Wikia

Wookieepedia

Wookieepedia:Comprehensive article nominations

Talk112
113,055pages on
this wiki

Redirected from WP:CAN

             
Comprehensive
article nominations
       
Era-comp

This page is for the nomination of "comprehensive articles." For a list of "comprehensive articles," see Category:Wookieepedia comprehensive articles.


What is a "comprehensive article?"

A "comprehensive article" is an article that contains all information regarding the topic. Often, "comprehensive articles" cannot reach Featured or Good Article status due to their limited content. This process is intended to recognize articles that contain all relevant canon information, yet are still under the 250 word limit required for a Good Article. The purpose of this is twofold—firstly, to help users distinguish what is a stub, and what is merely a short article with no further relevant material to be added, and, more importantly, to highlight for the reader when they are reading something that has been judged definitely "comprehensive"—that is, a guarantee to the reader that whatever they are reading contains the sum total of all available content on that topic.

Nominations and promotions of the Comprehensive article process are overseen by a collective of users known as the "EduCorps," which is made up of the Inquisitorius, the AgriCorps, and various other experienced users who are considered qualified to adequately judge the nominated material.

Lucasfilm Ltd. and its many licensees continue to expand the Star Wars universe. Since new information might become available, it may be necessary to revoke a "comprehensive article's" status. A forum will be used to nominate articles that have fallen out-of-date. Members of the EduCorps will then post a warning template on that page, and a grace period of one week will be instituted in which the article can be improved. If there is a significant amount of new information, it is likely that once updated, the article will become eligible for Good article status, and thereby ineligible for Comprehensive article status.

READ THIS FIRST!

An article must…

  1. …be well-written and detailed.
  2. …be unbiased, non-point of view.
  3. …be sourced with all available sources and appearances.
  4. …follow the Manual of Style, Layout Guide, and all other policies on Wookieepedia. This is, of course, within reason. If a topic only has a very limited degree of content that cannot be divided up into the relevant article sections, it is not required that it follow the Layout Guide precisely. This is to be judged on a case-by-case basis.
  5. …following the review process, be stable, i.e., does not change significantly from day to day and is not the subject of ongoing edit wars. This does not apply to vandalism and protection or semi-protection as a result of vandalism.
  6. …not be tagged with any sort of improvement tags (i.e. more sources, expand, etc).
  7. …have no redlinks.
  8. …have all relevant canon information presented.
  9. …be completely referenced for all available material and sources. See Wookieepedia:Sourcing for more information.
  10. …have all quotes and images sourced.
  11. …provide at least one relevant quote on the article if available.
  12. …include a "Behind the scenes" section for in-universe articles.
  13. …counting the introduction, the article body, and "Behind the scenes" material, must not exceed 250 words in length (not including captions, quotes, or headers, etc). Any articles exceeding the limit should be taken to the Good article nominations page for consideration.
  14. …if the nominated article reaches 200 words or greater, the nominator must either provide an intro or draft an intro and provide a link to the revision in the nomination, showing that the intro does not elevate the article over 250 words. Exceptions can be made for articles wherein the majority of the text is in the "Behind the scenes" section.
  15. …if an article approaches the 250-word length for Good article nominations, it should not deliberately shortened in order to avoid meeting that word limit.

How to nominate:

  1. First, find an article you find is worthy of comprehensive status. Nominated articles must meet all seventeen requirements stated above.
  2. Add {{CAnom}} at the top of the article you are nominating and save the page. NOTE: If the article you are nominating has been nominated for CA one or more times previously, you will need to specify a new subpage name as a parameter in the template (e.g. {{CAnom|Lorum ipsum (second nomination)}}).
  3. Open the redlink (in a new tab or window, if possible) and fill out the form according to the instructions provided.
  4. Copy the code provided to the bottom of this page.
  5. Purge the article to update the template.
  6. Others will object to the nomination if they disagree that the article is good enough; they will then supply reasons for doing so, and ways to improve the article in accordance with the established rules.
  7. Nominators and supporters will adjust the article until the objectors (with reasonable objections) are satisfied. Objectors may also make alterations—if there is any reason for contention on a given point, it should be settled in a civil manner in the nomination field itself.
  8. Users may not vote on their own articles.
  9. Each user shall be limited to four active Comprehensive article nominations at any given time. Any additional nominations beyond four will be subject to immediate removal.

How to vote:

  1. Before doing anything, be sure to read the article completely, keeping a sharp eye out for mistakes.
  2. Afterward, compare the article to the criteria listed above, and then either support or object the article's nomination.
    • If you object, please supply concrete reasons for doing so, and how it can be improved.
  3. As stated above, any objections will be looked upon by the nominator, supporters, and anyone willing to improve the article, and action will be taken to please the objectors. Do not strike other users' objections; it is up to the objector to review the changes and strike if they are satisfied.
  4. There are several ways in which an article can receive the required number of votes. Within a 48-hour period of nomination, only EduCorps votes will count towards the total, although anyone may choose to vote in that window. If four members of the EduCorps support a nomination in that window [0 to 48 hours post-nomination], and there are no outstanding objections, the article can be considered a "Comprehensive article" and be tagged with the {{Eras|comp}} template 48 hours after the initial nomination. The talk page will also be tagged with the {{CA}} template. When the 48 hours are up, any user's votes will contribute towards the total. If two EduCorps member has voted for an article after a week, three regular votes will be required. After a week, an article can also pass with just three EduCorps votes.
  5. Once a nomination is successful, it will be placed on the Comprehensive article list. Instructions on how to archive nominations, successful or otherwise, can be found here. Anyone can archive a nomination—just make sure it has the correct number of votes, has been nominated for at least a week (or 48 hours if there are four EC votes), and that there are absolutely no outstanding objections. If you are not sure how to do this, just ask, and someone will likely be more than willing to help you. Also, if you think you can slip one past us, think again—someone is always watching you.


All nominations will be considered idle and are subject to instantaneous removal by EduCorps members if objections are not addressed, or at least not answered, after a period of 1 week.

Please remember to archive your nomination beforehand if you plan on taking it to the Good Article Nominations page.


Comprehensive article nominations

View recent changes for this page and its subpages

Kaylah Taprish

(3 ECs/0 Users/3 Total)

Support

  1. ECvote Ayrehead02 (talk) 00:42, September 10, 2014 (UTC)
  2. ECvote 501st dogma(talk) 01:09, September 10, 2014 (UTC)
  3. ECvote Supreme Emperor (talk) 15:05, September 10, 2014 (UTC)

Object

Ayrehead
  • What in the Codex suggests she lived over one hundred years after the Mandalorian Wars? There doesn't seem to be any timeframe given from what I can see. Ayrehead02 (talk) 23:22, September 9, 2014 (UTC)
    • ... the very first sentence? The one that says the vrake were on the verge of extinction for more than a hundred years? Makeb was settled during the Mandalorian Wars; ergo, more than hundred years after the Mandalorian Wars. Cade StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 23:28, September 9, 2014 (UTC)
      • That sentence in no way implies that the period of near-extinction began during the Mandalorian Wars. They could of been near-extinction prior to the planet's settlement, as it's entirely possible for animals to go extinct without sentient input. Ayrehead02 (talk) 23:33, September 9, 2014 (UTC)
        • Then how would they know that the vrake was near-extinct? No sentient being was on Makeb until the Mandalorian Wars. Cade StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 23:35, September 9, 2014 (UTC)
          • Could be from fossil samples, or data extrapolation or anything, we have no idea. Your assuming the hundred years was within the settlement period, but I'd say it's speculation. Ayrehead02 (talk) 23:40, September 9, 2014 (UTC)
            • And you're reaching here. Unless another source says otherwise, this is what I'm going with. Cade StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 23:46, September 9, 2014 (UTC)
              • The Holonet entry only states that Makeb was settled during the Mandalorian Wars. There are literally dozens of examples of planets which aren't settled but which are visited by various travelers, including scientists. I don't think in any way it's reaching to say that scientists could of visited the planet prior to it being settled and worked out that they were near-extinction. Ayrehead02 (talk) 23:58, September 9, 2014 (UTC)
                • Firstly, have you been to Makeb? An enormous part of the plot is that Makeb's atmosphere basically prevents anyone from landing safely or leaving. Secondly, yes, the Holonet does say exactly what I'm talking about: "Undisturbed by civilization for a thousand years, Makeb was first colonized during the Mandalorian Wars..." Ergo, Makeb was first colonized during the Mandalorian Wars, and since they wouldn't know whether it's been on the verge of extinction without speculating about fossil data or other stuff, then Taprish's work must have happened at least a hundred years after the Mandalorian Wars. I'm serious here—if you're this anal about spelling and punctuation, you and the rest of us will all be better off. But right now, you're beating a dead horse. Cade StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 00:14, September 10, 2014 (UTC)
                  • Yes I have, and it's very difficult to land, but pretty obviously people have managed it. If anything the fact that it says "Undisturbed by civilization for a thousand years" suggests that, if anything, it has been visited before as the planets presumably existed for far longer than one thousand years before colonisation. I wasn't in any way suggesting that fossil stuff should be included that's obviously speculation, but what you've put is an assumption, which I don't think can be made. My spelling and punctuation do need work, I very openly admit that, but since you've told me and several other reviewers recently that our reviews are pretty much worthless since were not thorough enough I'm not going to just give in on what is a valid objection. Ayrehead02 (talk) 00:24, September 10, 2014 (UTC)
                    • Okay, here's the thing. Firstly, I did not mean that spelling/punctuation comment as an insult; I was commending your reviewing effort on this objection. Secondly, I would entire understand and submit to your objection if the Codex was an OOU, omniscient source. The problem is is that it's not—it's IU, and based off of galactic knowledge at the time. As the sources currently stand, we're stuck with what I've got. Cade StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 00:31, September 10, 2014 (UTC)
                      • Sorry I misunderstood your meaning, thank you. I'm still not sure about this but I realise continuing to argue will not really achieve anything. Since I have no other complaints at all about the article I'll support it assuming no one else also takes issue with this objection. Sorry if I came off as at all rude in this discussion, it was never my intention to. Ayrehead02 (talk) 00:42, September 10, 2014 (UTC)

Comments

Dep Aila

(3 ECs/0 Users/3 Total)

Support

  1. ECvote Ayrehead02 (talk) 23:47, September 9, 2014 (UTC)
  2. ECvote 501st dogma(talk) 01:12, September 10, 2014 (UTC)
  3. ECvote Supreme Emperor (talk) 02:44, September 19, 2014 (UTC)

Object

Ayrehead
  • The Codex entry gives no timeframe for when he encountered the Ginx so I don't think you can say he lived in the Old Republic era. The body does need to mention that the meeting to place either during or before the Conquest of Makeb. Ayrehead02 (talk) 23:25, September 9, 2014 (UTC)
    • That's completely false. Makeb is only settled during the Mandalorian Wars, and thus he must have lived on Makeb sometime between the Mandalorian Wars and TOR. Cade StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 23:27, September 9, 2014 (UTC)
      • Just because it was settled during the War doesn't mean no one set foot on the planet prior to the War. If there is a source that states that Makeb wasn't discovered by anyone prior to the war then a footnote to explain the timeframe should be included. Ayrehead02 (talk) 23:29, September 9, 2014 (UTC)
        • Times like this, those kind of references border on catering to stupidity. I'll add a reference, but this really is something you're blowing way out of proportion. There's a difference between sourcing something and spelling it out blow for blow. Cade StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 23:43, September 9, 2014 (UTC)

Comments

Troiken indictidile

  • Nominated by: Ayrehead02 (talk) 00:18, September 10, 2014 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: The eye looks orange to me, but if anyone thinks otherwise I'm happy to change it.

(1 ECs/0 Users/1 Total)

Support

  1. ECvote Corellian PremierJedi symbolThe Force will be with you always 13:20, September 17, 2014 (UTC)

Object

  • Firstly, {{CAnom}}.
    • My bad, forgot to click save page to add it. Ayrehead02 (talk) 00:28, September 10, 2014 (UTC)
  • Secondly, that's not how you write or refer to The Jedi Path. It's an IU text that should be referred to by its full name and italicized, not in quotation marks. Cade StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 00:25, September 10, 2014 (UTC)
  • How does the source state that it is non-sentient? Cade StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 19:40, September 15, 2014 (UTC)
    • The section starts with a bit saying that there are many animals that Jedi may encounter and gives a description suggesting non sentience, although it does say that the distinction between sentience and non-sentience is not as clear as most think. The indictile is then listed as an animal that the Jedi had encountered. I generally term animal to mean non-sentient but I'm happy to remove sentience from the article and put it in the unknown sentience category if you'd prefer. Ayrehead02 (talk) 08:34, September 17, 2014 (UTC)
Master of the universe

Comments

Kubindian royal jelly roll

  • Nominated by: Ayrehead02 (talk) 20:23, September 10, 2014 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: I think I'd probably actually eat this...

(2 ECs/0 Users/2 Total)

Support

  1. ECvoteEw. Lots of protein, though. Corellian PremierJedi symbolThe Force will be with you always 01:26, September 17, 2014 (UTC)
  2. ECvote 501st dogma(talk) 19:41, September 17, 2014 (UTC)

Object

Exiled Jedi
  • From the quote, I can see that it was served in slices. Please mention this in the article.
  • In the sources section, you do not italicize Dining at Dex's, while you do so in the references and body. Please be consistent.
    • Sorry didn't realized it wasn't italicized by the template automatically. Fixed. Ayrehead02 (talk) 09:27, September 21, 2014 (UTC)
  • You need a first mentioned tag in the sources section.
  • Does it say that Besalisks could eat the food?--Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 22:59, September 20, 2014 (UTC)
    • I did think about if I should count that or not. Dex describes it as scrumptious in his personal description of it, although that could just be made up to sell it I guess. I'm happy to remove it if you don't think so. Ayrehead02 (talk) 09:27, September 21, 2014 (UTC)

Comments

Buzzee's

  • Nominated by: Ayrehead02 (talk) 20:36, September 10, 2014 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: I imagine they probably serve the royal jelly rolls

(2 ECs/0 Users/2 Total)

Support

  1. ECvote Corellian PremierJedi symbolThe Force will be with you always 01:32, September 17, 2014 (UTC)
  2. ECvote 501st dogma(talk) 19:45, September 17, 2014 (UTC)

Object

Exiled Jedi
  • Does the book explicitly say 6 ABY? If not, you will need to make a reference stating how you calculate the date.--Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 23:03, September 20, 2014 (UTC)

Comments

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki