Wookieepedia:Featured article nominations/Kadann (impostor)


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

Kadann (impostor)

 * Nominated by: -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 16:27, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Finally finished it. Originally meant to be a double nom with the real Kadann so they could go one after the other on the queue but I've never been bothered finishing him to date.

(5 Inqs/0 Users/5 Total/INQCON 5)
Support
 * 1) --  —Harrar  ( Cut the comm chatter ) 17:34, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 2)  Grunny  ( Talk ) 22:35, September 5, 2009 (UTC)
 * 3)  CC7567  (talk) 06:58, September 9, 2009 (UTC)
 * 4) &mdash;  Fiolli  {Alpheridies University ComNet} 20:56, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
 * 5) Grand Moff Tranner Imperial Department of Military Research.svg (Comlink) 14:58, September 13, 2009 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) Harrar
 * 2) * "Eventually, however, the false Kadann and his peers grew discontent with following others, and decided to strike out as their own faction. Kadann established a headquarters for his faction..." &mdash; can you re-word the second "faction" so it's not repetitive.
 * 3) **Done.
 * 4) ***Cotorie &mdash; niiiice ;)
 * 5) * "when Hissa refused, Jedgar blackmailed with him sensitive information compiled by Kadann's that would identify Hissa as an Imperial traitor, and the grand Moff eventually relented and accepted Kadann's rule." Either you're missing something after "Kadann's", like "Kadann's agents", or that "'s" shouldn't be there. I didn't know which!
 * 6) **Yep it's missing a word; added.
 * 7) * "The once Imperial Intelligence agents were later paid a visit by Zorba, who had survived the Moffs' attempts to feed him to Tatooine's sarlacc." Again, I'd correct this but am not sure what need's correcting.
 * 8) **Fixed.
 * 9) * P&T &mdash; "which was very much out of character for the real Kadann, who didn't like to put himself in the spotlight." I think "who didn't like" is a bit shaky, especially considering how well written the rest of the article is. I may be being pedantic but can you rephrase it?
 * 10) **Good spot; rephrased.
 * 11) *Excellent article; it's amazing how serious you can make it all sound! -- —Harrar  ( Cut the comm chatter ) 10:28, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 12) **Thank you very much, and thanks for the review. :-) -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 17:12, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 13) There's an unsourced infobox item, and I'm not sure of the source otherwise I would add it myself.  Grunny  ( Talk ) 07:12, September 4, 2009 (UTC)
 * 14) *Whoops, thought I'd already axed that. Seems to be fanon - not in any of the sources. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 23:23, September 4, 2009 (UTC)

Comments


 * Oh yeah -- I'll sort out pictures once I'm home tomorrow. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 13:20, 24 August 2009 (UTC)