Talk:Maul

Article milestones Date Process Result September 19, 2018 Featured article nomination Failure September 29, 2018 Failed Featured article nominee
Current status: Failed Featured article nominee

Equipment

I'm currently working on finishing this page, and am curious about an equipment section. As someone who isn't that familiar with notability guidelines here, what would peoples' thoughts be on including an equipment section that includes two sections: one with Maul's double-bladed lightsaber, and another with the darksaber? Would those be notable enough, especially with the darksaber mostly having belonged to Pre Vizsla during the show's run (Maul only had it for 2 episodes + Son of Dathomir)? The double-bladed saber could be notable, but at the same time I may be looking at through through an out-of-universe lense. - Brandon Rhea^(talk)(he/him/his) 01:09, May 23, 2014 (UTC)

Maul's Childhood

Where does that picture of Darth Maul as a child come fro is that still a canon source or Legends? Matt Seay (talk) 05:01, May 25, 2014 (UTC)

• It comes from Darth Maul—Son of Dathomir 1, a canon comic adapted from unproduced Star Wars: The Clone Wars scripts. - Brandon Rhea^(talk) 05:05, May 25, 2014 (UTC)

Okay thanks, that is what I was thinking. Matt Seay (talk) 05:10, May 25, 2014 (UTC)

chest tats/markings

Should it be noted that the canon version of mauls chest tattoos/markings (not sure what they are in canon) are nearly identical to those in the Legends continuity which showed them first in the old Darth Maul comic? Or have I failed to note an important piece of concept art from the Phantom Menace that depicts them? I think this is important to note... not sure... ralok (talk) 04:28, June 26, 2014 (UTC)

power and abilities ?

can someone tell why is this info is in maul's power and abilities section ?

--- His skills paled in comparison to Sidious, however, even after Maul declared himself the true Lord of the Sith. During their encounter on Mandalore, Sidious easily pinned Maul to a wall using the Force, bested him in lightsaber combat, and captured him. It was just before this capture that Maul experienced Sidious' power over him and begged for mercy.---

This is more like ---Sidious wankery--- more than Maul's power info, this is ridiculous, Maul did a very good job against Sidious, kicked his torso and blade lock etc. Yet this become more like Sidious's power and abilities section, I did some additions here yet Brandon take it back. And I didn't add any non-canon info here, I only add from TCW episodes and Son of Dathomir. --Marco 1907 (talk) 16:14, November 25, 2014 (UTC)

• Powers and abilities sections should be balanced; the quoted text showed a weakness against another opponent, whereas in almost all other duels, Maul had been the victor or at least brought it to a stalemate. - Brandon Rhea^(talk) 16:25, November 25, 2014 (UTC)

I didn't see any info about Mace kicking ass of Sidious's in his power and abilities section, nor Vader's defeats in his own section, why is this info exist Maul's power and abilities section then ? --Marco 1907 (talk) 16:30, November 25, 2014 (UTC)

• The Sidious and Anakin pages are not very good. One page's content does not affect the other; one page doing it one way does not affect the other. The Darth Maul page was written to be balanced and to cover the relevant info; I can't speak to the other two pages because I did not write them. - Brandon Rhea^(talk) 16:32, November 25, 2014 (UTC)

Image

Should we update this page with an image of Maul from TCW instead of from TPM?? Policy is to use the most recent (chronological-wise) appearance of the character, and since Maul's return in TCW is over ten years since the events of TPM I'd say that warrants a new main image for him. Cevan (talk) 19:16, March 8, 2015 (UTC)

• We've always favored live-action over animation whenever possible. And in this case, Maul from TCW looks exactly the same as Maul from Episode I, so I don't see a need to change it. - Brandon Rhea^(talk) 19:23, March 8, 2015 (UTC)
  • What about Hera Syndulla's page then? The cover for "A New Dawn" is clearly made to look realistic and like it's live action. The book takes place only six years before Rebels as opposed to Maul in TPM and TCW which was over ten years, and Hera looks the exact same. Cevan (talk) 19:28, March 8, 2015 (UTC)
    • Because she's primarily an animated character, and there isn't an actual live-action image of her. - Brandon Rhea^(talk) 19:32, March 8, 2015 (UTC)
      • To expand a bit more, there's no actual policy that I'm aware of that says we must use an image from a character's most chronologically recent appearance. That's true sometimes, but not always. Live-action should and generally does trump everything else. That's long since been established. You can see that on every Legends page for a major OT movie character, despite the fact that almost all of them went on to be depicted in various Legends stories decades after Episode VI. Almost all of them have more "recent" looks in those EU stories, but we don't use those images. We use the live-action ones. Live action should always take priority so long as live-action accurately depicts the entirety of the character. The current image of Darth Maul does. It's an iconic shot, it's a well-framed shot, and is the best infobox-worthy Darth Maul image that's out there. - Brandon Rhea^(talk) 19:58, March 8, 2015 (UTC)
        • Ah alright then; thanks for the clarification, Brandon! Cevan (talk) 20:11, March 8, 2015 (UTC)
          • Can we change the name now? --Kyle03 (talk) 19:58, June 14, 2016 (UTC)
            • Maul has now returned nearly 30 in-universe years after TPM and looks significantly different, even disregarding animation vs live-action differences. I think it's time to update the picture.--D9328 (talk) 17:54, August 10, 2016 (UTC)d9328

Is anyone going to bother responding to this? I tried to switch the image for the reason D9328 said, but I was reverted. Clearly somebody has a position on this. DarkKnight2149 19:11, August 15, 2016 (UTC)

• It has already been discussed above, and Brandon gave a reason when he reverted it: that live action is preferred over animation whenever possible. There is not enough difference in appearance between Maul in TPM and in Rebels to justify a change to the infobox image. -- Dr. Porter (Talk|Contribs) 01:24, August 16, 2016 (UTC)
  • Yeah, I agree. The difference are stylistic. It comes down to the difference between live actio and the different animation styles of The Clone Wars and Rebels. If his appearance in Rebels was in any way a departure from what we've seen before then I'd agree changing the image would make sense. As it stands, though, he doesn't look different at all. In that case, live action > animation. - Brandon Rhea^(talk) 05:55, August 16, 2016 (UTC)

Once there is an image of Maul from Solo: A Star Wars Story available, should the image be switched? This will be the most chronologically recent live-action appearance of Maul. Pihlkachu (talk) 16:31, May 31, 2018 (UTC)

• My guess would be probably not, since he's a hologram and we tend to avoid those as infobox images whenever possible. I'd wait until if/when we get a full on live action, non-hologram image of him. Otherwise I'd keep the Episode I image, since that's the most iconic anyway. - Brandon Rhea^(talk) 17:08, May 31, 2018 (UTC)
  • Ok, makes sense to me, Episode I is certainly more iconic. And hopefully that is a "when" rather than an "if". Good to keep in mind for the future when/if that does happen. Pihlkachu (talk) 17:50, June 1, 2018 (UTC)

Move page

As of "Twilight of the Apprentice," he only identifies himself as Maul, as he no longer considers himself a Sith. Should the page be moved to Maul? - AV-6R7^{Crew Pit} 02:44, March 31, 2016 (UTC)

• I haven't seen the episode in question, but I would certainly say so. Its always been policy that we go with whatever the character is most recently identifying by within the current continuity. If he doesn't consider himself "Darth" anymore, then neither should we, and the article should be moved appropriately. ProfessorTofty (talk) 02:47, March 31, 2016 (UTC)
  • I would STRONGLY advise not doing that. That's going to do major damage to this page's Search Engine Optimization in two big ways:
    • One, by only being called "Maul," it's no longer going to be identified by the most recognizable name of "Darth Maul." It will fall in search engine results.
    • The Legends page will end up getting the SEO boost. People searching for information about Darth Maul will wind up on the Legends page. They won't find anything about Darth Maul in Rebels, and will find lots of information that does not apply to his canonical storyline. We'll be right back into the situation we were in before the canon/Legends default swap. We will be doing a disservice to readers by moving this page.
  • Please do not move this page until we have had a chance to more formally discuss this. - Brandon Rhea^(talk) 02:53, March 31, 2016 (UTC)
• I would also disagree. Not only cause of the reason of SEO (which is a big reason) but also because according to Maul himself, he wasn't always known as Maul. We can assume that the name Maul came with the Darth title, which gives reason enough to just leave it as is. Weirdo Guy (talk) 02:56, March 31, 2016 (UTC)
  • Tope protected the page temporarily so we can consider our options. - Brandon Rhea^(talk) 03:12, March 31, 2016 (UTC)

I support the move. Maul no longer uses the "Darth" title, and the word "Maul" applies to his Sith name anyway. Not to mention that the article about Darth Revan is simply called Revan. I think the same principle can be applied here. DarkKnight2149 03:27, March 31, 2016 (UTC)

• In terms of SEO (naming policy notwithstanding), Revan is likely just as strong if not stronger than just "Darth Revan." It's a unique name, and it's well-identified with the character. "Maul" is a generic word with no unique association to Star Wars or to Darth Maul's character. The page will take a bad hit if we move it. I'm probably in the minority amongst the community here, but I think those out-of-universe considerations need to trump in-universe ones sometimes. The health and accessibility of our content is vital. - Brandon Rhea^(talk) 03:31, March 31, 2016 (UTC)
  • A quick Google search reveals that our Darth Maul articles are the topic results when one simply searches the word maul. - AV-6R7^{Crew Pit} 03:36, March 31, 2016 (UTC)
    • That's largely because of the strength of the current name, a strength that will be weakened by the page move. Keep in mind too that Google knows your search habits, so it's also feeding you content that's relevant to you. - Brandon Rhea^(talk) 03:39, March 31, 2016 (UTC)
      • A quick Bing search has the Darth Maul article as the 8th result when you type in "Maul". Brules^{Click here to chat} 03:46, March 31, 2016 (UTC)
        • I see your point. When logged out of my Google account, it's comes up as the second result. - AV-6R7^{Crew Pit} 03:48, March 31, 2016 (UTC)

Some historical context, before I get into my main point. When we made the change that put canon pages into the default namespaces (i.e. moving Luke Skywalker/Canon to Luke Skywalker, and putting the Legends page on Luke Skywalker/Legends), there was a huge risk associated with those page moves. It could've harmed the SEO of all pages involved, and harmed them significantly. Luckily, Google ingested the change well—something it doesn't always do. The Legends pages took somewhat of a hit, but the key pages - the canon ones - were fine. And the Legends pages are now generally right behind the canon ones in search results, so it all worked out in the end.

This is a different situation. To that end, here is a quick note about SEO. You can't look at what the search results are like now and use that to say moving the page will be fine. That's not how SEO works. When you make a change on a normal website, you keep a redirect in the page's meta information. So if this was a regular website, if we moved Darth Maul to Maul, then Darth Maul would still redirect to it. That change would be ingested well enough—and the use of redirects and the way we did the canon/Legends switch is why that situation worked out fine.

But on a website like Wikia, where MediaWiki plays a significant role in how pages are structured, it doesn't work that way. You keep a redirect on the page, but not in the metadata. And in this case, we wouldn't have a redirect at all, because Darth Maul/Legends would end up moving back to Darth Maul. We'd therefore have two pages: Maul (the canon page) and Darth Maul (the Legends page). The SEO is going to go to Darth Maul, the Legends page. That's the strong URL. But Maul? Could take a really bad hit, and that's not ideal—especially not after a major episode where the character returned. The Maul page would be penalized, and whether it could recover—and how long that could take—is not something we can guarantee.

Not only that, but as I said before, it will lead to a confusing reader experience. Wikia ran a survey for readers (i.e. logged out visitors) on Wookieepedia not too long ago, just for our own curiosity really, to see how many people actually knew what Canon and Legends meant. It was about 60% or so, if memory serves, that knew what it meant. That's a decent number, a clear majority, but the 40% who didn't know what that meant is a huge number. That means people are going to be landing on the Legends page, not seeing Rebels info, seeing information that has no relevance to the canonical character, and ultimately having no idea what the difference between Canon and Legends is. I say that to counter what would've been a likely response to me here: that people can just click the Canon tab and get the canonical information. Not only is that an inconvenience to readers (the more you make people click to get what they want, the less people will get there), but 40% of readers have no idea what those tabs mean.

So I think we have three options here, not counting the proposed move:

1. The naming policy can be interpreted in such a way that lets us keep the page names as-is. I rate the chances of this being the final option as unlikely.
2. We can add a clause to the naming policy that says that if a page move would harm SEO, then we don't have to move the page. I think having this flexibility is important in general. If a decision made to reflect an in-universe change is going to negatively affect the discoverability of our content, then that is arguably the wrong decision. I rate this being the final outcome as possible, but I wouldn't necessarily hold my breath.
3. We move this page to "Maul," but keep Darth Maul/Legends right where it is. That means Darth Maul would redirect to Maul. If we can keep that redirect pointing at the canon page, then I think we'll be fine with SEO, just as we were in the Canon/Legends page name changes. I rate this as a more possible option, but it's unprecedented so I honestly have no idea what people will think.

I'm headed off for the night, so I'll see any replies to this tomorrow morning. - Brandon Rhea^(talk) 04:05, March 31, 2016 (UTC)

• If we are to move the article in the end, I believe that the third option that you presented could make sense. - AV-6R7^{Crew Pit} 04:20, March 31, 2016 (UTC)
• He says that he is formerly Darth Maul, but that's before he reveals himself to Kanan, Ezra, and Ahsoka. Maul could easily use Ezra to kill Vader and Sidious (I know he doesn't, but it would be the plan) and become the Dark Lord of the Sith.--Marcuspearl (talk) 04:53, March 31, 2016 (UTC)
• The character in question personally identifies himself as Maul (not Darth Maul anymore), so the article should reflect this per the naming policy. It would be similar to how Sheev Palpatine was moved to Darth Sidious after the Databank revealed that the Emperor identified himself by his Sith name in thought and action. Since Maul's appearance in Rebels only applies to his canon version, we can certainly keep his legends article as "Darth Maul/Legends." Ergo, I believe Option 3 is our best choice. JRT2010 (talk) 05:00, March 31, 2016 (UTC)
• The third option sounds like the best idea. --LoLuX12 (talk) 05:01, March 31, 2016 (UTC)
• My vote goes for the third option. Cevan (talk) 11:53, March 31, 2016 (UTC)
• Option 3 appears to be the lesser of the three evils, so that's where my vote lies. GG, Cap'n B! Nivlacanator^(talk) 16:48, March 31, 2016 (UTC)
• Option 3 seems to be the way to go. --LelalMekha (talk) 16:55, March 31, 2016 (UTC)
• A fourth option just came to mind. Although "Twilight of the Apprentice" is the episode where Maul declared he was no longer Darth Maul, technically speaking he was no longer a Sith in The Clone Wars either. We refer to him as a former Sith Lord and renegade Sith Lord, but under the Rule of Two he is no longer a Sith. That means he is no longer really a Darth in The Clone Wars. That would mean we could also change the page name of Darth Maul/Legends. So we'd move Darth Maul to Maul, and Darth Maul/Legends to Maul/Legends. Per our existing redirect practices, Darth Maul would redirect to Maul. So this accomplishes this intent of the third option as well. Thoughts? - Brandon Rhea^(talk) 17:06, March 31, 2016 (UTC)
  • I personally still think the third option is the best, but I really like the thought you've given into the fourth option. --LoLuX12 (talk) 17:10, March 31, 2016 (UTC)
  • That's a good point, Brandon. I didn't think about that. It's true that due to the Rule of Two, Maul could no longer be "Darth Maul" in TCW since he technically wasn't a Sith Lord anymore. However, at the time he still personally identified himself as a Sith—even going so far as to refer to himself and his brother as the true lords of the Sith. Honestly I'm not really sure what we should do in this case. On one hand, he couldn't be Darth Maul in TCW (Canon or Legends) because of the Rule of Two, but at the same time he hadn't personally renounced his Sith identity either. To be honest, it seems like a difficult call either way. Although the naming policy could allow for one to argue that an ex-Sith Lord could keep his Darth title if he still personally identifies himself as such in thought and action, I think it would be easier to follow the Rule of Two. So I'll switch my support from option 3 to option 4 because, as you said, Maul technically couldn't be a Darth anymore by the time of TCW. JRT2010 (talk) 17:23, March 31, 2016 (UTC)
  • Option 4 feels like a stretch, especially considering that most TCW media includes Darth in his name. Personally, I'd say not to move either page at all, but I'm probably in the minority here. Cwedin^(talk) 17:39, March 31, 2016 (UTC)
  • I'd say that we should keep the page here.--Rakhsh (talk) 17:57, March 31, 2016 (UTC)
  • I think we should keep the page here. Most people know him as "Darth Maul" and not just "Maul". Also Darth Maul is his full sith name like Darth Vader is Anakin's. Maul is his sith name and Darth the titel, so even if he keeps the name Maul it still belongs to his full sith name. If the page is moved anyway my vote is on option 3. --Andersand17 (talk) 18:45, March 31, 2016 (UTC)
  • I think Option 4 might be a bit too speculative. As others have pointed out, he still considered himself the true Sith Lord, and as such most likely identified as Darth Maul. Now, however, he views the Sith as his enemies, hence why he is simply Maul. I think that, if it is in accordance with the naming policy, Option 3 is the best way to go. Reddyredcp (talk) 20:19, March 31, 2016 (UTC)
    • When a character says something so unambigious as "Formerly Darth... now just Maul", there's really no excuse to not rename the page. Option 3. Dax (talk) 20:38, March 31, 2016 (UTC)
      • My thoughts exactly. One way or another, this has to be moved from Darth Maul to Maul. Otherwise we'd be discarding our own rules when it comes to the naming policy. JRT2010 (talk) 21:07, March 31, 2016 (UTC)
  • So who's gonna be bold enough to move the page? Someone has to get their hands dirty. Brules^{Click here to chat} 21:11, March 31, 2016 (UTC)

There needs to be a consensus first, as it's a contentious issue. Pádhraic (talk) 21:15, March 31, 2016 (UTC)

So in talking to Toprawa, since I wanted to get the opinion of an admin, here's where we landed. We'll hold off on moving the page, at least for now. Regardless of what should be done—and per policy, that means a move from Darth Maul to Maul—it is to our benefit to take into account when it should be done. Right now, we're in a peak traffic time. People who watched this episode are going to be looking for information about Maul. If we move this page now, then regardless of the long-term SEO implications (i.e. whether or not Google will ingest the change and stabilize traffic to the page), it will take an immediate hit and hurt the page's ranking in search engines. We are doing a disservice to readers if we move the page now, because they'll be landing on the Legends page and, as I said earlier, 40% of people have no idea what Canon and Legends mean.

Doing nothing for now is smart from the standpoint of site health. Lucasfilm also hasn't changed their Databank entry for Maul. Whether they will or not is anyone's guess, since the Databank doesn't have the same in-universe-based rules as we do, but if there was a conscious decision there then it's almost certainly at least partly because of SEO reasons.

But, that doesn't mean that the in-article content itself can't be updated to reflect this change in the character. It just means that, for now, we won't be changing the page name. We can reevaluate it in a few weeks after the traffic for the page has normalized and it's not a hot search item. Hopefully, by the time Maul appears again in Season Three or whenever his next appearance might be, the SEO for the page will have stabilized. This lets us avoid hurting site traffic and the reader experience.

I think it's fair to say that, come May 1st, it's probably safe to move the page. But, I have asked for the expert opinion of Wikia's SEO team so we can make a fully informed decision here. I will post what they tell me here, so you all can see it too. - Brandon Rhea^(talk) 03:33, April 1, 2016 (UTC)

May 1st has arrived. Just wanted to point that out. Brules^{Click here to chat} 06:09, May 2, 2016 (UTC)

Given that this is still in the Top 7 pages, I'd still wait awhile longer. Otherwise people will end up on the Legends page when the canonical character is still trending. - Brandon Rhea^(talk) 11:59, May 2, 2016 (UTC)

It should be also noted that Seventh Sister called him Darth Maul, so everyone in SW universe know him as Darth so it's not really a problem for us to keep his title, I respect the Maul's own decision to not use that title, but the majority of the SW universe still know him as Darth ...--Marco 1907 (talk) 17:50, July 17, 2016 (UTC)

• Even so, its his stance on the issue that matters, no the galaxy's. - AV-6R7^{Crew Pit} 18:12, July 17, 2016 (UTC)
  • Just going to say it's been two months since the last reply, has site traffic calmed enough for the page to be moved?--D9328 (talk) 18:40, September 3, 2016 (UTC)d9328
    • I think we need some sort of site consensus about how page names need to take SEO into account before we move this page, or do whatever it is we're going to do. We're about a month away from Season Three, in which Maul will feature heavily, and we have a decision to make: are we going to move this page to Maul and therefore move Darth Maul/Legends back to Darth Maul, based on current policy; or, are we going to do what best serves readers by ensuring that they land on this page in search engine results instead of the Legends page, which won't take Rebels into account at all? I know what my vote is there. I might bring this up at the forthcoming Mofference. - Brandon Rhea^(talk) 06:42, September 4, 2016 (UTC)
      • Has a decision been taken about this topic? Harshg (talk) 17:06, November 16, 2016 (UTC)
        • From what I understand, the consensus is to keep it the way it currently is so that it is more accessible than the Legends page. DarkKnight2149 19:18, November 16, 2016 (UTC)
          • Now that he's been dead for a while and unlikely to make a significant appearance in future media, is it time to make the change?--D9328 (talk) 02:52, November 1, 2017 (UTC)d9328
          • He's been dead for a year now. Time to move the page?--D9328 (talk) 03:34, January 24, 2018 (UTC)d9328

Ezra as Maul's apprentice?

We should add Ezra as Maul apprentice, even as briefly, because maul considered Ezra his apprentice. —Unsigned comment by 177.65.162.104 (talk • contribs).

• Maul was stating his intention to make Ezra his apprentice, but Ezra was never actually his apprentice. So it would be incorrect to add that information. Good question though, I hope this answered it! - Brandon Rhea^(talk) 14:04, March 31, 2016 (UTC)
  • Per The Holocrons of Fate, however, we can see that Maul does consider Ezra to be his apprentice.--D9328 (talk) 20:35, October 1, 2016 (UTC)d9328
    • I watched the episode. It's still the same as in the finale. Maul wants Ezra to be his apprentice and he is even referring to Ezra as his apprentice. However, Ezra hasn't actually agreed to be his apprentice, nor has a potential master-apprentice relationship between Ezra and Maul been solidified in any way. We also don't know if Maul will even survive throughout the entire season long enough for that to happen. I think we should continue waiting to see what happens. DarkKnight2149 20:40, October 1, 2016 (UTC)
    • Couldn't he be considered an "informal" mentor of some sort? 61.68.229.187 12:48, July 7, 2017 (UTC)

Rename Maul

Maul says he doesn't go by "Darth" anymore in Twilight of the Apprentice. Gopher dude 11 (talk)

• • See Section Above.--Marcuspearl (talk) 04:26, April 1, 2016 (UTC)

Anon comments

• I think you should add a section with lightsabers - double-bladed from Ep1 and TCW (and the broken half); the Dark Saber; the saber he wields in Rebels - and a section for his other stuff, like his ship, speeder, droids, binoculars from Ep1, and everything else he used in TCW.--92.114.148.141 12:43, April 1, 2016 (UTC)

• I was wondering though, the tattoos are said to have been given to him by Sidious while he was undergoing Sith training, but the pic has him with tattoos while he's just introduced to Sidious. Is't a continuity error, or did they just add it for aesthetic reasons?--92.114.148.141 12:45, April 1, 2016 (UTC)
  • Read the article. Talzin tattooed her children. --Alientraveller (talk) 12:49, April 1, 2016 (UTC)

alias addition to the info box ?

don't you guys think it would be better if we add alias addition to the info box ?

such as ;

Mace Windu says Mysterious Warrior for Maul in Episode I

Hondo Ohnaka says Tattooed Crazy

Inquisitors says The Shadow

Or ; Old Master ...

--Marco 1907 (talk) 20:52, April 21, 2016 (UTC)

• That sounds like a pretty neat thing, but you should probably take it up on the talk page for Template:Character instead. - LoLuX12 (walkietalkie) 21:01, April 21, 2016 (UTC)

Maul's new height

Can someone fix Maul's new height in the section ? It says that 1.75, but we already know that Kanan is 1.91 and I am pretty sure Maul is tall as Kanan or even taller now.

example 1 : http://i.hizliresim.com/jnG8mW.jpg

http://i.hizliresim.com/2ZVrBE.jpg

example 2 :

http://i.hizliresim.com/L3WyrV.jpg

--Marco 1907 (talk) 18:04, July 17, 2016 (UTC)

No reply ? --Marco 1907 (talk) 21:06, August 8, 2016 (UTC)

• His StarWars.com entry states he's 1.75 meters. 1358 ^(Talk) 21:09, August 8, 2016 (UTC)
  • Also, perspective and forward/backward distance between them may alter the height perception.—Unsigned comment by D9328 (talk • contribs).

Entire canon page removed?

What is going on???_MaZ__ (talk) 14:45, March 18, 2017 (UTC)

When exactly did Maul stop being a Sith?

He was described as a Sith in the Darth Maul - Son of Dathomir series (it has descriptions that describe him as a Sith example: on the cover of an issue it says "You can't keep a bad Sith down." and the title of that series is DARTH Maul SoD) So when was the exact moment he stopped seeing himself as a Sith and dropped his Darth title? Is it before or after Ahsoka? Eddo36 (talk) 06:57, March 27, 2017 (UTC)

• It hasn't been disclosed yet. -- Dr. Porter (Talk|Contribs) 07:04, March 27, 2017 (UTC)
  • By the time we see him in Rebels, although the exact moment he stopped considering himself a Sith Lord has not been revealed as Dr. Porter pointed out. However, it should be noted that according to Darth Sidious' perspective and the Rule of Two, Maul ceased to be a Sith the moment he was replaced by Darth Tyranus—stating in TCW The Lawless that "There can only be two [Sith]…and [Maul] is no longer [Sidious'] apprentice." However, Maul still regarded himself as a Sith during the events of Son of Dathomir, notwithstanding the Rule of Two. JRT2010 (talk) 07:25, March 27, 2017 (UTC)

A new header quote

Recently, Darth Maul's header quote was changed to this quote of Obi-Wan Kenobi from "Twin Suns" by a user:

And I personally loved it, because I thought this quote sums Maul's life up perfectly: someone who has a great power to kill, but nothing else really. He was a formidable warrior through his entire life, but he lost everthing since The Phantom Menace. But another Wookieepedia user stated that this was not appropriate and said that "Obi-Wan clearly makes fun of him." I didn't agree with him since Obi-Wan not that kind of a person at this point of his life, as also seen in "Twin Suns." I didn't revert it to avoid an edit war, so I felt that it is better to discuss this in the talk page. Would you like to see the Obi-Wan's quote in the article? AnilSerifoglu (talk) 23:39, April 7, 2017 (UTC)

• I completely agree with you Anil, it's a very suitable quote. -- Dr. Porter (Talk|Contribs) 00:24, April 8, 2017 (UTC)
  • Personally I preferred the quote about how he was destined to be so much more, but given the two options on the table now (yours and the other editor's) I prefer yours. Obi-Wan was trying to reach Maul, not make fun of him. - Brandon Rhea^(talk) 01:52, April 8, 2017 (UTC)
    • That's a great quote too—better than both of the discussed ones in my opinion. If anyone doesn't have an objection or another suggestion, I will change it to that. AnilSerifoglu (talk) 02:24, April 8, 2017 (UTC)

That's completely hilarious quote for Maul, it's better with something Maul himself says such as this ;

   "I was apprentice to the most powerful being in the galaxy once. I was destined to become… so much more."
   ―Darth Maul

This is much better now, or something about the darkside he says, not obi-wan's subjective lightside opinions, that's a critical opinion about maul and dark-side, and putting that as premiere quote is ridiculous. This is not a lightside forums, this is star wars wikia, you have to respect all aspects of the force even the dark side. --Marco 1907 (talk) 20:17, April 8, 2017 (UTC)

• I agree with Marco 1907. You don't add a quote because it is hilarious. We try to maintain some semblance of truth and professionalism on this wiki, and neither of those aspects are adhered to if we use that quote to define Maul. For a canon reference, please look into the responses from the SW powers-that-be when Kenobi confirmed to Maul that Luke was the Chosen One (Twin Suns). They were quick to say that Kenobi was wrong and that the opinion of a character is only that: an opinion. Opinion is not infallible. Besides, Maul had been trained for much more than assassination. If any definitive quote is added that doesn't take all of Maul's abilities and capabilities into consideration, then his entire page has been compromised. Red Heathen (talk) 00:44, February 16, 2018 (UTC)

about not being a match

'but proved no match for the seasoned Kenobi,'

I don't know who put this but this is simply not true... First off, the duel was out of universe, and producers confirmed that by saying it's an homage to the Seven Samurai.

So the duel was short because of that, and secondly ;

Henry Gilroy : the actual lightsabers hitting each other is actually longer because they’re basically playing it out in their heads,

And the amazing thing is, the move that Maul tries after the initial exchange, he actually attempts the move that killed Qui-Gon Jinn. He tries to basically bash him with the hilt.”

Dave Filoni : If you talk to a lot of people that sword fight they’ll tell you, people that are very good don’t have long fights. It’s very quick. And so that scene it’s an homage to the Seven Samurai. I think on one level people would be excited to see another prolonged lightsaber fight but I just never really saw the confrontation that way because to do that is to say the characters just don’t have growth. Yes, it’s exciting as an audience member but it’s not a really believable thing. Storytelling has to evolve.

--- Taken from ; Rebels Recon #3.20 Inside Twin Suns

So the reason Maul lost quickly not because he was no match for Kenobi, it's because ;

A : The duel was homage to the Seven Samurai, which is out of universe duel B : They were already dueling in each others head C : Filoni already confirmed that Maul was very good also, by saying people that are very good don't have long fights ...

If you disagree please provide a logical reason. --Marco 1907 (talk) 20:27, April 8, 2017 (UTC)

New Image

Since Maul's appearance in Rebels is his latest appearance chronologically, shouldn't that be the image?

Saw's was changed to Rogue One, since he died in that movie. Why don't the same rules apply to Maul?

• This has already been answered above, rather than repeat it I suggest you check it out --Lewisr (talk) 21:32, August 1, 2017 (UTC)

Edits

The Powers and Abilities section of this page makes Maul look no better than a Padawan. The paragraphs add purely speculative and blatantly false information, and they severely undercut his abilities. Whenever I correct them, they are also edited back. It is very annoying, can someone crack down on these anti-maul editors? MaceWindu190 (talk) 16:11, February 26, 2018 (UTC)

• I'm not entirely certain, though it may be best to directly message the users to find out their reasoning as they may not see this message here --Lewisr (talk) 16:16, February 26, 2018 (UTC)
  • I haven't seen Rebels yet, but looking over one of your edits...
    "forcing the outclassed Inquisitors to flee" — how do you know disengaging wasn't their intention in the first place?
    "she knew she was ultimately no match for the former Sith Lord" — how do you know she knew this? You're not inside her mind.
    "He proved able to effortlessly Force choke the Seventh Sister" — once again, how do you know it was effortless?
    Like I said, I haven't seen Rebels myself, but I can understand those who reverted you if my observations are true. 1358 ^(Talk) 16:23, February 26, 2018 (UTC)

How do you know that disengaging was their intention? That point of view is far more speculative than mine. The whole purpose of the Inquisitors was to kill and capture Jedi. In this particular scene, the Inquisitors had already been previously dueling Kanan and Tano, there is absolutely nothing within the scene to indicate that they intended to fight for a bit, and then disengage. That concept in-of-itself is ludicrous. The Inquisitors were matching evenly against Tano and Kanan before Maul intervened, at which point he forced them back and easily took on all 3 with no visible strain. Only after Maul joined the fight, did they flee. My edit was backed by the events clearly displayed in Rebels.

Ahsoka has nothing more than a Padawan's training. Granted, as I even included in the post, her skills and experience had greatly increased, but no informed SW fan in their right mind is of the opinion that someone of Tano's calibre could contend with Maul. Maul was able to defeat Pre Viszla, who has been shown to be vastly superior to Tano. That is merely one example. I needn't go into the details, but I suggest you research the subject before making a definitive opinion on it, and exluding that of another.

Watch the scene in Rebels. Maul clearly choked her without any effort, he merely used her to attempt to pull Ezra further towards the dark side. When Ezra refused, Maul expressed his disapointment and killed her in midair. That is why I deleted the purely speculative line of "However, he was only able to do so for a limited time." It was a blatant lie.

It was a true as saying that Darth Vader was only capable of choking the Imperial Officer in A New Hope for a limited time during the first scene we are introduced to Vader's power. It is purely speculative, and is outright false with nothing to support it. Respectively but heatedly, MaceWindu190 (talk) 18:24, February 26, 2018 (UTC)

• "How do you know that disengaging was their intention?" Exactly! We don't know what they were doing! Maybe they were outclassed, maybe they had a dinner appointment. This whole wiki revolves around the principle that we write what we know. If we don't know for sure, it's better to leave it out.
  "no informed SW fan in their right mind is of the opinion that someone of Tano's calibre could contend with Maul." Absolutely irrelevant. What SW fans think of Ahsoka's abilities or inabilities is, like you said, an opinion. We don't know if she realized she was no match for Maul. Therefore it doesn't go in the article.
  The line "However, he was only able to do so for a limited time." is indeed speculative and has been removed from the current version of the article. But we still don't know what kind of effort he put into that action. "Effortlessly" is your interpretation of the situation and someone else can have a different point of view on that. We present what happens on the screen. 1358 ^(Talk) 18:43, February 26, 2018 (UTC)

Inquisitors do not back down unless they were outmatched, in which case, Vader is always sent to deal with the threat. And that is exactly what happened. It is a standard and established MO, and thus, not speculative and absolutely admissable.

I will concede that the wording "she knew," may have been needless and without solid basis. However, you must see that if it is worded "but she was ultimately no match for the Former Sith Lord", it is not speculative and rings true, a fact not an opinion.

If Maul was exerting himself, it would have shown, as it always does. But it didn't. Maul was clearly depicted as being vastly superior to her. He choked her to give Ezra a chance to finish her. If he was limited, he would not have done so. What was presented on screen was Maul using the Seventh Sister as a lesson. Without any visible effort.

"We" did not remove the line. I did. Multiple times before my being blocked. But users kept putting it back. I removed it again after being lifted, and for once, it has not been put back. MaceWindu190 (talk) 19:18, February 26, 2018 (UTC)

New Profile Picture?

Should we update Maul's profile image to his older, live action appearance in Solo? One of these new images looks like it would be fitting. The Shadow Emperor (talk) 20:05, September 7, 2018 (UTC)

Legends Maul

why darth maul legends article says that he die in 0bby? the darth maul that die in 0bby in legends was not the real darth maul it was a doppleganger —Unsigned comment by 217.129.115.239 (talk • contribs).

• No idea but feel free to ask on the talk page for the legends page --Lewisr (talk) 18:15, November 23, 2018 (UTC)

i did ask that question in the legends article but nobody answered me yet —Unsigned comment by 217.129.115.239 (talk • contribs).

• Maybe leave a question on User:Lord KOT's talk page as they were the editor who added it --Lewisr (talk) 13:19, November 24, 2018 (UTC)

I like this guy Travjt (talk) 20:25, August 18, 2019 (UTC)

Name

I’m late to the part here clearly, but why is Darth Maul’s name made Maul? I’ve been trying to edit it and have had all my edits reversed. I made sure to include that he currently identifies as Maul, but that his original moniker (and the name he held for most of his life) was Darth Maul. I typed Darth Maul into the search engine and only the legends article came up. This strikes me as really bad for a bio page, especially when other characters like Dooku are referred to by their given name rather than their chosen name. —Unsigned comment by Mikey Sarasti (talk • contribs).

• Hi Mikey. As stated on our naming policy page, pages always use the name for a character that is used furthest along in the timeline. Since Maul goes by just "Maul" for the final portion of his life, this is the name that the article should be under and the first name mentioned in the intro paragraph. If you disagree with this policy you will need to bring it up for community discussion and vote to have it changed in either the Senate Hall or Consensus track. In future please remember to sign any comments you make with four tildes (~). Thanks, Ayrehead02 (talk) 00:12, October 10, 2019 (UTC)

(Rover paul (talk) 00:51, October 10, 2019 (UTC))was looking at this discussion when he was Sidious apprentice in episode one everyone thought he was dead until he turned up in clone wars and. Then was no longer a Sith so he wouldn’t be able to use the Darth title my opinion (Rover paul (talk) 00:51, October 10, 2019 (UTC))

• During TCW, he considered himself and Savage as the true Lords of the Sith, it wasn't until seemingly the son of Dathomir stuff onwards he stopped using the Darth title --Lewisr (talk) 00:55, October 10, 2019 (UTC)

sorry but it doesn´t mater if some son of dathomir prints as the legends brand and the comic may have been writen before the decanonazation and it was the last comic from the dark horse licensing but it was still released after april 25 2014 also son of dathomir was re-released as a marvell comic so it cannot be part of both continuities son of dathomir is disney canon only it doesn´t belong in this article and kycina is maul mother in legends not talzin —Unsigned comment by Beanbunny4 (talk • contribs).

• I've spended like 3 hours rewritting repositioning and adding content to Mother Talzin's legend page after The admins finally gave me permission to add the son of Dathomir addition, Son of Dathomir has been considered of both continuities for years do you know how much lore and hard work you would throw to the garbage can if you remove it? --LegnÁ 789 (talk) 11:03, march 01, 2021 (UTC)

Head quote

I'm pretty certain that the past participle apprenticed should replace the noun/adjective apprentice in the head quotation. The pronunciation of both might be the same, much as the way it appears now is not deemed valid by any dictionary I am accessed, out of which these can be linked ([1] • [2] • [3]), as is apprenticed. If the episode has subtitles verified by producers, it is worth checking out which variant is preferred by them. The fact I did not check for subtitles is what made me not edit the page by myself. {{Subst:user:Mustafar29/podpis}} 17:02, July 16, 2020 (UTC)

"Former Sith"?

Should we add Maul to Category:Former Sith? — YakovChaimTzvi (talk) 16:41, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

• I don't see why not. VergenceScatter (talk) 16:59, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Yeah since he was a former Sith, he should be added Lewisr (talk) 17:09, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Cad Bane's group Affiliation

Wheter Maul affiliation Cad Bane's group?5.63.188.106 11:33, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

• He just hired them for a job, that doesn't necessarily mean he was affiliated with them Lewisr (talk) 04:02, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Top quote

I made an edit before, though I didn't know it was twice until afterwards...technical glitch, I guess. But back to the main topic, I switched the main quote with a different quote, putting the old somewhere down below. In response, in undoing the edit, it was said such matters were to be discussed beforehand. So just to present it:

• Original quote: "I was apprentice to the most powerful being in the galaxy once. I was destined to become… so much more."
• Possible new quote: "The Sith took everything from me. Ripped me from my mother's arms, murdered my brother, used me as a weapon and then cast me aside. Abandoned me. Once, I had power, now I have nothing. Nothing."

I'm sure it'll be debatable which quote serves best, but just to say I put the option to vote, say "yay" or "nay", etc are here. HYDRArules (talk) 22:21, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

• • I definitely prefer the second quote VergenceScatter (talk) 06:35, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

OK, it's been about a week since I posted this with little to no objection. So I guess the quote can be changed now. HYDRArules (talk) 04:35, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

• Yeah I'd say go for it VergenceScatter (talk) 15:49, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

About Maul's Vader quote on Malachor

Not a fan of adding anti-feats in powers section but still I wouldn't say its wrong if it was true, this is under Lightsaber abilities section: He openly stated his belief that he could not defeat Darth Vader without the help of the Jedi , Maul never said he couldn't defeat Vader because of Vader's superior Lightsaber abilities, as that quote is under the section of Lightsaber abilities, as we know Vader is potentially more powerful than Maul in the Force, it wouldn't be accurate to assume this quote only translate to Vader's lightsaber abilities being superior to Maul's, without additional information this quote would simply mean Vader is superior to Maul overall both in force and lightsaber, its unknown if Maul only meant Vader is superior to him in lightsaber combat only, so I believe this quote should be removed for this reason or should be added extra sentence such as unknown if Maul meant Vader's force abilities or lightsaber skills or both combined. Another reason why I think the quote should be removed because Maul's plan was to keep the Jedi on Malachor until Vader arrives, but what Maul does later? Maul attacks Jedi Kanan before even they fight Vader, so Maul's actions contradicts with what he said earlier about he needs Jedi help to defeat Vader, highly possible that Maul was lying to the team to keep them on Malachor.

As for the next quote: In his final duel, Maul was fatally wounded within seconds of challenging his old rival, Obi-Wan Kenobi while I don't say this is wrong unlike the first quote I mentioned, I would also suggest that this quote need more explaining, it wasn't like Kenobi simply activated his lightaber and slaughtered Maul like Sidious slaughtered Jedi Kit Fisto or Saesee Tiin, Kenobi was clearly waiting defensively and not moving until Maul makes a move, so I think its obvious that Maul wouldn't lose to Kenobi if he didn't attack him in a certain way which was said by producers of the show that Kenobi was expecting Maul to use a certain technique that he used to beat Qui-Gon thats the reason Kenobi was able to counter it, I would like to hear any objections if there is any if Maul didn't attack Kenobi with that move, Kenobi could still easily beat Maul in seconds, I don't think Kenobi could do that, it was totally different than a superior duelist overpowering another, it was Kenobi setting a trap and waiting for Maul to fall into it.

Anyways, I don't say the second Kenobi quote is wrong even if we don't explain the context and simply not saying it all, but I would definitely say that Vader quote is wrong for the reasons I stated above. Marco 1907 (talk) 18:52, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

• I removed the Vader part since I agree it doesn't necessarily just refer to his lightsaber abilities. Regarding Obi-Wan, we'd be better to not speculate what may or may not have happened, we're only here to state what did happen. While it is missing some context it's still accurate that he was defeated within seconds. I'm unsure if this part of the page is the place to explain all the details but it would be suited in the biography at least Lewisr (talk) 19:58, 13 December 2024 (UTC)