Talk: Skirmish in the Senate

Article milestones Date Process Result April 10, 2007 Good article nomination Success July 7, 2007 Good article by T8-13 December 22, 2008 Good article review Removed January 18, 2009 Former Good article
Current status: Former Good article

Draw?

I'm a bit nitpicking today: Is this battle really a "draw"? Technically, yes, because neither got killed, but I think it would be better to mention that Sidious won, because Yoda found this failure so disappointing that he went to exile. I would go after something like: "Result: the retreat of Yoda". - TopAce 11:11, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• I agree. It is confusing, but Yoda left, sad and saying that he failed while Sidious was cackling. --Master Starkeiller 12:20, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • I'd even say "Victory for Palpatine" or something like that. Admiral J. Nebulax 22:02, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
    • Anyone that objects? --Master Starkeiller 16:11, 7 Jan 2006 (UTC)
      • For mine? Admiral J. Nebulax 17:52, 7 Jan 2006 (UTC)
        • For a Darth Sidious victory, with reason(s) why. --Master Starkeiller 17:54, 7 Jan 2006 (UTC)
          • All it needs to say is "Victory for Palpatine, Yoda retreats". Admiral J. Nebulax 17:59, 7 Jan 2006 (UTC)
            • Sith victory, done. --Master Starkeiller 18:04, 7 Jan 2006 (UTC)
              • Added "...retreat of Yoda". Admiral J. Nebulax 18:06, 7 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • I agree. If you read the novel, it seems pretty clear that while Sidious was not able to kill Yoda, not only had Yoda lost, but the last 1000 years of the Jedi Order as well.--Jad Jermain 06:34, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
    • But still, you must see that they were both very tired and so none of them won, but even if they could fight yoda could perhaps won over Sidious, but as he sensed clones were also coming he could not fight them both and win... —Unsigned comment by The Grand Master (talk • contribs).
      • Yoda tried to kill Sidious and failed, therefore it was a Sith victory. IFYLOFD ^{(You will pay the price for your lack of vision!)} 20:45, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
        • Hence why Yoda said "Failed I have". JangFett ^Talk 20:46, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
          • Well, in that case it is a Jedi defeat, not a Sith victory... --The Grand Master 12:56, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
            • Yoda just couldn't wait to crawl through those tunnels, and jump into Bail Organas ship. --Jedi Master Nabqzumo 15:16, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
              • This page is given a battle set out copied from wikipedia,(not that there is anything wrong with that). If this page was on wikipedia it would be described as a tactical draw and jedi retreat. --86.131.222.239 17:04, November 16, 2009 (UTC) 16/10/09

• It's amazing how presumptuously you guys snub canon. In the novelization of Revenge of the Sith, it unequivocally states that during the battle Yoda realizes that Sidious is the superior warrior. Yoda openly admits failure, so how can that be construed as a draw? This site is deplorably biased in favor of all things Jedi. "Light burns out; darkness is eternal." -Darth Creditor (talk) 16:53, September 7, 2012 (UTC)
  • This topic has been dead since 2009. Please don't try to resurrect dead toics. Start a new one if you want to ontinue talking about this. NaruHina ^Talk 19:34, September 7, 2012 (UTC)

Duel

This article is incorrectly titled. There are only two participants in this conflict, making it a "duel", not a "skirmish". Wolfdog 05:29, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

• Again, please, let me explain in more depth: a skirmish is either a battle between minor forces or a minor battle between large forces. A duel is a fight between two individuals who wish to defeat the other personally.
• Agreed. (You beat me to the punch.) It's ignorant that this title was changed. You can't have a "skirmish" with only two combatants, lest you undermine the very definition of the word "duel." Moreover, for the sake of consistency, why don't you change more titles, such as "Skirmish on Mustafar," "Skirmish in the Senate" (Exar Kun), "Skirmish on Bespin," etc.? It's laughable that this title change has come to pass, especially since it's been explained clearly why it should not have. "Light burns out; darkness is eternal." -Darth Creditor (talk) 16:45, September 7, 2012 (UTC)
  • Again, this conversation is years old and you need to start a new topic. Further—I'm just going to save you some time—the reason this is at "Skirmish" now is likely different than it was in 2006. A Hasbro set explicitly identified it as the "Skirmish in the Senate," making it the canonical name. That's the long and short of it: Canon. NaruHina ^Talk 19:34, September 7, 2012 (UTC)

Significance

You certainly can't argue that this has any significance whatsoever. No one died, no one had a change of philosophy, and it had no impact on anyone but the two involved. This should be merged with the articles of Yoda And Palpatine, and deleted. --Imp ^Comlink 13:28, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

• No, I once again disagree with you on another of your "merge" ideas. This has plenty of good information. Admiral J. Nebulax 21:01, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

• Yoda failed to kill Sidious and that was one was the reasons he decided to go into exhile, alone.
  • Exactly. Admiral J. Nebulax 20:44, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
• WHAT?????!!!!! Any significance whatsoever??????!!!!!! Do you realize what would have happened to the Galaxy had Yoda won? It shouldn't be merged; not by a long shot. --Master Starkeiller 22:47, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Exactly. Admiral J. Nebulax 00:33, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
• I strongly disagree. First and foremost, because the dual did have great significance. If you read the RotS novel, you will see that it was this dual that made Yoda realize by how much the Sith had won, and how the Jedi had been unprepared to deal with what the Sith had become. The Jedi had been preparing to fight the last war, while the Sith had been trying to fight the next. This aside, the dual should remain its own article for the same reason I first suggested a dueling subcategory be made. To study each individual lightsaber combat separately and in detail.--Jad Jermain 06:39, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Conjecture

Why is the conjecture template still up? If it's not easy enough for oneself to suggest a new article title, then don't leave the template up. I'm deleting it. Wolfdog 05:32, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

• Again, there's no actual name for it. This is a conjecture name. Admiral J. Nebulax ^(talk) 12:59, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Not a good reference maybe, but The Ultimate Visual Guide indeed used "Duel in the Senate" as image caption and title of this historic event. Darth Kevinmhk 16:00, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
    • Well, is "duel" the first word of the caption? Because if it is, it's possible that they might not have meant it to be the actual name. Admiral J. Nebulax ^(talk) 20:08, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
      • The caption was exactly Duel in the Senate, followed by describtion about how Darth Sidious unleashed his lightsaber and Sith Lightning to fight with Yoda. Well, it is the nearest reference we can find. Darth Kevinmhk 04:17, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
        • How, then, is this more conjectural than Duel on Mustafar? Cutch 05:29, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
          • Well, maybe Duel on Mustafar needs a conjecture tag :) Darth Kevinmhk 06:49, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Inconclusive

I'm thinking the battle is more inconclusive then a victory for the sith. Yoda didn't succeed in his mission of destroying the lord of the sith nor did Sidious succeed in destroying the grandmaster of the Jedi Order. Something along the lines of, "Inconclusive, Yoda retreats," is what I'm thinking. I changed it, but I'm wondering what everyone else thinks.

• Actually, it was a victory for Sidious. Therefore, reverted. Admiral J. Nebulax ^(talk) 02:33, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
• Darth Sidious's goal wasn't Yoda's death. He didn't want to fight him at all. Yoda wanted Sidious dead and, as he himself said, he failed. Therefore, Sidious won. --Master Starkeiller 14:20, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Plus, Sidious defeated Yoda by making him retreat. Admiral J. Nebulax ^(talk) 21:25, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
    • Yoda actually abandoned his mission & gave it up - because he was too tired to continue, otherwise he would jump up and challenge Sidious again. By that time Yoda did not know the Skywalker twins yet, and normally he should be able to handle incoming clones. Even if killing Sidious require Yoda being killed by clones, i guess it still worths it. Yoda retreated because he knew he could not kill Sidious & escape / take both of them to death / fight both Sidious & clones. To put it simple, Yoda knew he could not win, no matter what cost he was ready to pay, thus victory belongs to Sidious. Darth Kevinmhk 16:08, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

The search for Yoda

• Do you guys think we should briefly describe the clones search for Yoda and Sidious left for rescuing Vader? The novel stated that if not because of Vader, Sidious would direct the search personally, which might affecting the results greatly. Darth Kevinmhk 10:15, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
  • That would be good. Admiral J. Nebulax ^(talk) 12:56, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
    • Done. You may wanna improve it, Admiral. Darth Kevinmhk 13:13, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
      • No problem. Admiral J. Nebulax ^(talk) 13:16, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Concerning the disarm of Darth Sidious

• As i have mentioned in the BTS section of the article, Sidious was actually disarmed by Yoda on the Chancellor's Podium, stated in the Illustrated Screenplay and the young adult novel. Should we move it into the main article? Because both sources are canonical, and due to movie making not every single moment of the Senate duel was shown on the big screen (they have to show Mustafar duel at the same time), and finally, what described in the 2 sources do not directly contradict the movie: Sidious' lightsaber indeed no longer appear, and Yoda indeed land on a lower pod safely. Putting it into main article would only better explain the curious action of the 2 duelists in the movie. Please kindly comment. Darth Kevinmhk 03:48, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
  • I guess we could put that in. Admiral J. Nebulax ^(talk) 20:51, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
    • Wrote that in, and added Sources section for it. Darth Kevinmhk 02:06, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
      • Thank you. Admiral J. Nebulax ^(talk) 22:19, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

• Not the movie, Lucas or the novel has told us of Yoda disarming Sids. So, no dont put tat in.

Artical Name

Since the daul between Exar Kun and Vodo-Siosk Baas also took place in the Senate, I suggest this artical's name either be changed to the "the Second Dual in the Senate" or that we name articals in this subcatagory based on who participated in the dual, rather then where they dueled.--Jad Jermain 06:27, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

• Exar's duel took place in the Senate Hall. That article could be "Duel in the Senate Hall". Problem solved :) Darth Kevinmhk 06:54, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Right, and this one should be called "Duel in the Senate Rotunda". Totema1 02:20, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Sidious and his weapon

Iv watched the movie and read the novel. And neither source tells us any information whatsoever of Sidious being disarmed. GL didnt want us to see this. And for a good reason. He cut it from the script and let us wonder what really did happen. All other sources that tell us what happened are non-related and are not reliable. But to most sidious fans and even viewers, its possible Sids used a trick against Yoda to get out of the interlock and either chucked his saber or put it back in his robes to start a force duel.-Dillion Ryan

• 1) Disarm of Sidious: My point stands, it is from valid, licensed, legitimate and canonical c-canon elements which do not directly contradict the g-canon. 2) Deformation: for all we know, Sidious' deformation was caused by lightning, and we can see in g-canon that he was not further deformed when Yoda balled the lightning, so it is safe to assume that the deformation occured at the only other lightning struggle in this duel, on the chancellor's podium. Darth Kevinmhk 15:06, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

• Well, when you give me proof that GL himself or even the members of Revenge of the sith say "Sidious was disarmed", and not a deleted scene that was never shown or a book that was obviously changed on certain aspects for the authors pleasment, ill believe.
  • This relates to Star Wars canon policy. George Lucas, in an interview (which seemed to take place in 2005), said that he believed Han and Leia would marry after EP6, have kids, Leia probably would be a Senator again, but the couple would live happily together ever since and have no more adventures. So, are you going to delete all post-EP6 info in the Solos article? Or that Palpatine and Boba Fett both died in G-canon, for that matter. Darth Kevinmhk 16:38, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

• No, but I will say this. Disarmed or not, Sidious and Yoda STALEMATED in their saber duel. For many reasons. A) Because they used the same saber style, "Style 7". and B)They were the top dogs for their sides. sids was the ultimate Dark and yoda was the ultimate light. And thats why neither rival could overcome the other with a saber or with the force. However, its an interesting note that Sids bested Yoda in a force duel as well as disarmed him at the end. So look at this way, point A) After reaching a draw with sabers, Sids puts his weapon away and bests yoda with force by disarming and blowing him off the pod, or Point B)Yoda disarms sids, and not long after, Sids disarms Yoda. Either way, the saber duel is a draw. -Dillion Ryan
  • Lol. 1) Yoda used Form IV Ataru, no sources exist has stated that he ever knew Form VII. 2) Yoda confessed to Dooku in Yoda: Dark Rendezvous that the Grand Master carried some darkness in him, just like Dooku still carried a little light in him. 3) Maybe, but still, the Sith won by forcing Yoda to retreat. Darth Kevinmhk 05:12, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

• Oops, ur right. Ataru. BOTH Sids and Yoda used Ataru. Thats why the saber duel was a draw. Besides being the top dog for their class, Sids-Dark Yoda-light, they were excellant fencers that both used Ataru. Therefore the saber fight was a draw.

Other possible scenarios:

• Not to be opinionated, but about the whole Sidious getting disarmed thing, it was never shown, nor told by George lucas. so, we cant take for canon nor truth. But heres a possible scenario:

Sidious and Yoda interlocked blades. sidious realized with sabers this fight is useless. So he decided to change tactics. Sidious chuckes his saber and releases force lightning at his opponent before he can attack.

Yoda in turn blocks the lightning with saber and sends it back to Sidious, further deforming his face.

"Destroy i will, just as your Kenobi will destroy your apprentice" Yoda said.

But with Yodas small size and Sidious' mastery of the dark countered, and sent Yoda flying through the air, were he was able to safely land on the pod while Sidious jumped into his own pod.

POSSIBLE??

• • Yoda disarmed Sidious is c-canon. Period. Darth Kevinmhk 16:01, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

• Cannon my foot. It was not shown in the movie nor novel. It was shown in the JUNIOR NOVILIZATION which is always different in some aspects than the movie. And unless its shown by GEORGE LUCAS HIMSELF or the novel, its not cannon. Its mere heresay.- Dillion Ryan

I have proof that the whole "Yoda disarming Sidious" never happened!

Alright, when Sids and Yoda have their first force duel, you have a real good look at Sids face. It is scrunched together on his cheeks and has a yellow-greenish color. When they engage in a saber duel, you again have a good look at his face. It has not changed. He is not under direct light and since his face is hidden behind his cloak, his face looks gray now compared to the yellow-greenish as earlier seen. But thats because in the throne room, Sids face was in direct light so his face looks as exactly as it really is. But in the senate area, his face is darker because of the lack of light and his cloak. But in any case, his face has NOT changed. Now, Sids has changed tactics and starts to hurl pods at Yoda. When the camara pans in on his face, you can clearly see his face has NOT changed. It is exactly the way it was when the duel first started. So that contradicts what the Junior Novilization says of Sids face being further deformed. So therefore Sids was never disarmed by Yoda. What truly happened to his saber we probably will never know. HOWEVER, chances are that he chucked it once he realized that he and Yoda equaled in swordsmenship. —Unsigned comment by 71.243.63.199 (talk • contribs).

• You haven't disproved that Sidious lost his lightsabre, you've disproved that his face was further deformed. -- I need a name 15:54, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

• yes i have. The junior novilization says Sidious was further deformed BECAUSE he was disarmed. But in the movie he was not further deformed nor was he shown being disarmed. If he was truly disarmed as the novilization says, his face would be further disfigured. BUT, in the movie, his face was EXACTLY the same after the saber duel just like it was before the duel even started. Therefore he was further deformed, and because he was not further deformed, there is not proof whatsoever he was disarmed. And him chucking his saber to start a force seems the most plausible to me. But on the topic of disarming, we see YODA being disarmed by SIDIOUS.

• This talk section makes me very sad. --School of Thrawn 101 07:02, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

• You haven't disproved that Sidious lost his lightsaber, or do you have a canon source that specifically states that it did not happen? as far as I know all you've got is one source that states Sidious lost his lightsaber, and one that does not show if it did or didn't happen. However you, as far as I'm concerned, you have proven that his face wasn't further deformed
  And please, sign your comments next time. --Jedimca0 ^{(Do or Do Not, There is No Try)} 07:19, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Protection

• Per conversations in the IRC room, this article is protected with sysop-only access. If you want it unlocked, take your request and reason to the appropriate page or my talk page. There is no reason why the users and admins should be required to constantly cleanup and remove fanonish speculation. Atarumaster88 ^{(Talk page)} 19:56, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Even if Yoda had won

What would have happened? The empire was a declared fact by then and there was still a sith lord; surely palpatine would have stipulated that if he were to die, Darth Vader would inherit the Empire?

• Perhaps, but if that was true Vader would'nt know much about the Sith, and be easier to kill. Besides, the last three movies had already been made, with Sidious alive. Darth Oompa Loompa 12:55, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

also on mustafar darth vader would of died of his wounds had sidious not rescued him, and rebuilt him with armor--70.253.91.208 21:04, February 6, 2010 (UTC)

Name change

I just want to request a name change to Duel in the Senate (Great Jedi Purge), because it would make more sense. I thought the Clone Wars ended with the assassination of the Separatist leaders on Mustafar. Who agrees?—Darthtyler _Talk 18:50, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

• Strongly disagree, shouldn't use brackets unless needed - Kingpin13 08:51, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
  • The brackets are needed, because there were two duels in the Senate, and both are differentiated by brackets whose contents reflect the major event/conflict of the time.—Tommy^{(There are no Jedi here)} 10:29, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
• Also, Tyler, normally something like this would require a vote amongst users before a name change is decided upon. However, when the reason for the move is based on something that canonically supercedes the opinion of the masses, then taking the initiative to move the page is ok. I originally moved the page to reflect that there was more than one; this reason outweighs any opinion, because it is based on unrefutable fact. Same as yours—the War did end with the Separatist leaders' deaths on Mustafar, so technically the duel happened afterwards, being then a part of the Jedi Purge instead. The move was fully warranted, and only required a good dude like you to take the initiave to make it happen. For an instance where a vote is necessary, see: Talk:Allana. Otherwise, good job my friend, way to be on top of things;) —Tommy^{(There are no Jedi here)} 10:29, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Casualties: 2 Red Guards

shouldn't this be dropped since most likely, the guards were not killed?--Governor Jerjerrod 20:18, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

that's what i thought! unless someone can show me any proff that the two guards were killed i might try to get rid of it and change to none--70.253.91.208 21:06, February 6, 2010 (UTC)

I know most people don't think very highly of the visual dictionaries, but in the ROTS visual dictionary (i apologize for typos my computer is running slow and i am typing fast) it says that ypoda is in no mood for interference and flattens two red guards with a force push. thius doesn't indicate that they wrer or were not killed. however, in another book of mine, i believe it was the ROTS scrapbook, it ays something (or anothers book says something) to the effect of "dispatches" two red guards. where i come from, dispacth can mean two thing. one, dispatch an emergency vehicle or something to the scene, or two, kill. oviously, yoda didn't dispatch an emergency vehicle to the two red guards, so he must have mkilled them66.42.173.161 17:29, June 10, 2010 (UTC)

Yoda's lightsaber

Does anyone know if Yoda retrieved his lightsaber? When Sids knocked it out his hands it wasn't deystroyed because the lightning hit the blade, but afterwards as he jumps down into Organa's speeder I think I can make out the unignited hilt on his belt but I'm not quite sure. --86.131.205.161 17:02, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

In case you didn't notice the notice at the top of the talk page, this space is for discussing changes to the article, not for a discussion of the subject. You can ask questions like yours in the knowledge bank. --Xd1358 ^Talk 17:28, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Definition on the outcome of the duel

We need a better definition on the outcome of the duel. I have put in "Jedi defeat" as a temporary replacement, but I believe that that just isn't a good enough definition on the outcome of the duel, so I need suggestions for a definition.--The Grand Master 20:40, December 7, 2009 (UTC)

retreat of jedi master Yoda?--70.253.84.225 02:28, February 17, 2010 (UTC)

holding office?

After the lightning ball exploded, sidious grabbed onto the pod they had been on, and yoda was blasted back to the chancellors podium. he held on for a bit, but then slipped and fell down to the floor of the senate chamber. he didn't fall immediately, and when he did, he did not fall to the holding office, just to the floor (still an impressive distance for a small, green, ancient person to fall and survive). i wanted to make sure everyone agreed before i edited.66.42.173.161 14:26, June 11, 2010 (UTC)

Not to mention i refuse to edit anymore.66.42.173.161 14:29, June 11, 2010 (UTC)

Cloak

I wonder if it should be mentioned that it's possible Palpatine thought Yoda was dead, as all that was left was his cloak, as seen when Vader killed Obi-Wan? Imperial Star Destroyer (Interrogation room) 17:42, September 5, 2010 (UTC)

Title?

Should this article be called "Skirmish in the Senate" opposed to "Duel in the Senate"? It may not be the most solid source, but an Episode III toy, one of the Hasbro figures battle boxes that included Yoda, Palpatine, and a Senate seat, was titled Skirmish.

• Information from Hasbro toys is canon. If you could provide us with a picture of the part of the packaging that says this or show us the specific toy online, we will have to change the title to suit it. "Skirmish" will also have to be capitalized and used in a manner indicative of a proper noun. NaruHina ^Talk 21:50, July 8, 2012 (UTC)
  • Here's the box image from the set's Amazon listing. All the letters in the title are capitalized, however. [1]--Mewtwo152 (talk) 20:28, July 9, 2012 (UTC)

Outcome (again)

At the very end of the battle, you can tell from their faces that Yoda was gaining the upper hand before the concentration of energy became too great. Yoda didn't fall because Sidious overpowered him, but because he was standing closer to the edge and simply had bad luck. I belive such a fall would beat the heck out of anyone, including Yoda, and that he retreated because he was no longer in a fighting shape. This article completely ignores this point, and I think that's unfortunate. --CrappyScrap (talk) 12:14, June 19, 2013 (UTC)

• If you have a canon source that states this, feel free to add it. Otherwise, it is speculation. Supreme Emperor (talk) 22:02, June 19, 2013 (UTC)