From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Where does this spelling come from? -- Zoe

All the official Star Wars stuff I've ever seen, including books and promotional material. This is the canonical spelling. Stormwriter

Wow, you're right. I found it at The vast majority of the Internet is wrong in their spelling.  :-) -- Zoe

Popular Culture[edit]

Added a popular culture section; it's pretty small & quite frankly worded a bit weird. Any additions and comments on this section are welcome. -- Falmarin

The Law[edit]

Is there any documented evidence of the word "Wookiee" being used in a legal sense, or is this pure speculation? If its speculation, it should be removed.

Ibuki 20:05, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I believe it was meant as speculation, so I've removed the speculative part of that section. - UtherSRG 20:30, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)



Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
SubPhylum: Vertebrata
Class: Mammalia
Order: Primates
Family: Hominidae
Genus: Homo
Species: Wookiee


This classification table does not belong in the article. Wookiees are entirely fictional, and the usual methods of taxonomy simply cannot apply to such creatures -- unless there's some canonical Star Wars material that gives this information, which I doubt. --MIRV (talk) 21:12, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)

"classification table does not belong"? the FICTIONAL Wookiee species is cited in several start wars sources (see existing link; other are possible) ...
Wookiees are entirely fictional? yes ...
Usual methods of taxonomy simply cannot apply to such creatures? ummm no, it can be ... and has been ...
"canonical Star Wars material"? yes, several exist .... "Star Wars: The Wookiee Storybook", "Heir to the Empire", "Skywalking - The Life and Films of George" ... among other sites that gather this type of information ... JDR

I never disputed that Wookiees as a species exist within the Star Wars universe. However, it is important to remember that said universe is fictional: it is a work of imagination by many different contributors and bears only tangential relation to our universe. The taxotable, as it stands, places Wookiees within a taxonomic system developed for creatures of Earth. There is nothing within the Star Wars background material -- as far as I know -- to suggest that evolution on Kashyyyk was in any way similar to evolution on Earth. --MIRV (talk) 21:32, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I agree that SW is a work of imagination by many different contributors, though it has been under analysis with tools of the "real world" (similar to the Physics and Star Wars has). Ans yes, this places Wookiees within a taxonomic system developed for creatures of Earth.
It has everything to do the Star Wars background material and it's suggestions that evolution on Kashyyyk (or any place in the SW universe) is similar to evolution on Earth. Sinmcerely, JDR

Reddi, You do not understand what you are talking about. You do not understand what an encyclopedia is. You do not know how to work in a consensus atmosphere. Please cease editting articles until you understand better. - UtherSRG 21:48, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Show me the canonical Star Wars material that describes Wookiees as having, at some stage in their life, a hollow dorsal nerve cord, pharyngeal slits, a tail extending past the anus, and bands of muscles that go around the body (all distinguishing characteristics of the Chordata, from Chordate). I bet you can't -- and you'll have to do the same for every step on the taxotable before it can be considered a worthy addition to the article. --MIRV (talk) 21:51, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Canonical Star Wars material? I cited the books / sources, you look it up ... also, look @ all the surrounding non-conical literature on them (ie., sites that have info them) ...
"I bet you can't"? you'd have lost that bet ....
Do the same for every step? ummm not really ... JDR
He'll have to do even more than that. He'll have to show that they are directly related to the primitive Hominidae that is the ancestor to all hominids. That's what the table says. - UtherSRG 21:57, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)
I did say "every step on the taxotable", didn't I? --MIRV (talk) 21:58, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Yes, though showing the lowest proves the higher. Besides, the table's data is incorrect: Hominidae is a family, not a genus, Primates is an order, Mammalia is a class. Vertebrata is a subphylum. - UtherSRG 22:01, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for the correction on the labels (needed a shift up on most of them; just adjusted it) JDR

Given that in fact it's just a bloke in a not very convincing hairy-carpet suit, the taxotable is actually valid ;-) (ducks)

*laughs* Well yeah, except for the incorrect data! - UtherSRG 22:05, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Well, I'm a rabid Star Wars fan, and I think the table should go down. Wookiee's evolved light-years away from humans. They're not related to any of the ancestors of humans. Putting them in the same genus implies that they're near-human, and they're not, at least not in an evolutionary sense. Furthermore, the taxodermic table really isn't useful or meaningful in any way. -LtNOWIS 23:04, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Yes... and this is an old conversation. - UtherSRG 01:04, Jan 21, 2005 (UTC)
Oops. I didn't look look at the dates. So did everyone just stop caring or what? I still think it should go down. Also, I think the spoiler warning should be moved down two paragraphs, to allow those averse to spoilers read the first half of the article. -LtNOWIS 01:12, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)
By what do you mean "go down". The taxobox should not be included in the article, at least not in any format the resembles the taxobox used for non-fictional organisms. - UtherSRG 01:37, Jan 21, 2005 (UTC)
I mean it should be removed. If nobody protests, than I eventually will.-LtNOWIS 19:46, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)
It's been removed from the article ages ago. - UtherSRG 22:29, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)

Nomination for Deletion[edit]

This article is entirely pointless and serves no purpose, practical or otherwise.

  • Neither does saying so. but since you didn't actually nominate you can be safely ignored. SchmuckyTheCat 15:58, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)


On May 9, this article was nominated for deletion. The discussion can be found at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Wookiee. The result was, naturally, keep.


Um - a member of the class mammalia would be a mammal, wouldn't it? I don't think mammalian exists as a noun, just as an adjective. I then saw the whole discussion about whether you should be using these terms for fictional creatures at all. I think 'mammal' is OK, as the basic definition (hairy, live young, milk) is confirmed by the source material, although you can't go any more detailed than that. I've changed it to mammal anyway. Feel free to change it back if there is some special Star Wars reason for the use of 'mammalian'. Cheers 4u1e 08:24, 6 August 2006 (UTC)


Tarfful, trying to get the links to redirect to Tarfful, but without and external link, how do I do this without the link being List_of_Star_Wars_Old_Republic_characters#Tarfful?

Write it like this: [[List of Star Wars Old Republic characters#Tarfful|Tarfful]] Gurko 11:16, 16 April 2007 (UTC)


Could someone please delete the WOOKIEE MATING section? I would believe (and hope) I'm safe in assuming that it's fake, and when I attempted to edit it, the words were not in the EDIT THIS PAGE section, as far as I could see. Could someone more experienced do this?

wookiee extinction[edit]

i remember in episode 3 that 2 droids were saying "all the wookiees are dead" only tarful and chewie are left. still how come in star wars battlefront there are wookiee warriors? 11:14, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

It was the clones that said that.Darth Anzeruthi (talk) 01:03, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely Terrible Grammar[edit]

point made

Repeated vandalism[edit]

Has no one observed the rampant repeated vandalism by ? There have been 8 vandal edits in the last 10 days. It's apparently (a) student(s) at Mohawk College of Applied Arts and Technology in Ontario, Canada. Someone really wants to get this idea across that someone they know is a wookiee. --Fashnek (talk) 21:22, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


So after working so hard on this article, I leave, come back after half a year, and this is what I find. Amazing! Needs more improvement!Astroview120mm (talk) 06:10, 20 December 2008 (UTC)


I took out the reference to the wookiee that could speak basic. In Heir to the Empire, Leia mets a wookiee with a speech impediment that makes it easier for her to understand him, but the brackets [] placed around his dialogue indicates that he is not speaking basic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Monkeysocks2 (talkcontribs) 21:15, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Another question about spelling[edit]

Is there a reason for changing the spelling when the word is in plural? The article uses 'Wookiee' consistantly, but has both 'Wookiees' and 'Wookies.' I had edited the article so they were all spelled with double Es, but someone reverted my edits the first time.


Please cite a source describing the Wookiee "beaches" as tropical -- otherwise, it's conflating that shooting location with the in-universe description. --EEMIV (talk) 00:53, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Outside the fact that it looked fairly tropical in nearly all the media it's been mentioned in? Sure, i'll look around. Doc Quintana (talk) 00:57, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Here you go. Here's another. Doc Quintana (talk) 01:03, 13 October 2009 (UTC)'s web site describes the shooting location; it doesn't assert that the Wookiee world was intended to have tropical locales (any more than the movie suggests the Wookiee homeworld is, in fact, Thailand). Does the in-universe (i.e. Databank) entry on Kashyyyk at use the same description for the waterfront? As for the second: Wookieepedia is not a reliable source; I didn't bother looking. --EEMIV (talk) 01:07, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
The Wookiepedia page is referenced from a Dorling Kindersley book, and the database article uses describes biomes found in tropical areas (i.e- lush jungle). This is an ipso facto. They wouldn't have filmed in Thailand if Kashyyyk weren't meant to be tropical or hot or what have you. Doc Quintana (talk) 01:31, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Your thinking epitomizes original research. As you said on my talk page: you're still pretty new to this. So, rather than interpreting things ipso facto or making other inferences, merely find a reliable third-party source that describes Kashyyyk as having tropical beaches. It's really that simple. --EEMIV (talk) 01:34, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
I might be new, but I just mentioned a source that mentions it: the book that the Wookipedia page referenced. Doc Quintana (talk) 01:38, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
And even if that source didn't exist, calling a spade a spade isn't original research. Doc Quintana (talk) 01:39, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Great. Then go to the book store, or see if Amazon has a preview -- ascertain whether the Wookieepedia citation is for the whole paragraph or just the line and, if the former, whether they paraphrased accurately. If yes, then cite it properly. Really -- it's not that hard. (And, yes, it is utterly trivial; go ahead and keep your {{disputed}} tag, but really, try also to grow a thicker skin and not sulk when someone disagrees with you.) --EEMIV (talk) 01:41, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
And i'd suggest that you don't engage in personal attacks. Doc Quintana (talk) 01:43, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
If I remember next time I'm at Barnes & Noble, I'll even take a look. --EEMIV (talk) 01:42, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Neither "tropic" nor "tropical" appear when searching Tatooine Ghost, the paperback of which (ISBN 0-345-45669-6) includes "A Forest Apart" (the story cited at the end of the paragraph in which that latter term is used) and is on Google Books. It appears only the last sentence in the Wookieepedia article -- the one about Mount Korrokrrayyo -- is cited back to that short story (that word actually does appear in the story). If you can ponder another source in the next day or two, great; otherwise, the {{disputed}} tag can come down. (Which it should anyway -- the so-called dispute isn't about accuracy, but instead specificity. But, whatever. If it gives you a modicum of happines...) --EEMIV (talk) 01:54, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
You can believe what you like. Until we can come to a consensus, it's inappropriate to bring down the disputed tag. Please do not do so, or I will report the incident. Doc Quintana (talk) 02:14, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Beach envelopment[edit]

Kashyyyk is a world enveloped in immense forests and beaches. How could any place be enveloped in a beach, for starters?--Wetman (talk) 18:06, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Chewbacca screen shot[edit]

The screenshot from the films, that one, is currently, in the article, attributed to Revenge of the Sith... but in my humble opinion it is more likely a screenshot from A New Hope... Does anybody agree with me ? In that case, shouldn't this be fixed ? Kintaro (talk) 14:17, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

It's ok, somebody fixed it... Kintaro (talk) 22:36, 22 December 2015 (UTC)