Removed links to words "Depression", "Adopt", and "Disown" edit

I'm not sure why these words were chosen to be linked to their Wikipedia articles, but it's unnecessary in this context. I would be curious to know what standard these were based on. We might as well define all words in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kronosys (talkcontribs) 20:52, 26 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

It happens all the time. WP is full of irrelevant links. Keep up the good work of removing them but you don't have to mention it on the talk page (too much trouble for such a routine uncontroversial edit), just use the edit summary. Jimp 22:53, 3 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Han Solo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:47, 26 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Affiliation: Galactic Empire edit

In the past discussion it said this came from the Han Solo trilogy of novels which are Legends now. Is there somewhere else where it's mentioned that he was in the Imperial Navy? If not I think the Galactic Empire Affiliation should be tagged under Legends or removed.24.253.247.171 (talk) 04:17, 30 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Do you mean The Han Solo Adventures? There is mention in them that Han was at the Imperial Academy - just as it's also mentioned by Bel Iblis in the Thrawn novels. Both seem to make it clear though that he left the Academy before graduating, so cannot be reasonably classed as an Imperial lackey.
The "Galactic Empire" affiliation was added here without summary. I agree with your pointing it out as a discrepency, and am removing it. Chaheel Riens (talk) 19:14, 30 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Film article edit

Since filming on the Han Solo movie started today, we need to create the film article. See WT:STARWARS#Multiple drafts for Han Solo solo for a discussion about two drafts and merging them and putting an article in the mainspace. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 17:07, 30 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

Concept and Creation:

Some concept art of a 10 year old Solo was made, but finally, Lucas decided to omit Solo's appearance from the film. Any actor was cast or considered for the role.

This sentence is terrible and it's not a quote, so it can be changed. The later is incomplete and you wouldn't say finally when describing the past.

Change to this:

Some concept art of a 10 year old Solo was made, but Lucas decided to omit Solo's appearance from the film before any actor was cast, or considered for the role. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.252.58.26 (talk) 07:50, 24 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

Han Solo's Funeral In The Last Jedi: Expanded Edition edit

Hello Wikipedians, I think this important event should be included in Han Solo wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.164.178.98 (talk) 19:34, 14 January 2019 (UTC)Reply