Wookieepedia:Featured article nominations/Morag


 * ''The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a featured article nomination that was successful. Please do not modify it.

Morag

 * Nominated by: -- Cull Tremayne 02:06, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: This page isn't crowded enough.

(5 Inqs/1 Users/6 Total)
Support
 * 1)  Chack Jadson  (Talk)  22:22, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 2) --Eyrezer 01:26, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 3) Hooray 1980s cartoon characters. Toprawa and Ralltiir 00:05, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * 4) Thefourdotelipsis 10:09, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * 5)  Graestan ( Talk ) 03:10, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * 6) The most dangerous known Endorian villain. Unforgettable. -- Delmar Nori 21:59, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) From the Well Worn Path:
 * 2) * Intro: I'd suggest changing "eventually" to once, as this is your first mention of this conflict, and there's no exact date.
 * 3) **Good point. Changed.
 * 4) * Sorry, but all your refs are too small. They are literally smaller than others (like I said on another of your articles). Hope that explains it well. Please ask if you need more explanation.
 * 5) **Not sure why I did that, but it's fixed now.
 * 6) * Did she explicitly use the dark side, as you link from dark arts to that article.
 * 7) **I don't think the words "dark side of the Force" are explicitly used, but the dark arts of other Ewok magical creatures has been referenced as such, so I don't know how much of a stretch it is to link to that article. Suggestions?
 * 8) ***I'll ask around on IRC, and try to get a consensus from some other Inqs.  Chack Jadson  (Talk) 12:20, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * 9) ****Cull, most people know little about the Ewok stuff (or don't know a ton, at least), so I'd have to say I suggest removing said link. If you disagree, could you give me some examples of Ewok articles that link to dark side in similar cases? If you do remove the link, you have my permission to strike this objection, and I'll then vote support when I get back on Tuesday. Thanks.  Chack Jadson  (Talk) 22:05, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
 * 10) *****Can't really think of a similar situation in our articles, but the magic of someone like Charal has been referenced as the Force. I guess I don't see any harm in removing the link, since there's no explicit connection between Morag's dark arts and the dark side of the Force. However, I think there's enough peripheral information to justify the connection. Cull Tremayne 22:26, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
 * 11) * "In a later plot, the forests of Endor had been subject to a long draught." I don't like the way this is worded. Please rephrase it.
 * 12) **Reworded.
 * 13) * "Special mention needs to be given to Morag's abilities with plants." This is bit too OOU.
 * 14) **Reworded. Cull Tremayne 21:04, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
 * 15) *  Chack Jadson  (Talk) 23:51, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * 16) From the Lawgiver:
 * 17) * Please explain how Logray came into Morag's captivity in the intro.
 * 18) **I mentioned that she enslaved him after her theft of the Sunstar. Did you want me to mention why Morag enslaved him? I'm a little hesitant to mention more about Logray's capture, just because it tends to draw focus more towards Logray and away from Morag.
 * 19) ***It really isn't that big of a segue, to be quite honest. Graestan ( Talk ) 22:27, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * 20) ****Took another stab at it, clarifying how Logray came into Morag's captivity. I wasn't trying to make a point, I was just wondering how much more detail needed to be added. Cull Tremayne 23:06, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * 21) * Does "shaman" need to be capitalized? Is it a recognized, official title? It seems to me that it is more of a simple descriptor. Indeed, later in this article it is not.
 * 22) **De-capitalized.
 * 23) * The intro seems to have some confusion as to whether the Sunstar is the whole artifact, or merely the "light" half which Logray stole. Please provide some clarity.
 * 24) **Should be cleared up now. It's a little confusing because they rename the "Sunstar-Shadowstone" as just the "Sunstar" in later episodes.
 * 25) * How is the fortress precarious? Do you mean that it is precariously located?
 * 26) **Err...yes. :P
 * 27) * "incredibly powerful &hellip; incredible power" so close together is a bit awkward.
 * 28) **Reworded the second one to "impressive capabilities". Does that read better?
 * 29) * I don't believe "bordok" should be capitalized; pretty much all non-sentient creatures aren't, and the article for them doesn't do this.
 * 30) **De-capitalized.
 * 31) * Same with "rakazzak beasts."
 * 32) **De-capitalized.
 * 33) * And "mantigrue."
 * 34) **De-capitalized.
 * 35) * "Lair" is overused as a descriptor for the mountain fortress.
 * 36) **Removed and reworded several "lair"s. If more rewording needs to be done, can you point it out?
 * 37) * Please change this line: "&hellip;the final battle was at hand."
 * 38) **Bah! :P Reworded.
 * 39) * A note that the Willow universe novel is not part of Star Wars canon would be appropriate in the BtS.
 * 40) **Done.
 * 41) * Graestan ( Talk ) 16:07, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 42) Toprawa:
 * 43) * The quote in the first Bio section would benefit from some context for what "it" is
 * 44) **I replaced "it" with a bracketed "bug bite cure". Hopefully that's what you meant. :P
 * 45) **On second thought, I just clarified what "it" was in the quote attribution. Whatever works best I suppose.
 * 46) * I'm inferring from this that the Sunstar's power is weakened after breaking in half? An explanation along these lines would be good for "Theft of the Sunstar"
 * 47) **Good catch. Added a small mention.
 * 48) * I would request you tweak some of the sentences in the second paragraph of the "Eye of the Kreegon" section. Many sentences begin the same way, with "As," and it becomes a bit repetitive
 * 49) **Reduced the "As" beginnings to one per section. Hopefully that makes it less repetitive.
 * 50) * After reading through her entry in SWE, I notice some things that I don't see in this article. Namely, that she had great medicinal qualities (on par with Logray) and that she has a mandrill's face. I saw that you mentioned the mandrill bit in the BTS, but I would still consider this a canonical description that could be thrown into her P/T. Leaving a redlink to mandrill would even be ideal. Also, SWE describes her as having a "shriveled, stooped body." I think that could be worked in someplace too.
 * 51) **Mandrills are also mentioned in the Castaways aritcle. --Eyrezer 06:19, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * 52) **Hmmm, I guess I was treating the "mandrill" mention as an OOU description, but since CoE makes mention of it as well, I guess it is supposed to be some sort of IU creature. Redlink added, then killed. Added a couple sentences to the P&T indicating her stooped and shriveled appearance.
 * 53) * Finally, as we discussed, the BTS would benefit from an explanation of why the article treats her as having Force abilities/being a Dark Jedi. To go along with this, I removed the speculative bit in the P/A about her power being akin to whatever Force Planet power that was. That could be included in the BTS instead. Toprawa and Ralltiir 05:28, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * 54) **Done. That speculative bit can just stay removed. People can make their own connections there, since its not explicitly stated to be Plant Surge. Cull Tremayne 23:25, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * 55) Ewok children or teenagers:
 * 56) *I think we cannot call that group of four Ewoks (Wicket, Kneesaa, Teebo, Latara) as children. All of them was getting jobs in the village, and the four became apprentices during the second season of the cartoon. We must call them as teenagers. I think the real Ewok children was Malani, Nippet, Wiley, Winda and others with the same age. -- Delmar Nori 02:23, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * 57) **I get what you're saying, but they certainly aren't adults, and "teenager" implies that they are in their "teens", and we don't know enough to say that, since we don't know their exact birth dates. Besides, if that doesn't work for you, Wicket has been said to have been born around 8 BBY according to Leland Chee. If his friends are around the same age, that would make Wicket and friends about 11 or 12 during these adventures. That doesn't make them teenagers. I think calling them children, even at that age, is still appropriate, in my opinion. Cull Tremayne 18:29, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * 58) ***Could "youth" be a middle ground? --Eyrezer 16:53, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * 59) ****I understand. We can call that four Ewoks as children, at least during the TV series appearances and previous stories. But when someone call them as teeenagers, it's correct, in a point of view. I called them as teenagers in many articles on Wookieepedia, considering their jobs. -- Delmar Nori 21:51, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * 60) *****I think calling them children is fine. For one thing, teenagers just sounds too colloquial.  Chack Jadson  (Talk) 21:54, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Comments