaber would be possible using nanotechnology (nanogenerators) as a power source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Extrasolar01 (talk • contribs) 18:59, 13 November 2007 (UTC)


The light saber runs of a diatium power cell this is not a infinite power supply just several megawatt-hours of stored energy. This power supply is focused through a crystal that sends the energy out in a thight ark that only has light as a bi product of the blade not the blade itself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by hope that gives some more info on it 66.51.146.69 (talk) 00:33, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Can that be cited or proved? In reality, that should be physically impossible. Unless there can be some kind of restraining field preventing energy/the laser beam from diffusing further than four feet or in any direction. Not to mention I'm inclined to think that energy of this kind (not laser beam, more like plasma or something) would be incredibly radioactive. Danny Sepley 19:33, 4 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danny sepley (talk • contribs)


If you really need to know it was in one of the pre 3,000 BBY year comics (think the freedon nadd uprising) when thy where telling that girl Jedi whose really good at battle meditation how to make a light saber but I really don’t want to look through my comics just to sight something sorry but hope that helps. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.45.89.181 (talk) 04:06, 5 November 2007 (UTC)


but how often said a physician: this is impossible and then they found out? i think there will be so many surprises in the technic of the future, so: never say no!:D —Preceding unsigned comment added by FlorianStahl (talk • contribs) 07:15, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Gto2000wes (talk) 21:16, 11 March 2008 (UTC) yes a light sabre is possabe you people just arnt thanking outside the box wich is the greatist Engineering law, it not just possable but i am in the prosses of making one right now, know if you want a citation for that there is no documents as of yet but you could go to waverly new york, go to the sr. high school and you will find a senior student working on making a light sabre (that studnt is me), now for anyone who wants to know how i am doing it, take a refressior course on optics

A little fuzzy on the details but it has something to do with the fact that a Jedi has to use the force to create his own lightsaber. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.51.146.69 (talk) 00:37, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Original Trilogy

This article needs some pics from the OT. Superior1 22:28, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Got that right. Unfortunately, all I have is a pic of "Draco Malfoy, Jedi Master". Don't think it would help, would it? :] 74.60.25.192 05:30, 9 December 2006 (UTC)Leia 22, 8 December 2006

[edit] Violet lightsaber

Any place to mention the joke that the violet lightsaber is "the one that says 'bad motherfucker'" because of Samuel L. Jackson's line in Pulp Ficton? Damien Shiest 04:43, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Unless it really does say that, or there's a section talking about what actors called their lightsabers (Or something like that), then no. Sorry. JBK405 04:46, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Samuel's light saber has the letters "B.M.F" on it, an allusion to Pulp Fiction. I learned this from an article in Enterntainment Weekly (I don't have it on me right now so I can't site it.) Apparently the purple lightsaber was Samuel's idea, as he wanted to stand out more from the other Jedi. User:Hibbidyhai

[edit] Cleanup

I deleted a small part of the cortosis section referring to the shadowtroopers as it looked more like speculation and has no place in an article. --Scott w 11:07, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Nice work. :-) --Lord Deskana (talk) 11:10, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
cheers. if anyone wants to help me, we can get the rubbish filtered out of this article. the topic is too good to get a bad article. if i can get a couple of my star wars books out, i'll get some citeable sources (only about the original trilogy though ;))
Under Lightsaber effects in the films, I added A New Hope, The Empire Strikes Back, Return of the Jedi and Sound titles. - Dethom (talk) 02:31, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Possible theories

I added an OR tag to the possible theories on the lightsabre's origin section. So far, George Lucas's statement about Robin Hood is the only part with actual relevence. Are the other theories proposed by outside sources or just ideas cooked up by other wikipedians? 199.126.137.209 05:39, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

I heard somewhere (though it might have been on The Simpsons) that George Lucas got ideas for his lightsaber battles from old Samurai movies. Does any confirmation on this exist? It's always a possiblility--some of the Jedi ideas seem to be carried in the Samurai values, from my perspective at least. 74.60.25.192 05:28, 9 December 2006 (UTC)Leia 22, 8 December 200674.60.25.192 05:28, 9 December 2006 (UTC)


Rent - Hidden Fortress by Kurosawa Lucas was inspired by that movie. It's practically the same movie.

You probably did see it in The Simpsons episode Days of Wine and Do'hses. But there is quite a bit of similarity between the the relationship of a Samurai and his kanata and a Jedi and his lightsaber. Supernerd 10 16:51, 23 June 2007 (UTC)


They took down the origin section!!! VANDALISM!!! Put it back up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.149.218.109 (talk) 04:23, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hi-tech lightsaber

What would be the most advance lightsaber used today in the comic books????

Is what you mean "what is the latest interpretation of the lightsaber in modern comic books"? or "whats the coolest lightsaber around"? neither of which are very...sensible questions.JonathanLee98 03:56, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps "Which lightsaber in recent comic books is the most technologically advanced?" Applejuicefool (talk) 05:31, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Repetition

As with any article where too many people know about the subject, this one is full of repetition. Just in the introduction, we hear three times that the sabre can deflect blaster fire. Would you people please READ the article before thinking you have anything to add. Quase 12:32, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The 'In Reality' Section

This section seems to assume that lightsaber blades are supposed to be lasers, which I don't find recorded anywhere canonical, or indeed anywhere earlier in the article. Have I missed it, or is this whole section just destroying a strawman? Skittle 16:09, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

If this helps, in George Lucas's original spript for the movies, it says that lightsabers are "Weapons that have a laser beam that extends about 4 feet". So yes, in Star Wars context, a lightsaber is a laser beam. (Even though that's theoretically impossible).Abcw12 06:23, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

George doesn't know what a lightsaber is. It's been used before in Scifi. Check nonfiction category. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.243.231.36 (talk) 23:45, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Just because Lucas said it once doesn't make it canon. Obviously modern technology can't produce a lightsaber using a laser or anything else - otherwise, somebody would build one. It's pretty obvious to me that the above comment by George Lucas (if he wrote it) was intended to describe what a lightsaber looks like and basically give some clue about how it functions, not to definitively explain its technical workings. Applejuicefool (talk) 05:38, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Table

That table has to go - we do not need to list everyone who's touched or ever seen a lightsaber - that level of detail does not belong here. --Larry laptop 06:16, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

There's been some vandalism on this article. Thought I'd bring this to people's attention. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.96.210.48 (talk) 03:19, 5 February 2007 (UTC).

Yes, I was in the process of reverting every instance of "penis pump" to lightsaber when someone else did it and I did not save. Amazing how fast things get fixed here!12.10.223.247 16:47, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

In case you didn't know, you don't have to go through the article finding every instance of the word "penis pump" and typing "lightsaber" if someone's done it in a few edits. You can go to the 'history' tab, look for an earlier version before the person's vandalised the article, and edit that version. Just save with a note in the edit summary box. This is how we can keep on top of vandalism; it takes a fraction of the time to revert that it takes to vandalise. Skittle 18:35, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Collectors Item

This is the only place I could think of to ask this question. There was an tv ad on a while ago that was selling duelable lightsabers.Does anybody remember the website or the name of the company? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gundam94 (talk • contribs) 18:58, 5 February 2007 (UTC).

This is a talk page that discusses improvement of the article, not a discussion page to ask questions. Simply Google search for lightsabers; I know for one that many sources will sell plasma-like blades or lit tubes along with the lightsaber handle. Danny Sepley 19:30, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] question

why does this site say crystals can be synthisised? in the book "starwars: the visual dictionary" it sais they cant —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.42.125.146 (talk) 20:07, 23 February 2007 (UTC).

Because they can. Luke did so in Shadows of the Empire. I'm not sure why The Visual Dictionary would claim otherwise. Prometheus-X303- 20:20, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] lightsabers in other media

should this be deleted? why or why not? I dont see the point of this since there is article that outlines this already. List of energy blades XAV 02:50, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Should the various fan films using the lightsaber effect be mentioned here? --Wilson 20:22, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I think it's relevant. It's always interesting to see what pop-culture influences something has had. User:Hibbidyhai

[edit] Major rewrite needed

This article is in need of a major rewrite, as pointed out several times on this talk page, and I am quite prepared to do this myself. But not if people are going to get upset over it. So would anyone object if I were to rewrite the entire article? --Stenun 18:49, 10 April 2007 (UTC) NO.i agree,this article suks Gto2000wes (talk) 21:24, 11 March 2008 (UTC)no go ahead, just leave in my comment about how i am making an actual lightsabre

Yes, It's too large. Include information about how Lucas came up with the design along with the movie prop designer information. http://moongadget.com/origins/lightsabers.html --69.149.218.109 (talk) 04:22, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Lightsabre

Lightsabre is spelt Lightsabre not Lightsaber.

first, please sign your comments. you can easily do so by typing a series of four tildes (~). second, see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (spelling). Whateley23 06:07, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

It absolutely is NOT spelled Lightsabre. Not in the Star Wars Universe. User:Hibbidyhai

I'm English. The word "sabre" is the correct spelling. However, this article is about a primarily American film, therefore the correct spelling is clearly Lightsaber. --Deskana (fry that thing!) 00:11, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
I agree with Deskana. Check the subtitles in the films; it's obviously Lightsabers, not Lightsabres. Yes, "sabre" is more correct than "saber"; that's just how it's pronounced, not "sae-breh" (eh, I'm not sure if it's like that; but I know a lot of people would probably say "sae-breh"). Also, the general consensus as to how it's spelled; Ryan Wieber of Ryan Vs. Dorkman spells it like that, "The Art of the Lightsaber", and so on, so forth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danny sepley (talk • contribs) 19:27, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Actually, on the box set for the IV, V and VI films, the first time a lightsabre is mentioned, when Obi Wan is talking to Luke in the first film, handing him his father's weapon, the subtitles spell out lightSABRE. Sabre is also the correct spelling for the real life weapon, and also, if you look at the way the lightsabre is used in the later films (episode I, II and III) the combat is more of a sabre style than a sword style. My opinion is lightsabre is the correct spelling, but it's such a stupid thing to argue about anyway.- PedroFromHell
Both sabre and saber are acceptable spellings. Applejuicefool (talk) 15:01, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] linksaber

we should remove mention of fan film —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.119.153.104 (talk) 22:11, 24 April 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Lightsaber in other media

Now that the seperate page had been deleted I feel that this subject on this page requires some thought. To avoid too much information on this page and avoiding using too many references I was thinking of including only the more noteable references of Lightsaber style weapons on Movies, Games, and Anime/Manga. -Adv193 03:15, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

With the seperate page deleted, it seems that some of the best-known instances of lightsabres in other media are relatively, well, MISSING.
Can anyone say Jay and Silent Bob?208.54.15.187 18:44, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Durge The bounty hunter: anti lightsaber material?

in star wars clone wars, the banking clan sends a bounty hunter named durge to fight the clones and obi wan ends up fighting him. he stabs him in the heart but nothing happens he just laughs and starts punching obi wan. and then obi wan slashes him in 2 but he reforms himslef. how is that possible?71.2.38.191 01:06, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Because Durge has no vital organs and regenerates whatever damage he takes. See his entry: Durge#Durge. Anyway, that's not really a question about lightsabers, now is it? Luis Dantas 21:08, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Stephen Colbert is right

Stephen Colbert mentioned on his show last night that light sabers have a longer article than the printing press (FIVE TIMES longer, in fact). It is ridiculous that we have an 10,000+ word article on a fictional item. How can anyone defend statements like "'Historically, these complex blades were constructed mostly by ancient Jedi and Sith'," and even having a "History" section for a fictional item is ludicrous. This article has got to be trimmed a lot, the question is how much. Aplomado talk 00:46, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Trim? Why? What's wrong with having plenty of information available. It's possible that this article should be split, but just because another, "more important," article is much shorter doesn't mean we should remove information from here. It means we should make the other article longer, in a good way. Yes, the stuff people are more interested in get longer articles. But trimming articles and removing content is hardly the solution. (P.S. with the publicity, the printing press article will grow) Gscshoyru 00:57, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
I think the printing press has gotten as much press as it's going to get after a few centuries. Honestly, I understand and respect your argument, but I feel that taking 10,000+ words to discuss a fictional item is a bit excessive. Where do you think the line ought to be drawn? Aplomado talk 04:11, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
That doesn't mean we should remove them. We're trying to build a compendium of knowledge here. Since when does removing content increase our knowledge of other articles, or further out purpose? It doesn't. And you know what? It'd be great if all the articles were this length, full of useful content. But they aren't. So increase their length -- don't decrease the length of this one. Gscshoyru 04:15, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I must concur. It may well be sad that the printing press article is comparatively small, but that is a direct result of a lack of interest in improving it. Crippling this or any other "less than serious" article on purpose does not really make the situation any better. Make the serious articles better instead of trying to sabotage the superfluous ones. Luis Dantas 21:11, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia's content and policies are not guided by what Steve Colbert wants. 64.236.121.129 (talk) 21:03, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

This whole article is just too much about worthless information.--69.149.218.109 (talk) 04:19, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] stephen colbert is wrong

is it wrong to give in- depth detail about something that 9 million people worldwide want details about? Not really. weird fans like those 2 linksaber hating nerds up there and sane fans like me want details. there's nothing wrong with that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.147.226.35 (talk) 14:01, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Um... is there a reason why you're including me? Perhaps you should read what I said, above. Gscshoyru 14:22, 7 September 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Z-Saber

I won't change anything, but I don't think the Z-Saber is quite the same as a lightsaber, at least until Megaman X6, it seems to be more "fluid", almost like a wave or a whip. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gargomon251 (talk • contribs) 01:36, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Aurra Sing

Was force sensitive, and should not be listed as a non-force sensitive user. Wookiepedia has more complete info. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.200.142.234 (talk) 05:43, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] No More Heroes

Does the Beam Katana/Hacksaw used in No More heroes by Travis Touchdown count as a Lightsaber? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.22.166.183 (talk) 11:06, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

no it doesn't Techo (talk) 16:12, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Unmentioned Type of Saber

Under the "Lightsaber Types" section, there should be a part devoted to the "Force Saber" mentioned in The Crystal Star. These sabers were created without an activation button so that only Force-sensitive users could activate them. 68.4.231.10 (talk) 23:09, 27 November 2007 (UTC)DarthGarth

  • All that means is they were lightsabers without an external switch. They were simply turned on by Force-users by means of telekinesis activating the internal switch, it's just a different casing of a lightsaber is all it is really.
  • And are you saying that doesn't qualify as a different type of lightsaber? A saber without the button sounds different to me. Applejuicefool (talk) 13:21, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] complimentary radiation theory

It is possible, in the Star Wars Universe at least, that the blade of a lightsaber is determined not just by a single beam, but by a combination of the "beam" energy conjoined with a radial energy. Suppose the radiation that forms the visible blade is originally inert, and would behave no differently than a beam of ordinary-but focused-light. The radial energy could also be "harmless", with the exception of maybe emitting a few rads. Since both would be generated out of the same crystal, only the beam from that particular crystal would react with the radial aura. In real physics, light travels fastest through a vacuum, and more slowly through things like glass and water. This radial aura/radiation would react with the beam so that it would slow it down so much the light beam would travel at a mere 2 meters per second, as we see to be the approximate speed a lightsaber blade ignites. As the beam escapes the aura, it becomes inert and presumably invisible light/electromagnetic radiation. A beam of slowed light could presumably cut through about anything, and contain enough mass to deflect matter. 12.146.22.19 (talk) 21:02, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Luke Skywalker (Episodes IV and V)

This was in the caption for the picture of Lightsabers on the top of the page, it's wrong, Luke only had this type of Lightsaber in Episode VI Return of the Jedi so I changed it. The Lightsaber he has in Episodes IV and V is Anikin Skywalker's old lightsaber, the same one that Obi-Wan picked up at the end of the Mustafar duel in Episode III. 12/29/2007 Zeelog1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.164.23.154 (talk) 12:55, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Hello! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.32.81.74 (talk) 12:04, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Videogame Deus Ex

Hi, i have post 2 times the info about a sword similar to a lightsaber that appears in a videogame called deus ex. It has been deleted 2 times, and I dont see any mention here. Any guess? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.197.190.70 (talk) 02:40, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] No More Heroes

why when i click on the beam katana link on the [[No more heroes (video game)] page it goes to a page on lightsabers? they're completely different. Techo (talk) 16:12, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Looking at the picture on the No more heroes article, it looks like that weapon involves a physical structure along the blade, possibly to contain (by reflection or absorption) the laser blade. IMO this is different enough that it is not an "obvious nod to the [Star Wars] series." Applejuicefool (talk) 16:54, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] development and such

Is there any info of where george lucas came up with the light saber, and perhaps myths that involve a light or energy blade. to discuss where he could have gathered ideas for the light saber.72.94.107.221 (talk) 03:11, 28 February 2008 (UTC)Dan

My impression has always been that it's just a 'futuristic'/Sci-Fi look grafted onto various martial art-weapons. Be interesting to know, though. I saw Samuel L. Jackson interviewed once, and he said that there were 8 or so stances, modelled on some form of martial art/weapons training, so whichever school that was, must have had a substantial impact... ntnon (talk) 02:07, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
I had a whole damn section on this and they DELETED it.

http://moongadget.com/origins/lightsabers.html--69.149.218.109 (talk) 04:18, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Leia is a non-force user????

In the section titled Non-Force users (number 5) it says that leia used a lightsaber, before she had any lightsaber or force training, it then says that "Some may say that Leia does possess the force, however." I think that there can be no debate about whether or not leia has the force - she obviously does. Unless somebody disagrees on this page with in 7 days I'm going to take out Leias name out of the list of non-force users who have used a lightsaber. Regards - Derob ecnirp (talk) 16:28, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok I've deleted it here it is if anybody thinks we should add it again: In Splinter of the Mind's Eye, Leia Organa used Luke Skywalker's lightsaber in a nearly fatal attempt to hold off Darth Vader. This was before she had any training in use of the Force or lightsabers, and it showed. Only the sacrifice of the Yuzzim Hin and Vader's own overconfidence prevented her untimely demise. Some may say that Leia does possess the force, however. - Kingpin (talk) 15:30, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Editing Vandalism

Under the colors section of this article there is the phrase "Star Wars is for nerds" repeated many times, i tried to delete the offending section, but it does not appear in the editing box. Can someone tell me why this is so?

Nosmo Kex (talk) 14:30, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Photo needed

Of internal structure of lightsaber. Anyone know of a uncopyrighted source or can make an image with photoshop to upload?

[edit] Lightsaber Colors

In the "Colors" section it claims "In the original film trilogy, lightsaber blades could be blue, green, purple, or red." It may be I'm wrong but I don't remember ever hearing about or seeing anything resembling a purple lightsaber while watching the original movies, this is unsourced information and might be original research. Can I remove this claim until someone can cite a refrence? 68.219.26.177 (talk) 03:54, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

The color was introduced in this edit, which was wrong from the start. I've removed it. --Krótki (talk) 11:45, 3 June 2008 (UTC)