Wookieepedia:Good article nominations

This page is for the nomination of Good articles. 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.

Nomination of Good articles
To nominate an article for Good article status, list it here. If it has more than five votes after a week, the article will be considered a "Good article" and tagged with the template. The talk page will also be tagged with the GA template.

Force lightning (+3)
Support
 * 1) User: jediknight19bby
 * 2) General Layton
 * 3) T8-13
 * 4)  Stake black   msg 18:07, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Domlith 12:40, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) --Windu223 18:46, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) Azra Namor 19:42, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) Cut down on the images.  .  .  .  .  22:58, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) *Which images do you suggest we remove? - User:General Layton
 * 3) *I think the images are fine.  Stake black   msg 18:07, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Superfluous Palpatine.  Sarendipity  Talk [[Image:Atrissig.jpg|20px]] 07:06, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Vary the images. Way too many from one source. And dare I say it? No mention of Stagorr's powers with Force lightning... :-P Cull Tremayne 11:15, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Too many of them seem to be from ROTJ, in the final duel scene. Hobbes15 ( Tiger Headquarters ) 05:28, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Comments

Verpine (+6)
Support Object
 * 1) Inquisitor Culator said it's GA material on IRC just now.&mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 02:18, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) --Eyrezer 04:44, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 3)  Gonk  ( Gonk! ) 13:22, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Domlith 21:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Yes. -Darthtyler
 * 6) Ajrand 22:08, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) Jedipilot94  (*Fo-Shizzle*)  00:24, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) I know this undermines my nomination, but the article's still missing a source for the lead quote, and there's one claim in the infobox ("no heart") I can't source. Please strike this out as soon as that's fixed without waiting for me to do it.  8) Never mind, the quote's sourced and the unsourced infobox tidbit was removed. &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 12:27, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) I think something needs to be added to the paragrah on antenna about how defective antenna resulted in Verpines criminals etc. I remember reading that somewhere. Also, I thought it was a coup attempt rather than a direct invasion by the Killiks. If so, I think that paragraph should be reworded. --Eyrezer 04:16, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) *I'm pretty sure the source for that was The Courtship of Princess Leia Atarumaster88  [[Image:Jedi_Order.jpg|20px]] ( Audience Chamber ) 02:55, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) ** So, could you put it in? There's also some info on Talk:Verpine which should be incorporated, assuming someone with access to the primary source can confirm and work it in. &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 02:02, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) ***Just added it. Sorry it took so long. --Eyrezer 04:44, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) **** Thanks! Now if someone could clear up the bit about Verpine queens from The Swarm War, we're set. &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 11:48, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Comments

Duel in the Senate (+1)
Support Object
 * 1) T8-13

Comments
 * I sourced two of the images, but I think some of the images have to go. There's just to many of them. --Jedimca0 (Do or Do Not, There is No Try) 07:28, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * We can lose "YodaDuel.jpg" - the one where they "lock blades" - ...that'll square it away a bit. --School of Thrawn 101 08:35, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Agreed, I also think that the ones from the comic at the end of the article don't ad much, perhaps one of them could go too? --Jedimca0 (Do or Do Not, There is No Try) 10:22, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I think that the flying yoda image can replace the one that talks of him fleeing with Organa. The flying yoda pic is really the only one that's necessary as it's demonstrating a difference  between the comic and the movie. --School of Thrawn 101 13:38, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree, the diference between the comic and the movie should be in there. The other one has to go. --Jedimca0 (Do or Do Not, There is No Try) 13:50, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I with you guys, too many pics. Humbone 16:34, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I removed those two pics from the article, and it already looks a lot better. Are there any other things that need to be improved before this article is ready for GA status? --Jedimca0 (Do or Do Not, There is No Try) 11:28, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
 * It certainly looks better, now. I'll give it a full run through later.  Well done, Jedimca. --School of Thrawn 101 11:34, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Entymal (+3)
Support
 * 1) --Eyrezer 07:09, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Cull Tremayne 08:54, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 3)  Gonk  ( Gonk! ) 13:59, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Object

Comments
 * Does Chitin really need to be linked? Cull Tremayne 08:54, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I'd link to the Wikipedia article, if there is one.  Gonk  ( Gonk! ) 13:59, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * No, it's just like skin for other animals. And it would be one of the literally thousands of pages that will start to appear if we continue to allow ones like breast. 16:28, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Darn. My subversive attempt to provide a rationale for an article on skin has been identified! I removed the link anyway. --Eyrezer 02:16, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Kaleb Darme (+3)
Support Object
 * 1) —Xwing328 (Talk) 17:01, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Greyman ( Paratus ) 03:41, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) --Eyrezer 06:10, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Comments
 * The previous Hyperspace image issue in these two has been fixed with an original from SWAJ6. —Xwing328 (Talk) 17:01, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Priam (+2)
Support Object
 * 1) Green Tentacle (Talk) 19:57, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) I always enjoyed this mission:P, well written too. Humbone 01:22, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Comments

Thermal detonator (+1)
Support Objections Comments
 * 1) Jedipilot94 20:17, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Botbillder 17:31, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Needs some serious cleanup. a source for the first picture would be a good start. Tutos Lumenarious 13:58, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) *I'll see if can source that picture. --Jedimca0 (Do or Do Not, There is No Try) 14:06, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * So far I've been unable to source the main image, for the relevant discussion see here, I also asked the person who uploaded it about the source but haven't received a reply yet. If the image can't be sourced we should consider replacing it. --Jedimca0 (Do or Do Not, There is No Try) 12:27, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Buzk (+3)
Support Objections
 * 1) --Eyrezer 08:36, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) --Master Fetty 18:05, 8 May 2007 (GMT)
 * 3) It reads well. Greyman ( Paratus ) 03:39, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Comments
 * Nicly cleaned up after my first attempt.

Lushros Dofine (+1)
Support
 * 1) --AdmiralD'orl001 06:58, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Objections

Comments

Tarfful (+1)
Support
 * 1) --User:OOM-10 10:32 6 May, 2007
 * 2) Skippy Farlstendoiro 16:10, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Objections
 * 1) Intro needs work, expansion —Xwing328 (Talk) 05:19, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Comments
 * I think the intro should be expanded some. Humbone 01:17, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Needs to be expanded to the point where the Character-stub is not needed anymore. Greyman ( Paratus ) 01:30, 14 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I'll get to work on it soon (maybe) to save you some timeOOM-10 16:29, 17 May 2007 (UTC)OOM-10

Cannok (+2)
Support Objections
 * 1) --Eyrezer 05:44, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Greyman ( Paratus ) 18:08, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Comments

Laigrek (+3)
Support Objections
 * 1) --Eyrezer 05:44, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Greyman ( Paratus ) 18:08, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Looks good. --School of Thrawn 101 06:01, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Comments

RZ-1 A-wing interceptor (+3)
Support
 * 1) Nominated Tutos Lumenarious 10:40, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Jedimca0 (Do or Do Not, There is No Try) 12:50, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) School of Thrawn 101 12:51, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Objections

Comments
 * He who nominates, vote for their nomination, they must, or deleted it will be. Pardon the Yoda talk, my ego got the best of me :) Hobbes15 ( Tiger Headquarters ) 05:24, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I informed the nominator about it, I suggest we give him a day to vote for his nomination. --Jedimca0 (Do or Do Not, There is No Try) 06:53, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Wait, why does the nominator have to vote for it? --School of Thrawn 101 06:56, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, I don't know, just assumed Hobbes15 was right. And I can remember a nomination being removed for this reason a while ago. --Jedimca0 (Do or Do Not, There is No Try) 06:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, ok...but is that just a traditional practice or is there a policy in place for that kind of consequence? --School of Thrawn 101 06:59, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I think it is just a way to identify the nominator, I'll see if I can find a policy about it. --Jedimca0 (Do or Do Not, There is No Try) 07:10, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up jedimcca0, I thought I wouldn't be allowed to vote! Tutos Lumenarious 10:40, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. --Jedimca0 (Do or Do Not, There is No Try) 10:48, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * In any case, back to the article...one of the images needs sourcing. Other than  that, it looks pretty darn good. --School of Thrawn 101 07:12, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm working on it. --Jedimca0 (Do or Do Not, There is No Try) 12:14, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * The image has been sourced, Thanks JMAS. --Jedimca0 (Do or Do Not, There is No Try) 12:50, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * And with that, I'm all for it. --School of Thrawn 101 12:51, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I just finished looking over this, and it feels to me like the pictures make it looked a little cramped. Would anyone object to the removal of the pic at the beginning of the section "Early production", since it is almost the exact same picture as the Infobox picture?  I think if we could space the pictures out some, then the article would  'visually' flow better.  I did enjoy the writing in this article, nicely done.  Greyman ( Paratus ) 02:16, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Good call, Greyman, I'm surprised we didn't catch that. I say nuke that pic. --School of Thrawn 101 03:38, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Good idea, I hid that image. The article looks good, but lack sourcing to meet attribute 2 above.  Only some of the specs are sourced now.  -Fnlayson 04:49, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Darth Nihilus (+4)
Support
 * 1) Nominated. Guilty as charged.  Darth Seth [[Image:Stormtrooper helmet.jpg|20px]]( Chewbacca lives! ) 18:18, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Cleaned up and sourced article. Greyman ( Paratus ) 14:11, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Jedimca0 (Do or Do Not, There is No Try) 14:14, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) School of Thrawn 101 14:17, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) Was Darth Nihilus in Evil Never Dies: The Sith Dynasties?? According to the article about it, he does not make an appearance.  Does anyone have a copy who could verify this?  Greyman ( Paratus ) 16:17, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) *Yes he is. It's just a throwaway line, but it was the source for him beeing a Dark Lord. Charlii 05:08, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Comments
 * One of the images has no Licensing information listed, other that the article looks good. --Jedimca0 (Do or Do Not, There is No Try) 18:34, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * All pictures are now sourced. Greyman ( Paratus ) 14:11, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Xandel Carivus (+3)
Support
 * 1) Nominated. Greyman ( Paratus ) 16:02, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Jedimca0 (Do or Do Not, There is No Try) 16:26, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) School of Thrawn 101 11:38, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Object

Comments
 * Expanded, cleaned up, and sourced. Greyman ( Paratus ) 16:02, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Emperor's Royal Guard (+3)
Support Object
 * 1) Nominated. (see comments) --School of Thrawn 101 16:50, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Jedimca0 (Do or Do Not, There is No Try) 16:57, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Tutos Lumenarious 22:43, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Comments
 * Images are now sourced, article has undergone a relatively minor formatting clean-up and redlinks have been eliminated. --School of Thrawn 101 16:50, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Articles that pass
Move article votes that receive a passing vote to Good articles archive.