Wikia

Wookieepedia

Wookieepedia:Good article nominations

Talk116
115,205pages on
this wiki

Redirected from WP:GAN

       
Good article
nominations
             
GoodIcon

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

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.
  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 a proper lead that gives a good summary of the topic if the length of the article supports it. This may not be appropriate on articles with limited content.
  8. …have no more than 1 redlink for articles less than 500 words, no more than 3 redlinks for articles 500 words or more, and no redlinks in the introduction, infobox, or any templates.
  9. …have comprehensive detail with all information covered from all sources and appearances.
  10. …be completely referenced for all available material and sources. See Wookieepedia:Sourcing for more information.
  11. …have all quotes and images sourced.
  12. …provide at least one quote on the article if available. A leading quote at the beginning of the article would be preferred, though not required if no quotes are available. Although quotes may be placed in the body of the article, a maximum of one quote is allowed at the beginning of each section.
  13. …ideally include a "Personality and traits" section on all character articles if information is available.
  14. …ideally include a "Powers and abilities" section for Force-sensitive characters and a "Skills and abilities" section for non–Force-sensitive characters, where said powers and/or abilities are stipulated.
  15. …include a "Behind the scenes" section for in-universe articles.
  16. …include a reasonable number of images of sufficient quality to illustrate the article, if said images are available.
  17. …counting the introduction and "Behind the scenes" material, be at least 250 words long (not including captions, quotes, or headers, etc). Alternatively, a good article cannot exceed 1000 words. Articles that do so should be nominated for Featured status.

How to nominate:

  1. First, find an article you find is worthy of good status. Nominated articles must meet all seventeen requirements stated above.
  2. Add {{GAnom}} at the top of the article you are nominating and save the page. NOTE: If the article you are nominating has been nominated for GA one or more times previously, you will need to specify a new subpage name as a parameter in the template (e.g. {{GAnom|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. Per AgriCorps consensus, nominators are restricted to four nominations on the GAN page at any one time. Once one nomination is removed from the page as either successful or unsuccessful, another can be added.

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. Once a nomination has a total of five votes, with at least three votes coming from AgriCorps or Inquisitorius members—two of which must be AgriCorps 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. Alternatively, if a nomination receives a total of five AgriCorps/Inquisitorius votes—three of which must be AgriCorps votes—with no outstanding objections before one week has passed, the nomination will be considered successful.
  5. The article is placed on the Good article list.


All nominations will be considered idle and are subject to removal by AgriCorps vote if objections are not addressed after a period of 2 weeks.


Good article nominations

To nominate an article for Good article status, place the {{GAnom}} template on the top of the article and then follow the instructions above. Nominated articles must meet all seventeen requirements stated above. If an article has a total of five votes, with at least three votes coming from AgriCorps or Inquisitorius members—two of which must be an AgriCorps vote—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.

View recent changes for this page and its subpages

Voorpee

  • Nominated by: ProfessorTofty (talk) 23:15, September 23, 2014 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: My first try at a good article nomination. I've checked everything, read it over and all the rules and I think it qualifies, but I guess we'll see.

(0 ACs/0 Users/0 Total)

Support

Object

Ecks Dee
  • Lacks sourcing throughout.
  • Linking really needs to be checked.
    • Still lacking throughout, particularly past the intro.
      • This still isn't fixed. 1358 (Talk) 22:29, October 8, 2014 (UTC)
  • I'll review it again once these glaring issues have been fixed. 1358 (Talk) 20:22, October 4, 2014 (UTC)
    • I have added additional references on Behind the scenes and added what links I could find. There is really only one reference and one appearance for the main content: Jedi Academy: Return of the Padawan. Are you just saying that I should link it in more places? I do seem to recall though reading that it doesn't need to be referenced in the intro. As for the linking, I think that's about all that can be done, unless you believe that certain items mentioned in the article are worthy of their own articles that haven't been created yet. ProfessorTofty (talk) 00:43, October 5, 2014 (UTC)
      • You need to source everything. Every paragraph, every infobox item, needs a reference. See other GAs for examples. 1358 (Talk) 08:46, October 5, 2014 (UTC)
  • Please use the same layout for pets as for individuals (see Gor for precedent).
  • References go after punctuation. 1358 (Talk) 14:59, October 7, 2014 (UTC)
    • Done and done. Doesn't really have much in the way of a personality, sort of a Star Wars tribble, but I did what I could. As for the linking, again, I really think that's about all that can be done, unless you think maybe something like Roan's journal or the care center would be article-worthy. ProfessorTofty (talk) 18:01, October 8, 2014 (UTC)
      • Still present in the infobox.
  • Please use bullet lists for infobox fields with multiple entries.
  • You don't need to source the name in the infobox.
  • To be honest, I think most of the big glaring issues in this article could be fixed by reading other Good Articles. They should give you a general idea of what a GAN should look like. 1358 (Talk) 22:29, October 8, 2014 (UTC)
    • Objections regarding punctuation and using bullets taken care of. Well, actually, the latter really took care of the former. As for your latter point, I'm looking at Ceasar right now, and it actually seems like you're holding me to a higher standard, as that article has no references or sourcing whatsoever. Anyway, I've answered all of your objections, save the bit about the linking. Again, unless you feel that more links should be added because other subjects are article-worthy, I don't see anything else to be linked. I can't just conjure them. ProfessorTofty (talk) 22:34, October 9, 2014 (UTC)
      • Just interjecting here, Ceasar is an anomaly with the lack of sourcing which will be fixed. All GANs need to be sourced. 501st dogma(talk) 22:49, October 9, 2014 (UTC)
      • Actually, Ceasar gets away with that for historical reasons. A year or two ago, articles with a single source didn't require referencing (although it was still recommended), but that was changed a while ago. Thanks to your observation, it'll probably be on the agenda for the next AgriCorps meeting, as it definitely needs to be fully referenced now. However, look at any other GA and you'll see that they're all (hopefully) completely referenced as they should be. As for linking, what I'm trying to say here is that the intro and the body should work independently. That isn't the case right now—if you disregard the intro, the biography starts off completely abruptly. You should make sure to rewrite the beginning of the intro to properly introduce who Voorpee actually is. As for the linking, since the intro and the body are independent from each other, every subject needs to be linked both in the intro and the body. 1358 (Talk) 22:50, October 9, 2014 (UTC)
        • Okay, sorry that I seized on Ceasar (heh), but I was looking for an example of another named pet that was a good article, and that was the one that came up at the top. Anyway, I think I'm really starting to get this now. I've made updates to both the intro and main body and I think, hope, that all problems should be squared away now. ProfessorTofty (talk) 18:54, October 12, 2014 (UTC)
  • Does Coruscant really count as homeworld in the infobox if he was only on loan?
  • Is there any sort of timeline given in the source material? If yes, specify. If no, how do we know it's Rise of the Empire era?
  • A lot of things are mentioned in your article with any sort of context. As a general rule, most things require at least some context. I'm just looking at the intro right now, and the first sentence requires context for Coruscant and Roan. Please go over the article and give context to things when they're first mentioned. 1358 (Talk) 20:30, October 16, 2014 (UTC)
    • Regarding the first point-- well, he spent nearly a year there, if not longer, so it really became a sort of home. The article for homeworld states that it could be a world that one migrated to. Still, if you feel it's stretching the point, I could just remove it. Regarding the second question-- yes. In the first book, it is stated that Yoda is 700 years old. So we've sort of been running with that for articles related to the series. In any case, the series does clearly depict a pre-Clone Wars Yoda. I can try to add a more specific citation, though, if you feel one is necessary. (Edit-- never mind, I just went ahead and added the direct reference.) Last point-- all right, that one I'll work on, should have done in a couple days at most. ProfessorTofty (talk) 22:31, October 16, 2014 (UTC)
      • I'd say that if he only was on loan there, it's a bit of a stretch to call it a homeworld. It would be another thing if he moved there permanently.
        As for the timeline reference, that's a start, but you definitely need to elaborate more. Something like "In source 1, Yoda is said to be 700 years old. source 2 states Yoda's birth year as X BBY, which means the events of source 1 take place around Y BBY". Don't use my exact wording, but you probably get the concept. 1358 (Talk) 19:17, October 20, 2014 (UTC)
        • Coruscant as homeworld removed per suggestion. Reference regarding Rise of the Empire Era improved to make it clear why that period as specified. I've also added the context requested, explaining more clearly what the Jedi academy at Coruscant was and who the various characters referenced such as Roan and Gaiana were. I hope these will be enough to finally push the article to where it needs to be to achieve status. ProfessorTofty (talk) 18:41, October 23, 2014 (UTC)
        • P.S.: I've also added two new images and quotes. ProfessorTofty (talk) 15:02, October 24, 2014 (UTC)
          • While you're getting there, this isn't exactly the context I'm looking for. Generally subjects in the intro need less context than the body. Remember that the body should work independently from the intro, which means you'll need to provide context in both instances. I suggest you move the context on Jedi academy to the body. What I'm looking for is really a word or two explaining subjects you introduce. For example, when you mention Coruscant, tell the reader it's a planet. It's not much, but it's something. Who is Yoda? Tell the reader. 1358 (Talk) 11:28, October 26, 2014 (UTC)
            • Okay. I've gone through the article and I've tried to expand and explain on anything that might require context. I think I've tried to provide a good balance of providing good information without going into too much detail. For example, I'm assuming that I don't need to explain to readers that "the Force" is a field of energy that binds and penetrates the Galaxy, given that, say, Force speed doesn't do so. If there's anything else that needs done, I think I need specifics at this point. Also, I was wondering, do you agree with the recent addition of "Infinities" to the Eras tag for the article? Because, if so, then it applies by extension to every other article in the series. I'd been leaving it out because it was not originally included on the entries for those books, nor is included on articles on subjects for things such as the LEGO Star Wars series. ProfessorTofty (talk) 01:59, November 2, 2014 (UTC)
              • Apologies for the delay. The reason why I added the Infinities tag in the eras was because the header template said so, but if it's not explicitly labeled Infinities, then go ahead and remove it.
  • You could probably expand the intro with a short mention of what the bullies did instead of leaving it at a cliffhanger.
  • No timeline established in the body. 1358 (Talk) 19:51, November 19, 2014 (UTC)
    • No biggie about the delay. Thank you for taking the time to review the article again! As for the Infinities thing-- that bit about Infinities always appears on the non-canon template. Personally, I think it needs to be removed or clarified-- "Infinities" is a branding term and not a general purpose catch-all for "non-canon." See this here. Anyway, I went ahead and added a brief bit in the intro explaining the bullying and I've modified the body to more clearly establish a timeline. ProfessorTofty (talk) 00:06, November 20, 2014 (UTC)
      • Not quite what I meant in regards to timeline; please see my next objections. 1358 (Talk) 20:16, November 30, 2014 (UTC)
  • The lead quote: The proper plural form of Padawan is Padawans, not Padawan. If this is quoted correctly, please add a [sic] tag in the quote.
  • The biography starts off a bit rushed. You could probably end the sentence after his homeworld and then talk about his loan in the next one. Also see the following objection, which has some relevance for this one.
    • Check your sourcing here. You're currently sourcing the entire first sentence of the bio to the age reference, which is obviously incorrect. Please rectify. Also note that you have two consecutive [1] references in the bio; I believe one of them should simply be removed. As an aside, I believe Naboo's location in the Mid Rim needs a separate source as well. 1358 (Talk) 12:55, December 5, 2014 (UTC)
      • Okay, those objections are handled. Better referencing for the first sentence, source for Mid Rim and no more two consecutive of the same reference. ProfessorTofty (talk) 15:48, December 5, 2014 (UTC)
  • When I said timeline, I was actually talking about the dates that we went over earlier. As it is, the Rise of the Empire era and the nice date reference is exclusive to the infobox. This needs to be in the bio as well. My suggestions is something like "Around 200 years before the Battle of Yavin[date reference goes here], Voorpee was temporarily in loan..."
  • I've added a bunch of {{Fact}} tags to the bio.
    • Number 1: Is it stated in the source that the temple was the Jedi HQ? If not, please find a source.
    • Number 2: Find an appropriate source for rank of Jedi Master. As a side note, I tweaked his context a bit.
    • Number 3: "Powerful" sounds like POV, Unless it's explicitly stated in the source that they were training under powerful Jedi, you should probably remove the word altogether.
      • I feel like the context you added is a bit unnecessary and unrelated to Voorpee. See if something like "and various other Jedi, including Mr. Garfield and Principal Mar. As a side note, should Principal Mar's article be at simply Mar? 1358 (Talk) 12:55, December 5, 2014 (UTC)
        • Regarding the first point, sure. That's done. As for the second, the character is invariably referred to as "Principal Mar." And Mar is currently a disambiguation. Still, if you really feel the article should be at "Mar," then I suppose that could be done and the current contents moved to "Mar (disambiguation)." Though, personally, I think it would be okay, similar to how we list Maul as "Darth Maul" and not simply "Maul." ProfessorTofty (talk) 15:01, December 5, 2014 (UTC)
  • You should probably move the "Arriving with the class at the beginning of the school year," to an earlier point as it's a bit confusing when you first talk about Gaiana caring about Voorpee and then suddenly mentioning Voorpee arriving.
  • More to come once these are fixed. You show good persistence in handling objections, keep it up. 1358 (Talk) 20:16, November 30, 2014 (UTC)
    • Oh, no problem. I definitely plan to keep going until we get this done and I think it'll really help me with going ahead with future good or featured articles. Anyway, I just answered one of your objections and have added "[sic]" to the quote. The rest will have to wait until I'm able to consult my copies of the books, probably sometime tomorrow. ProfessorTofty (talk) 19:09, December 2, 2014 (UTC)
      • Objections answered, I think. I've referenced Yoda being a Master; that comes straight from the Jedi Academy books. I also added context for them training under "powerful" Jedi, which I believe is fully supported by them training under Masters like Yoda and Mr. Garfield. Other objections handled. The edits did introduce one redlink, Principal Mar, which I believe is permissible under the GA rules, and heck, I'll just go ahead and create the article. ProfessorTofty (talk) 11:28, December 5, 2014 (UTC)

Comments

  • Also, just FYI, as this is your first nomination, I'm going to be more "harsh" in my review. Some of the objections are things I'd normally fix in my copy-edit, but it's probably for the better if you go through them and fix the issues so that you know what's expected from a GAN. In addition, it's a good idea to go through the edit history of the article and look at the copy-edits other people do. The changes will give you a good idea of what's expected from a GAN. 1358 (Talk) 11:28, October 26, 2014 (UTC)


V-Brose

  • Nominated by: Trip391 (talk) 03:02, October 21, 2014 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments:

(1 ACs/1 Users/2 Total)

Support

  1. <-Omicron(Leave a message at the BEEP!) 03:11, October 26, 2014 (UTC)
  2. ACvote Winterz (talk) 21:29, November 1, 2014 (UTC)

Object

Exiled Jedi
  • The introduction needs to be expanded.
    • Done
      • The introduction to an article should not be a single sentence.
        • As the body of the article has been expanded, I believe that you should expand the intro some more. You should at least add a sentence mentioning how the encounter was resolved.
          • Added
  • From the information in last three sentences of the biography section, I think you can put together a short personality and traits section. There is easily enough information for two or three sentences.
    • Added
  • "For lying, V-Brose gave them" I'd reword this slightly since they were not actually lying. V-Brose just thought they were.
    • Done
  • Are there any more quotes you can use for the biography section?
  • Does the novel have the full release date in it? If not, you can either shorten it to just the year or find a source that has the full release date.--Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 18:10, October 28, 2014 (UTC)
    • While Amazon says August 1, 2000, the Essential Reader's Companion only says August 2000, so I shortened it. Trip391 (talk) 01:31, October 29, 2014 (UTC)
  • "When Jedi apprentices Obi-Wan Kenobi and Siri Tachi were on a mission to find a Force-sensitive girl in 44 BBY" Should all of this be sourced to the Reader's Companion?
    • Fixed
  • "After V-Tan relented" Is this supposed to be V-Tarz?
    • Yea. Fixed
  • Currently you start all of the sections with V-Brose except Equipment. Could you try and vary the start of at least one more of the section of the body?
    • Reworded
  • "and would make sure other Benevolent Guides followed its methods as well" From the body, all I can see is that he made sure V-Tarz, who seems to be a Security Guide, followed its methods. It doesn't say anything about him and Benevolent Guides.
    • Should have been Security Guides. Fixed
  • The quote in the P&T mentions that V-Brose and V-Tarz had discussed similar matters before. Could you mention this in the biography?
    • Nothing more was said about what happened before, so to avoid speculation I've taken that part of the quote out
      • Uh, how is taking part of the quote avoiding speculation? I don't see any reason to remove it. While you shouldn't speculate about it, the fact remains that the two of them discussed something related to the discussion in the quote, and this needs to be mentioned somehow.--Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 05:55, November 6, 2014 (UTC)
        • The text says nothing further about who V-Brose discussed it with before, so the "we" could mean all the Security Guides had a problem with physical force and discussed it, V-Brose and a few other Security Guides noticed a problem and discussed it, or simply just V-Brose and V-Tarz themselves discussed the issue.
          • Okay then, I still think you should add that part of the quote back in. There is no reason to remove it. If there isn't anything to include in the body about the discussion, you should add a sentence to the BTS mentioning that a discussion was mentioned, but that the source did not make it clear who was involved.--Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 23:13, November 6, 2014 (UTC)
  • In my opinion, it would probably be best to have the main quote be one actually spoken by V-Brose. The exception would be if there was a quote that says something important/significant about V-Brose, but the current main quote doesn't do this either.--Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 23:07, November 5, 2014 (UTC)
    • Besides the quotes used, the only other things that were said near V-Brose were Obi-Wan and Siri answering V-Brose and V-Tarz; nothing more is said by/about V-Brose. I feel that the two quotes he said are better in the Bio and P&T sections because the Bio quote deals more with the situation at hand while the quote in the P&T shows V-Brose's belief and adherence to The Learning, although I guess the Bio and main quotes could be switched for the same effect. Trip391 (talk) 04:18, November 6, 2014 (UTC)
      • Yeah, I think switching the main quote and the bio quote would be best.--Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 05:55, November 6, 2014 (UTC)
  • I am rather confused by the first sentence in the biography. I think you are trying to out too much information into one sentence. You mention a group, but I can't figure out what you are referring to. Please rework this.
    • Reworded
  • "As a believer in The Learning established by O-Vieve and V-Tan, V-Brose made sure other Security Guides followed its methods as well." This makes it sound like all believers in The Learning would make sure others followed its methods. If the other guides are believers, then this seems incorrect.
    • Reworded
  • From what I can see in the biography, there is more that you can say about his personality in the P&T.--Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 18:25, November 22, 2014 (UTC)
  • Why is all of the BTS sourced to the Reader's Companion? I doubt all of that information is in there.
    • Fixed
  • Could you make it clearer where he has the encounter with Kenobi and Tachi in the bio?--Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 02:55, December 3, 2014 (UTC)
  • "as a Security Guide, a group that guarded" Unless the "Security Guide" is the name of the group he works with, you shouldn't follow up the singular "Security Guard" position with a clause that describes the group, as "Security Guide" is a singular subject, while a group is talking about multiple individuals.
    • Reworded
  • "that taught The Learning, a curriculum that instructed each Keganite to be dedicated to their planet as well as teaching the students misleading facts about other planets and species in an effort to keep Kegan isolated from the rest of the galaxy." Is there any way you could condense this description down somewhat? It kind of takes away from the flow. If you really feel like you need all of this information in the article, you can give the term a short definition here and then detail his belief system more fully in the P&T.--Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 06:09, December 15, 2014 (UTC)
    • Reworded and improved flow Trip391 (talk) 06:31, December 15, 2014 (UTC)
SE
  • Can you add some context in the body about what The Learning is?
    • Added?
  • Likewise with the Benevolent Guides.
    • Done
      • Can you clarify what they are a bit more?
        • Clarified
  • V-Brose also demands to know why Kenobi and Tachi were on the ground, this needs to be mentioned.
    • Reworded
      • Still no mention of him demanding it.
        • Done
  • V-Tarz also told V-Brose they were on the ground for resisting capture, not for talking back. The talking back is what Tarz told Kenobi previously. Supreme Emperor (talk) 21:51, November 9, 2014 (UTC)
    • Previous rewording helped with this too Trip391 (talk) 20:01, November 11, 2014 (UTC)
  • I think you should expand the intro a bit.
    • Done
      • Please expand it a bit more. The intro should essentially be a condensed version of the article.
  • Can you give some context on what the General Good is?
    • Done
  • Can you reword the sentence in which you say V-Brose encountered them while they were being punished? I'd like to see a mention of why they were punished here. Supreme Emperor (talk) 05:31, November 14, 2014 (UTC)
  • Does the novel specify what V-Brose was doing when he encountered them?
    • No
  • "He demanded to know why V-Tarz had thrown the Jedi to the ground and placed his boot on Kenobi's head," Can you reword this? It sounds like V-Brose placed his boot on Kenobi's head.
    • Reworded
      • It still sounds like it's V-Brose placed his boot on Kenobi's head.
        • Reworded
  • Can you give some context on what a Security Guide is?
    • Done.
  • "and was told it was because the pair had informed V-Tarz" Told by who?
    • Reworded
  • "After V-Tarz explained to V-Brose that the pair were resisting capture, he relented as instructed" Can you clarify which one of them relented? Supreme Emperor (talk) 06:08, November 15, 2014 (UTC)
  • Are O-Vieve and V-Tan relevant to V-Brose? If not, you should cut out the part about them and Benevolent Guides, and just explain that the Learning was a curriculum.
    • Cut
      • I personally don't thing you even need to mention them. Perhaps something like "that taught The Learning, a curriculum that existed on the planet Kegan which was meant to teach each Keganite to be dedicated to their planet, as well as teaching the students misleading facts about other planets and species in an effort to keep Kegan isolated from the rest of the galaxy."
    • Removed
  • Likewise with the part about the General Good, is it relevant to V-Brose in particular? Supreme Emperor (talk) 03:29, November 20, 2014 (UTC)
  • Can you reword the first sentence of the bio? Perhaps "V-Brose was a male Human who served as a Security Guide, a group which guarded the Learning Circle" Supreme Emperor (talk) 05:18, December 5, 2014 (UTC)
  • "V-Brose encountered the pair outside the Learning Circle building" Can you specify which pair was encountered? Also, perhaps you could flip the sentence around so it talks about them being on the ground before detailing how V-Brose encountered them. Supreme Emperor (talk) 04:54, December 9, 2014 (UTC)
Cav
  • The last part of the biography is very play by play - V-Brose did this, V-Tarz did that. Try condensing it down to flow better. - Sir Cavalier of OneFarStar(Squadron channel) 01:37, December 10, 2014 (UTC)
    • Reworded Trip391 (talk) 03:42, December 10, 2014 (UTC)

Comments

Too big to be a CAN, seen here.


BC-714 luxury transport

  • Nominated by: Ghulavar Ø 20:29, November 11, 2014 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: My first Wook-nomination. Hope it meets the requirements.

(0 ACs/0 Users/0 Total)

Support

Object

SE
  • Always good to see a new face on here. As this is your first nomination, I will object to things that I would normally fix in my copy edit, to give you an idea what to look for in the future.
  • "and gathered as much prestige as that most of the passengers despised less comfortable vessels." Can you reword this? As is, it doesn't make sense.
    • Can you rewrite that part of the sentence? Why did most of the passengers despise less comfortable vessels, and how does that relate to the prestige?
  • In the history section, can you specify why San Hill visited Geonosis?
    • Did he travel there because he personally joined the CIS, or because of the Banking Clan? Supreme Emperor (talk) 04:03, December 8, 2014 (UTC)
  • "headed by general Grievous' Subjugator-class-flagship Malevolence." In this instance, you should capitalize General because it directly precedes Grievous' name. If you were only referring to the rank, then it would be lower case.
  • "Later, a pair of these ships" Is there a way to specify how much later?
  • In the characteristics section- "The ship's availabilty was restricted in the market for vessels." How was it restricted? Supreme Emperor (talk) 05:17, November 18, 2014 (UTC)
    • I'm sorry that it took some time, but I'm a bit busy at the moment. I hope, my changes improved it as you requested. Thank you for the review. :) Ghulavar Ø 20:47, November 24, 2014 (UTC)
Jang
  • Infobox- I would avoid using the databank source entirely. If you can't, change Rise of the Empire and the CIS's referencing, specifically. Since the ship's affiliated with the CIS, per the TCWCG, then I start there as a better source. If you plan to remove the databank source, then please make sure you take a look at the entire article as a whole.
  • The first sentence in the intro needs tweaking. You say "designed by," "used by," and then a lot of "to's' to carry out information. Try to condense and remove any unneeded words.
  • "The luxurious interior of the starships often made the passengers despise less comfortable vessels." Really comes out of nowhere in the intro. Try to make this word/flow better in between the banking clan information.
  • Since you do mention that the Malevolence was a flagship in the body's image caption, I'd mention Grievous when you introduce the ship in the intro and in the caption. Now, you can say Grievous's flagship, the Malevolence in the intro without implying he led the convoy. Unless the source does say he did, I'd avoid mentioning that since it would be too extrapolative.
  • I'd mention the "fastest ship in the galaxy" in the intro, since it's rather important.
  • "It was able to reach an atmospheric speed of 1,800 km/h while its hyperdrive had a rating of one and a backup rated with six" Something is odd about this sentence. I was puzzled as I read "had a rating of one and a backup rated with six"
  • Avoid using "It" to start a sentence, consecutively. You already used "it" twice in the characteristics.
  • "However, there existed two variants of the ship." Huh?
  • Avoid using contractions wherever. Did not instead of didn't, as an example.
  • What do you mean by "standard configuration"? You mean on a normal flight?
  • Try to avoid using "typically" or any words that suggest from your point-of-view. Keep it strictly source-based. So here: "Because of its luxury status, it was typically unarmed." you can easily merge this with the next sentence and reduce its wording. So say "Although unarmed, blah." I think it'll also make for a better read, a better flow, ect.
  • History- "The transport was used as a luxury vessel for the Muun executives of the Banking Clan and gathered much prestige, so that most of the passengers despised less comfortable vessels" You can reduce some of the words here to make it read better. The "so that" clause reads awkwardly.
  • Fact tag in the history.
  • Per my objection above, mention Grievous earlier.
  • The bts needs some work. Since AOTC didn't mention the ship by name, it's best to say it was unnamed, and then mention its name origin later on.
  • Since you said "transports" in the bts, how many were there actually? I was confused during my attempts to correct "was" to "were". You'll see once I save my copy-edit. Please go back and check the movie.
  • Tip: I fixed these for you, but please do not leave any wording outside a pipelink. Ex: [[Star system|system]]s should be [[Star system|systems]]. Be alert next time. JangFett (Talk) 06:07, December 10, 2014 (UTC)
    • Thank you for the review, it was very helpful to understand the further processes of improving an article. I hope I did everything to your satisfaction? Ghulavar Ø 11:41, December 16, 2014 (UTC)
  • "the trade organization" What trade organization? JangFett (Talk) 00:17, December 17, 2014 (UTC)

Comments

Unidentified Herglic criminal

  • Nominated by: Ayrehead02 (talk) 15:26, November 22, 2014 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: Another sub nom for Anandra

(1 ACs/1 Users/2 Total)

Support

  1. ACvote IFYLOFD (Enter the Floydome) 00:54, December 5, 2014 (UTC)
  2. 501st dogma(talk) 19:24, December 18, 2014 (UTC)

Object

Floyd
  • "The criminal lifted the trooper into the area" Lifted the trooper into what area? IFYLOFD (Enter the Floydome) 04:29, December 3, 2014 (UTC)
    • That's meant to be air. Not really sure how I managed that.... Ayrehead02 (talk) 12:39, December 4, 2014 (UTC)
501st
  • The intro has her refusing the work before the trooper came, while the bio has her still discussing the deal when he comes. Please change it so both say the same thing.
  • "The Alderaanian then questioned why he had helped her, before the criminal swiftly left the scene." This sounds like she asked him why he saved her, and he left not answering, which is contrary to what the P&T says. 501st dogma(talk) 21:57, December 14, 2014 (UTC)

Comments

Unidentified Pau'an criminal

  • Nominated by: Ayrehead02 (talk) 16:40, November 22, 2014 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: The less heroic partner of the Herglic

(0 ACs/0 Users/0 Total)

Support

Object

Jang
  • I'd mention the partner in the intro. Right now, he's alone.
  • "but refused to take on Santigo as the boy was far to young" What does this have to do with shelter and work?
    • Take on changed to hire. Ayrehead02 (talk) 19:22, December 18, 2014 (UTC)
  • I would double check his biography, specifically his meeting with the two siblings because right now it's rather play-by-play and your intro is misleading in a few places: Per my first objection and Santigo's purpose. When you said "take on" you mean fight him? Or keep him? I don't understand, and my mind is going with the former. In the intro, it seems they're siblings without conflict. Please double check your work.
    • I think it's a bit less play by play now? Ayrehead02 (talk) 19:22, December 18, 2014 (UTC)
  • The "take on" issue is in the P&T as well, but now it seems like you're suggesting the criminal wants to "take on" Santigo as in keep in. I'd clarify this. Try to use a different phrase, one with less indefinite meanings. JangFett (Talk) 23:40, December 11, 2014 (UTC)
    • Take on changed to hire. Ayrehead02 (talk) 19:22, December 18, 2014 (UTC)

Comments

Escape from Darth Vader

  • Nominated by: ProfessorTofty (talk) 23:30, December 8, 2014 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: I have been working hard on this one and I think it's ready to go. I've got plot summary, plenty of background info, images, etc. The only thing I'm slightly unsure about is the source in the development. I know Wookieepedia isn't normally a source, but I think in this case it's acceptable because it's referencing the page history simply to prove that the Amazon link is a match; that it proves that the same link that existed then exists now. ProfessorTofty (talk) 23:30, December 8, 2014 (UTC)

(0 ACs/0 Users/0 Total)

Support

Object

Brandon

  • Right off the bat - the sections were in the wrong order. I fixed it, but please keep the Out of Universe Layout Guide for published narrative works in mind in the future.
  • Is there no information anywhere about the creation/development of this book? No author interviews or tweets or anything? The development section, as it currently stands, is all about the release. Obviously if that's all there is then that's fine.
  • Are there no reviews from significant sources that you can use for a reception section?
  • Also, Wookieepedia is definitely not a source in this context. For all we know, that information was wrong. That will need to either be sourced or removed.
  • More later, if I find anything. Brandon Rhea(talk) 23:58, December 8, 2014 (UTC)
    • Regarding point 1: I was actually using an existing good article for a book as a model for the order of the sections. It would seem that one then has them out of order. I'll have to go back and fix that one later, but thank you for fixing this one. Regarding point 2, given its being a somewhat minor children's book, I wouldn't be surprised if there aren't, but I'll research this one and report back here. Regarding point 3 - good idea. I'll add that. As for the last point, hmm. Okay. This is going to take some digging, but I'll try to find something with a date attached to it regarding the book going that far back. I'll try to take care of all of this tomorrow. In the meantime, any other objections or thoughts from anyone else are welcome. ProfessorTofty (talk) 01:31, December 9, 2014 (UTC)
      • Thanks. Remember, when it comes to things like what I mentioned in the first point, your first stop to figure out how it should be are Wookieepedia policies, not existing articles. They may have been written before policies were updated/created, issues may have been missed, etc. Existing status articles are a good guide for new nominations, and I’ve used then myself, but the policies trump existing status article in regards to how you should do it. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 01:51, December 9, 2014 (UTC)
        • Yeah, I'll definitely make sure to do that in the future. Okay, point 2: there is nothing. Nothing. Michael Siglain has a Twitter, but started in May of this year and says nothing on about this book. Neither does Roux on hers. I couldn't find anything else, anywhere, whatsoever. Point 3: Reception section added. Point 4: Ee. This really stings, but again, there's nothing. I couldn't grab anything off of Internet Archive and I couldn't find anything else anywhere that proves that that listing was there at that time. Information removed. ProfessorTofty (talk) 20:40, December 9, 2014 (UTC)

Comments

The Bridge

  • Nominated by: 501st dogma(talk) 13:59, December 17, 2014 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: As of now, there is no definite connection between this and the Rings of Coruscant. If anything comes up that shows that they are the same, I'll merge Rings into this.

(0 ACs/0 Users/0 Total)

Support

Object

Comments

Imthitill

  • Nominated by: 501st dogma(talk) 01:33, December 19, 2014 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: There isn't anymore information on how the fire destroyed the droids. I assume the droids were tossed into a firepit like in Vector Prime, but it's not stated outright

(0 ACs/0 Users/0 Total)

Support

Object

Comments

In other languages

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki