Recent changes Random page
GAMING
Entertainment
 
Star Wars
Star Trek
Transformers
 Muppet Wiki
Digimon Wiki
Marvel Database
See more...

Wookieepedia:Good article nominations

From Wookieepedia, the Star Wars wiki.

(Redirected from WP:GAN)
Jump to: navigation, search
       
Good article nominations
      

This page is for the nomination of good articles. This is not a way to showcase the articles of your favorite characters, spaceships, or the like. For a list of good articles, see Category:Wookieepedia good articles.

What is a Good article?

A Good article is an article that adheres to quality standards, but cannot reach FA status due to its limited content.

A Good article has the following attributes.

1. It is well written. In this respect:

(a) it has compelling prose, and is readily comprehensible to non-specialist readers;
(b) it follows a logical structure, introducing the topic and then grouping together its coverage of related aspects; where appropriate, it contains a succinct lead section summarizing the topic, and the remaining text is organized into a system of hierarchical sections (particularly for longer articles);
(c) it follows the Manual of Style, Layout Guide, and all other policies;
(d) necessary technical terms or jargon are briefly explained in the article itself, or an active link is provided.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable. In this respect:

(a) it provides references to any and all sources used for its material;
(b) sources should be selected in accordance with the guidelines for reliable sources;
(c) it contains no elements of original research.

3. It is broad in its coverage, addressing all major aspects of the topic (this requirement is slightly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required by WP:FA, and allows shorter articles and broad overviews of large topics to be listed);.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy. In this respect:

(a) viewpoints are represented fairly and without bias;
(b) all significant points of view are fairly presented, but not asserted, particularly where there are or have been conflicting views on the topic.

5. It is stable, i.e., it 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. It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic. In this respect:

(a) the images are properly sourced and have succinct and descriptive captions;
(b) a lack of images does not in itself prevent an article from achieving Good Article status.


Contents

Nomination of Good articles

To nominate an article for Good article status, list it here. Nominated articles must meet all six requirements stated above. If an article has a total of five votes after at least a week since it was nominated (beginning the day of its nomination) and no objections (or the objections have been stricken or overridden), the article will be considered a "Good article" and tagged with the {{Eras|good}} template. The talk page will also be tagged with the {{GA}} template. For complete instructions on archiving nominations please see here. Also remember to add {{GAnom}} at the top of the article you are nominating.

Q-series droideka

(+1)

Support

  1. I've done a good amount of work on this article. A lot of referencing. -- Joe Butler (Obi Maul12) talk 04:43, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
  2. Inspected via AIM and all my quarrels have been taken care of. --Squishy Vic (discussion) (contributions) 05:13, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
  3. Sure, well sourced, good expansion Enochf 17:56, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
  4. Certified by the board of Ataru. Atarumaster88 (Talk page) 03:27, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
  5. My objections have been satisfied. JorrelFraajic 03:28, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Toprawa:
    • Kinda don't know where to start with this one, so I'll begin by saying let's not just vote on articles because we like the concept of the article itself.
    • That being said, this isn't even an article. It's a stub with sourcing.
      • Much better! Now we have an article on our hands. :) Toprawa and Ralltiir 06:32, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
    • The intro needs to be expanded.
    • The first paragraph of the history section isn't sourced.
    • There really shouldn't be any information restrictive to the infobox.
      • --I believe all info in the infobox is included within the article. (excluding eras, of course)
    • There's no section describing the droid model.
    • There's no BTS.
    • Your source list doesn't appropriately match the Notes and references. Toprawa and Ralltiir 05:27, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
    • The first section should be titled "Characteristics"
    • Now you don't have a "History" section
    • "Design flaws" should be a subsection of the new "Characteristics" section, not its own section
    • Introduction should not be sourced in this case. Intro should not have any info not also found in the article body.
    • I'm not sure why you sourced the non-canon appearances. Toprawa and Ralltiir 17:59, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
    • One of your appearances or sources needs to indicate when the droid was first identified as the "Q-series" droideka.
    • Also, please format your responses as they appear above so as to not interfere with other users' comments. Toprawa and Ralltiir 23:48, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
    • Your era template and era infobox field do not match. Also, Obimaul, you seem to think that my objections alone are holding up this nomination. I will kindly remind you that all objections must be resolved before a nomination passes. You have several other users you need to be getting in contact with, not just myself. Toprawa and Ralltiir 02:09, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  2. As Tope has said, this surely needs major expansion before GA ready. --Eyrezer 06:14, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
  3. There are appearances in the source list, and, puzzlingly, things repeated in both lists. Thefourdotelipsis 06:41, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
    • Is that bad? -- Joe Butler (Obi Maul12) talk 06:47, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
      • Quite. I touched it up for you, though. Also, for future reference, sourcebooks, such as RPG materials and books like the Essential Guides and Visual Dictionaries go in the ==Source== field, and novels, comics, books, and video games go in the ==Appearances== field. JorrelFraajic 15:42, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
  4. From Jorrel Fraajic
    • Are you sure on some of those sources? If Ep. III was its first appearance, how did it appear in Ep. II? Also, I'm almost positive both Lego Star Wars entries aren't accurate; unless it states somewhere in the booklet or Prima guide that they are Q-series, they didn't "technically" make an appearance. I'm pretty sure this applies to many of your sources (FoC, being another one - if it does appear there, let me know).
    • A lot of this information seems to apply as a general overview of the Droideka, not specifically the Q-series. Correct me if I'm wrong.
    • Those are the two major ones I see. Sourcing-wise, it's very good. How accurate the sources are, however, could be a different matter. JorrelFraajic 15:42, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
      • --The original model of the droideka was very similar to the Q-series droideka, that's why a lot of the info seems to be a general of overview of the droideka. Also, the Prima Official Guide for LEGO Star Wars: The Video Game and the guide for LEGO Star Wars: The Complete Saga both list the droideka model as Q-series. I forgot to source this, and will do it now. Thirdly, it was my mistake adding AotC in the appearances. Lastly, the Q-series droideka was the main droideka model manufactured after the Battle of Coruscant featured in RotS, the source being the novel I recently read, but I also forgot to source this; that's why most appearances are after the time of RotS. Thanks for notifying me. What is FoC, though? -- Joe Butler (Obi Maul12) talk 16:11, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
  5. From the desk of Atarumaster88
    • I didn't change this because I wasn't sure, but I'm used to seeing the Confederacy abbreviated as "CIS", not "C.I.S." If it's that way in the source, then keep it.
    • Need a bit more context on the Colicoids in the intro. Doesn't quite flow very well where the way it's currently structured.
    • If possible, detail what exactly was upgraded from W-series to Q-series.
    • From what I've played of Republic Commando, I don't recall them identifying the droidekas as Q-series specifically. Correct me if I'm wrong.
      • All information, such as the droideka dispenser bit, that's referenced from Republic Commando will need to be removed if the droids in question are not actually Q-series.
    • Present tense in the Design Flaws section is absolutely unacceptable.
    • Kindly check with other droid GAs to ensure that you're following precedent on organization/sectioning. I'm not sure, but I have a sneaky suspicion that it's not exactly in line.
    • "Additionally, there were limits when a droideka could fire at a target." Reword this sentence. I get what you're going for, but there has to be a better way to say it.
    • While this might not be a concern for GA, it'd be nice to have Galaxies information included in the article. (From Star Wars Galaxies: An Empire Divided)
    • Have a Super Terrific Friendly Un-frustrating day. Atarumaster88 (Talk page) 19:30, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
  6. I hate to be Imp, but that second image is distorted as hell and just overall horrible. It needs to be reuploaded or ditched. Havac 02:33, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
  7. History section needs expansion, and is missing Galaxies info. Also, nothing from the NEGTD? Also, and pardon me if I'm being thick here, why is the Episode I visual dictionary where the majority of stuff comes from when this subject first appeared in Episode III? Could also do with a {[1stID]} and a lead quote. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 07:32, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
    • I will expand the history, and add Galaxies info. The reason that the majority of the references come from The Visual Dictionary is that the original droideka and the Q-series droideka are very similar in design, so many of the characteristics of the original droideka apply to the Q-series. -- Joe Butler (Obi Maul12) talk 08:12, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
    • The history has been expanded. As far as the Galaxies info, I haven't played the game myself, but upon searching through the article itself I could not find any information relating to the Q-series droideka. -- Joe Butler (Obi Maul12) talk 08:44, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
  8. Are they definitely Q-series in Survivor's Quest and Battlefront? Frankly, half the article looks like you've taken info about the regular droideka and used it for the Q-series's article. Unless models appearing are specifically identified as Q-series, then the info cannot be included. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 22:00, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
    • I've added an additional quote. As for the rest of the article, well, yeah, some of the information is the same, because it has to be, since, like I said above, there are very few differences between the original droideka and the Q-series. And yes, in some of the levels, the type of droideka is Q-series, specifically because the only type of droideka that was produced after the Battle of Coruscant was Q-series, because of its upgrades. -- Joe Butler (Obi Maul12) talk 20:16, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
      • Sorry; what I meant by "quote" was the quote (to be listed here, not on the article) from ROTS:ICS which establishes that the Q-series had everything the original had. Also, unless a source either states outright or indicates (i.e. it's stated the droid was produced after Coruscant, or any special features unique to the droid are described) that the droideka in it is a Q-series, the info cannot be included in the article. Please try and format your responses as other have been. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 22:00, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
        • I can't find the quote from the book, but all appearances that do not outright state that the droideka is Q-series have been removed. What do you need me to do? Though I can't find the source, it's fairly obvious that the original and Q-series were almost exactly the same; a simple examination and comparison between the two shows this.-- Joe Butler (Obi Maul12) (Chow) 19:04, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Comments

  • I'll note that while a Behind the scenes (BTS) is often preferred in articles, a BTS is not required per the current GAN rules. It's fine to ask if one can be created using any available information, but it's not a requirement, per se. Greyman@wikiajanitor(Talk) 05:34, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
  • A stub worth sourcing? I've seen shorter articles than this. -- Joe Butler Obi Maul12 talk 05:50, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Do you remove your opposition, or what else needs to be done? -- Joe Butler Obi Maul12 talk 06:36, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
    • Obimaul, you should never touch or edit another person's comments on a page without his or her permission. I originally posted my comment above because that's where I wanted it to be seen. Please don't move it into the "Comments" section like you did. Also, my objections will not be "removed." You will know when they are no longer in effect when they are stricken, as the first two currently are. And, only I can strike my own objections. A nominator should never do that himself. Toprawa and Ralltiir 06:50, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Quick question to the GA faithfull: Are there guidelines on how sources are "implied" or not? JorrelFraajic 15:42, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Comments

Pau'an

(+3)

Support

  1. Chack Jadson (Talk) 21:07, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
  2. Keep'em comin.—Tommy(There are no Jedi here) 21:41, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
  3. More alien spcies GA's!!! Darth Xadún(Consult the Holocron) 08:50, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. By the looks of things, you've missed this Wizards source: Saga Edition Web Enhancement: The Pau'ans. There is also BTS info in the article on Star Wars that I added to the sources section. --Eyrezer 11:54, 30 May 2008(UTC)
    • Added. Thanks for the sources. There was not much BTS info though; most of it is better suited to Medon rather than the species. Chack Jadson (Talk) 20:21, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
      • You seem to have added info to the article without adding refs. Ie, the 57,000 year date is in the Wizards source, yet to that paragraph you've only added an EpIII reference. Furthermore, the referencing has only been done at the end of the paragraph, not the particular fact. Finally, the sourcing abbreviations need to be shortened. --Eyrezer 22:36, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
  2. The BTS also seems rather patchy and short. --Eyrezer 22:37, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
  3. The Anvil:
    • Just one thing...I don't think the lead quote is appropriate. I know it's from Episode 2, but it doesn't relate to the species other than being what Obi-Wan said to one of them. I'd just remove it, if none others are available.—Tommy(Clean face and hands)The Anvil 22:40, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
      • I'll go through the ROTS novel and see if I can find a better one, but a lead quote is important, so I'd like to keep this one if a better one cannot be found. Chack Jadson (Talk) 13:50, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
        • Important, but not essential for GA. This quote is circumstancial - it doesn't reference anything to the Pau'an people. If you find a better one, it can always be added later. Darth Xadún(Consult the Holocron) 07:54, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
          • I've got no problem with that quote... --Eyrezer 23:09, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
            • I've seen other GAs with poor quotes. I've checked several sources, and have found no better quotes. I'll keep looking but I don't expect to find anything. If anyone has one, please add it. Chack Jadson (Talk) 00:34, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
              • I'm fine with it also, no big whoop. And I agree with you Chack, I've seen some with poor quotes too ;)—Tommy(There are no Jedi here) 21:41, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
  4. Finally, given that the Wizards article is over 3,000 words, and this one is only 800 I suspect there is still plenty of info missing from the article. --Eyrezer 22:42, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
    • I think I just compressed it more, but I'll go through the article again and look for any missing info, and try to expand what I can here. Chack Jadson (Talk) 13:50, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
      • Expanded it last night. Should be much more comprehensive now. Chack Jadson (Talk) 17:28, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
  5. Could you get a mention of Lampay Fay in there? A mention of needing the CSA to intervene and stop the massive recruitment of Pau'ans would be good. A mention that the species that moved there was likely from a destroyed world. A mention of the rumor that Utapau was the original homeworld of the Jedi. You can also flesh out a bit more about the city states and the way they tried to keep apart. Could mention more about the Empire taking over: the Wizards article has at least a paragraph on it. Mention the subsequent resistance movement. A bit more in the Society section on the planetary council and how it meets together, as well as that Port Administrator was the leader of the cities. The 99% figure re the wind power. No mention of liking art works. Also a bit more context re the Trade Federation embargoes. It's all there in the Wizards article. Comparision with Caamasi would be good. More on how Imperials treated the advisers.
  6. TL:DR version - still needs to be expanded. --Eyrezer 07:10, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
    • Expanded, I think. What does TL:DR mean? Chack Jadson (Talk) 16:27, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
      • That one confused me at first too. Stands for "Too long, didn't read". --Eyrezer 05:57, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Comments

  • Another NEGAS nom. Chack Jadson (Talk) 21:07, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
    • Eyrezer: thanks for the review. Because of your in-depth critique, I believe this article is now ready for FA after it passes GA. Chack Jadson (Talk) 23:27, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

RC-1207

(+3)

Support

  1. Done a large over haul I think its ready for GA now, but what ever happens I'm sure you will point out some things that will help me improve the article RC-1136 Copy 17:07, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
  2. Seems much better. Chack Jadson (Talk) 19:16, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
  3. Nice work :) Aqua Unasi 18:46, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Chack:
    • Needs a longer intro and a BTS. Chack Jadson (Talk) 14:44, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
    • "Sev had experience combating Battle Droids,Geonosians and Trandoshans." Uneeded
    • What are Black Ops?
      • Explation there now RC-1136 Copy 08:20, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
    • ...due to the fact that Boss had met the rest of the squad on the way to the rendezvous." I’d say this is unnecessary.
      • Hmm... I left it in because the end of that paragraph is mainly introducing Boss and beacause I've tryed to make that explantion fit in with the flow it needed that to make it make sence (if you get what I mean) but if you still think it should be got rid of just say again and I will happily remove it RC-1136 Copy 08:20, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
    • What room did they infiltrate?
      • His Planning room, I belive RC-1136 Copy 08:20, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
        • actually I know know :), the adivisor says so, RC-1136 Copy 16:01, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
    • The first sentence in that paragraph is a run-on.
      • Once they infiltrated the planning room the squad quickly set about killing all occupants, despite this Sun Fac escaped to a landing pad, leaving two Super Battle Droids to cover his back? I don't see how thats a run-on, Probly just me being blind RC-1136 Copy 08:20, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
    • Please correct your link to 1138 too.
    • The second paragraph in Geonosis needs more explanation. It could also be written better to make it more interesting.
      • Did you mean the bit about the core ship and the jamming device? well I expanded those, RC-1136 Copy 08:20, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
    • The paragraph about the Prosecutor does too. Expound on things more.
      • added a small amount, is it enough? RC-1136 Copy 08:20, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
    • You use however too many times in the second paragraph of Mission with Omegas.
      • However, now I don't :) RC-1136 Copy 08:20, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
    • Also, your apostrophes are wrong in several cases there.
      • I didn't use any incorrect apostrophes. at lest not in Mission with Omegas. Some where else? RC-1136 Copy 08:20, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
    • Give some context on Skuuma and de-link the second time it’s mentioned.
      • Delinked, also added a bit of information about its location RC-1136 Copy 08:20, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
    • Can the Mid Clone Wars section be expanded at all?
      • Not really, I added five words *looks chuffed* RC-1136 Copy 08:20, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
    • Why did she want Skirata to get there first?
      • He I think you ment, I added a bit about Juskin explaning why he gave info to Kal RC-1136 Copy 08:20, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
    • The last sentence in P&T is present tense.
    • I'd move the first sentence in appearance up to P&T and get ride of that section, as there is little info.
    • You mention something about 36's squad? What is that? Chack Jadson (Talk) 17:41, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
      • I can't remember the exact words, but just before going into the catacombs Advisor says something like: "deltas, as you already know 36's squad have been lost while investigating a jamming device that's blocking our scopes" there has been much speculation over whether 36's squad is in fact RC-1136s original squad, but as it is only speculation it has been left out the article RC-1136 Copy 09:06, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
  2. Aqua Unasi
    • A very nice article, but it still needs a little work to be a GA. Main thing: the article's punctuation is, pretty bad. Some parts of the article entire paragraphs are written as one sentence, using commas in places of periods which makes it very difficult to follow it and read through it. I went through and tried to clean it up a bit, but in some places I didn't know exactly what it was trying to say. Here's a spot, for example:
      • Once they infiltrated the room the squad quickly set about killing all occupants, despite this Sun Fac escaped to a landing pad, leaving two Super Battle Droids to cover his back, Delta destroyed these droids and breached the door, however Sun Fac had already reached his Star Fighter and was heating up the engine, Boss quickly ordered Sev to take the fighter out from a sniping position, before Sev could do so, Sun Fac was in the air, however instead of running he stayed, obviously hoping to blow the squad apart with his laser cannons, but before he could do so, Sev downed his fighter. - Thats all one sentence, and reads very play by play-ish. Could you touch this up, and see if anywhere else in the article it needs it?
        • That should be done, but you'd best be the judge of that RC-1136 Copy 08:50, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
    • The article needs to be fully sourced, so that includes the infobox, and every paragraph.
      • However, the introduction does not need to be sourced. lol, So your reference there isn't necessary. :)
    • Some of the sections are pretty short and talk about the events of Delta Squad, and not Sev in particular. - examples: Meeting Omega and the Mid Clone Wars. Is it possible to maybe combine these with other sections, or say something like, Sev, along with the Delta Squad, to keep the article about Sev, not just the events of Delta Squad.
      • Have changed that, People are going to think the Squad is called "Sev and the rest of Delta" now, also I combined Meeting Omega with Mission to Coruscant,and the Mid Clone Wars was originally two sections, So I'm not sure it would be a good idea to combine it with Ko Sai, Or Mission with Omega, What do you reckon? RC-1136 Copy 09:11, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
        • That's much better :) Aqua Unasi 17:52, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
    • To someone not familiar with Delta Squad, some of these names are confusing. Fi, and Kal Skirata are introduced with no explanation, could you add context about them in the article?
      • Added an explanation for 'Kal, Fi, a small one for Atin and Sun Fac', if you spot any others please let me know RC-1136 Copy 08:50, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
        • Good! Now we know who everyone is - however, I can't find the explanation of Fi. Am I missing it? Aqua Unasi 17:52, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
          • Hmmm, how funny, I was sure I put that in, anyway its there now, well spoted RC-1136 Copy 18:30, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
    • Finally, this paragraph: Regardless of how Sev developed his unique personality, it certainly aided the Deltas greatly when their covert operations turned into all-out warfare - reads very point of view-ish. I see you have it from a source, however it should still be presented in a NPOV way in the article.
      • Have touched up the Personality and traits section a bit, hope its ok now RC-1136 Copy 08:56, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
    • Also, I believe that you can't have quotes in the middle of sections - only at the beginning of sections. So your quote at the bottom of Kashyyk needs to either be made the section header or removed. Aqua Unasi 17:52, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
      • Done that, should be everything RC-1136 Copy 10:20, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
    • This may seem like a lot, but this will help to (hopefully) greatly improve your article. Good work :) Aqua Unasi 03:32, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
      • Ahh! overload :D. I'll do the best I can, and thanks for your help on the article, RC-1136 Copy 07:52, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Comments

  • RC-1136 will be inactive from the 30th of June till the 27th of July 2008, please display patience, thankyou

Iving Creel

(+3)

Support

  1. Toprawa and Ralltiir 23:11, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
  2. Your articles on ESB-related stuff never fails to amaze me. Chack Jadson (Talk) 21:34, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  3. Aqua Unasi 16:21, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Xadún's scrawlings...
    • If Jaster Mereel is Boba Fett, all further refences to 'Mereel' should read Fett. Otherwise, it can be misleading as to whether it is Fett or Mereel (irrespective of who everyone else thought he was).
      • I don't necessarily believe this is the best course of action for this particular article. I agree with what you're saying, and pushed for the very thing on the Nyna Calixte article in regards to the Calixte vs. Morrigan Corde persona alternating. However, in this stage of Fett's life, while living on Concord Dawn he strictly went by the name of Jaster Mereel, and did not alternate between the two. Your suggestion would serve better on the Fett article, I feel, where it would be silly to alternate between the two. From Iving Creel's perspective, however, he only knew the man as Jaster Mereel.
      • The fact that Creel knew Fett under an alias for the duration of their contact does not chance the fact that the character is Boba Fett, and not Jaster Mereel. The names should be changed, or the Article is written from a perspective, and therefore has bias to a character. Articles need to be neutral, to the best of their ability. Darth Xadún(Consult the Holocron) 20:07, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
        • I think you're misinterpreting the idea of the NPOV rule. Articles on certain characters are meant to be written from their perspective while maintaining a neutral description of what's going on, in terms of not showing bias toward, for example, right and wrong. This isn't a violation of the neutral perspective in that sense, it's showing the situation from Creel's angle, as in he and the planet of Concorn Down knew the man as Jaster Mereel. Toprawa and Ralltiir 20:26, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
    • A little more info on Fett when you introduce him would be nice.
      • Added.
    • "Unknown to Creel was that the man had raped Fett's wife, Sintas, causing Fett to seek vengeance." Re-phrase this so it makes sense, and always use full names when mentioning a character for the first time in an article.
      • I added this, so I feel like I should ensure it make sense. Changed the sentence a little, though it still refers to him as Fett rather than mereel, because she was Fett's wife, after all, not Mereel, as in his fake identity. Chack Jadson (Talk) 23:36, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
        • Thanks, Chack.
    • Infobox - Either put a canonically confirmed birth date or leave it blank, please
      • I don't think this is necessarily that bad of a practice. While we don't have an exact DOB for the man, we know from the book's description of Creel that he is canonically several years Boba Fett's senior, and thus was born sometime in the time frame prior to Fett's birth in 31.5 BBY. A similar infobox can be found on the Clabburn the Elder Featured Article. Mind you, this isn't just a random assumption based on whether someone appears older than someone who is a teenager, for example. This is indeed a canonical description. Toprawa and Ralltiir 14:15, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
        • Just because it's slipped though on an FA doesn't make it correct. If this was the case, all character articles could have an "approximate" DOB based on how old they are compared to canonically age-defined characters. And that, IMHO, would just look amateurish. Darth Xadún(Consult the Holocron) 20:07, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
          • Once again, I think you're misinterpreting the meaning behind including this. Nothing "slipped by" the Inquisitors. Of course any and all article could include a "Sometime before X date," but the uniqueness of these instances is that the they are canonically described to be born around this time, rather than just guessing based on someone's appearance. If we could give a certain date for Creel we would, but we're working with what we have. In this instance, we're nailing it down as close as canonically possible. There's nothing amateurish about this at all. Toprawa and Ralltiir 20:26, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
    • Not bad. I like GAN/FANs on people I've never heard of, mainly because I think it's easier to judge them without bias. Darth Xadún(Consult the Holocron) 20:20, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments

  • Not really opposition since I'm not sure - but as Revelation had extra information on the case, should that be added to the article? Also, is Creel mentioned (either directly or indirectly) in the book? - Cavalier One(Squadron channel) 10:40, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
    • Is this the case where the man Fett killed was guilty of raping Sintas? I believe it is, and that thus needs to be added. I don't think Creel is referenced, but I could be wrong. Chack Jadson (Talk) 00:10, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
      • Hmm, very interesting. I'm not sure, since I've never read Revelation. If someone could shed some definitive light on this, it would be greatly appreciated. Toprawa and Ralltiir 00:41, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
        • I'm almost positive this is the case mentioned. I'll add the info for you in the next day or two unless someone else does it first. Chack Jadson (Talk) 21:45, 25 June 2008 (UTC)


Liberation of Gerrard V

(+0)

Support

  1. DjMack 19:46, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Object

  1. The Anvil
    • Add the (goodnom) tag.
    • Source infobox.
    • Unsource opening.
    • Beginning of "background" could use a rewrite.
    • No BTS?
    • No quotes?
    • The quote you do have in there needs to be paraphrased instead, and devoid of pipelinks.
    • Cursory glance.—Tommy9281 (Peace is a lie) 10:08, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  2. Xadún's Dun Möch:
    • "A failed revolt against the Empire had taken place two years prior." Ends abruptly for an opening, just round off this sentence.
    • The whole "The initial revolt" section could do with improving. It's just short sentences and sounds really disjointed. Make it flow more. Also, Moff is a title and is capitalized.
    • "128th Counterattack" - Open a section straight away with a quote if you decide to have one. Consult the Manuel of Style for help with your layout. This shuld help with some of your linking too.
    • Echoing Tommy, for a first attempt at a GAN it's ok. A lot can be improved, but don't let people's criticisms put you off. Take them in your stride and correct them. The next GAN you do will be even better as a result! Ask if you need help. Darth Xadún(Consult the Holocron) 20:55, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments

  • Nice to see a different user up here for a change. DjMack, please remember to leave a note on the GAN page after you've addressed any objections, so the objector knows to go and have a looksee. You're doing fine by the way, and if you need help with any of the others, just ask.—Tommy9281 (Peace is a lie) 16:16, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Thanks. Actually, I've been here for a few years, I think suppressed my Star Wars obsession for a long time, which recently exploded. Hence I'm back here again. ;) DjMack 00:02, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

The Great Herdship Heist

(+1)

Support

  1. --Eyrezer 09:49, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Object

Comments

  • You might want to check your tenses a little. Yrfeloran 03:56, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • It could do with a redlinks tag. Darth Xadún(Consult the Holocron) 21:04, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
    • In response to both, OOU articles are meant to be written in present tense, and there are no GAN red link rules. Toprawa and Ralltiir 16:23, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Misik

(+2)

Support

  1. Nominated. Greyman(Talk) 22:52, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  2. Simple. Informative. Oddly, I don't usually like minor film character articles, but this was brief enough not to sedate me. Darth Xadún(Consult the Holocron) 21:09, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Object

  1. Toprawa:
    • The lead quote should really be that from the movie, "Keep on that one, I'll take these two," unless you have a specific reason for using the alternate novel version.
      • I don't see any reason to use the movie quote, or any rule saying thus, but I've changed it in the article to satisfy this objection. Greyman(Talk) 00:16, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
    • There are a few bits throughout here that could be added to a P/T section, as repetitive and short as it will likely be.
    • I'm sure he appears in the RD and RD script, whether or not there's new info in there. Please add to the apps/source lists if so. I can check the script for you, if you don't have it. Toprawa and Ralltiir 21:57, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
      • I have no way of knowing, since I don't possess the said scripts. If you can check, like you offered, the help would be welcomed. Greyman(Talk) 00:16, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments

Mohs

(+2)

Support

  1. You should read this article for the 110-meter Lando Calrissian alone.Yrfeloran 21:04, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  2. Muuuuuurgh 02:36, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Object

Comments

Being Boba Fett

(+1)

Support

  1. Goodwood (Alliance Intelligence) 23:50, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Object

  1. Needs something on how it does/doesn't fit into continuity and what level of canon it is, etc. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 07:39, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments

Rancor

(+1)

Support

  1. Dark Ridley 02:57, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Object

  1. Not sourced, could probably be expanded a fair bit. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 07:38, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  2. Xadún's Dun Möch
    • GA tag required.
    • Expand the intro. There's much you could use and still be brief, like their use as mounts, gladiatorial combatants etc.
    • Biology and Appearence section is rather fragmented. join some of the sentences up to improve the flow.
    • Only the Witches of Dathomir used Rancors as mounts. The Human populice were Zsinj's pinal colony, who used speeders. Edit thise references please, particularly with regards to the "Human" population. Focus on the Clan's use, and don't generalise to Humans use.
    • I recommend a seperate section for the Subspecies of Rancor, outlining the point that despite Dathomir is cited as the planet of origin, how rancors appeared and evolved according to their environments across the galaxy is largely a mystery, and briefly describing each type and it's origins.
    • Remove the lists. They aren't necessary since a) you refer to all owners earlier in the "Wider Galaxy" section, b) it's probable they existed on other planets as well so a few examples will suffice, c) having a subspecies secion will encompass these anyway and d) all individual rancors should have been mentioned in the article body anyway.
    • Are the pictures of Dathomir and Ottethan neccessary? They seem to have little purpose, at least where they are presently placed.
    • Like Ackbar says, sourcing too, and it seems this entire article could be expanded.
    • That's the first lot. Cover them, and I'll be back. With a lot of graft, I don't doubt this could be fashioned into an FA, but it will take a lot of work from where it is now, Ridley. Although Rancor's aren't my specialty, if you want some help, drop me a line. Darth Xadún(Consult the Holocron) 20:58, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments

  1. This is my first suggestion, and from what I know so far the article seems very good, and unless some massive new source of Rancor related knowledge is created, I doubt there will be any major changes. Dark Ridley 02:57, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Saba Sebatyne

(+1)

Support

  1. Markrox91 10:50, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Object

  1. Needs Personality and traits section and one for Behind the scenes. Chack Jadson (Talk) 20:36, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments

  1. I've done alot of work on this article in the last few weeks, and I now believe it is of good quality; the introduction now gives a summary of the article, the actual article is much more comprehensive and is now much more adaquaetly referenced.--Markrox91 10:50, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  2. Have added Personality and traits section, as well as the Behind the scenes one.--Markrox91 02:12, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Kueller

(+1)

Support

  1. Atarumaster88 (Talk page) 15:00, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Object

Comments

  • Not up for FA yet because I need to research BTS and get a few more sources. Atarumaster88 (Talk page) 15:00, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Edly Fasalk

(+1)

Support

  1. Continuing the drive to GA/FA the entire DarkStryder Campaign! - Cavalier One(Squadron channel) 12:14, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Object

Comments

Unda Lagor

(+1)

Support

  1. Continuing the drive to GA/FA the entire DarkStryder Campaign! - Cavalier One(Squadron channel) 12:14, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  2. Ifindyourlackoffaithdisturbing (Go Dodgers! Woooo!) 02:58, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Object

Comments

Retrieved from "http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Wookieepedia:Good_article_nominations"