Wookieepedia:Good article nominations/Hawk (clone)


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

Hawk (clone)

 * Nominated by:  CC7567  (talk) 08:16, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Looks like it's clone day for me.

(4 ACs/4 Users/8 Total)
Support
 * 1) Gethralkin 04:34, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) Nice work CC.  Jonjedigrandmaster  ( Jedi Beacon ) 00:18, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 3) &mdash;Master Jonathan(Jedi Council Chambers) 21:44, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 4)  JangFett  Talk 15:56, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 5)  Graestan ( Talk ) 23:06, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 6) Toprawa and Ralltiir 22:39, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 7)  Mauser  Comlink 07:58, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 8)  IFYLOFD  ( You will pay the price for your lack of vision! ) 22:41, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) Mauser:
 * 2) * I am unsure about how you deducted Hawk's death at Teth. The scene was cut from the movie, so that variation remains only a deleted scene. The canonical variation appears in the novel, which does not say that Hawk was the pilot of the gunship, and it previously mentioned him a lot. The episode guide doesn't say that Hawk was the pilot of the gunship in the novel, it only says that Hawk was supposed to be the pilot from the film in a scene that was cut. It even says that the removing of the scene "may have ended up saving Hawk's life". All that, especially the note from the Episode Guide led me to believe that the pilot of the shot gunship in the novel was a pilot other than Hawk. Please double-check.
 * 3) **It sounds like you're basing your statement off of the "likelihood" that Hawk would have been identified in the novel as the pilot of the destroyed gunship. Just because he was mentioned extensively in the past and wasn't identified as the pilot of the destroyed gunship later does not mean that he wasn't the pilot. There is absolutely no reason that the film's "variation" is not canonical; it corresponds completely to the novel's version, and I can't note any major differences except for those in dialogue. Furthermore, from the episode guide: "Clone pilot Hawk was originally in the Clone Wars movie, called by Anakin for an extraction from the B'omarr monastery on Teth. That sequence was cut from the movie -- which may have ended up saving Hawk's life, because as it originally played out, that rescue gunship would have been shot down by a vulture droid." This is clearly referring to the scene of the Vulture droid shooting down the gunship, and it even says he was "called for an extraction" from the monastery, which is what the novel supplied. You're right that the episode guide does not confirm Hawk as the pilot of the gunship in the novel, but it indirectly does because the deleted scene corresponds to the one in the novel, which is how I drew my conclusion.  CC7567  (talk) 20:21, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 4) ***It was the note "may have ended up saving Hawk's life" that confused me most. But I accept your explanation unless some new info comes up. Will give a full review later.  Mauser  Comlink 20:27, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 5) ****That did catch me too, but I'm assuming that the episode guide is just joking or misinformed; the lack of a reference to the novelization supports the latter.  CC7567  (talk) 20:31, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 6) *****That's still speculation though. Cut content is cut content and is non-canon. Even though the deleted scene may be mostly the same as the one that made the novelization, extrapolating details from the cut scene borders on OR. — Milo Fett [Comlink] 23:13, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 7) ******I understand your reasoning, but the two scenes are identical, and it's common sense to draw the conclusion if they're like this. This is speculation, yes, but it's still referencing based on fact.  CC7567  (talk) 00:58, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 8) *******Based on deleted fact. Unless there's an official source that confirms that the scene in the novelization and the deleted scene are both canon, we can't just assume. I think it's likely that he died as well, but there's just not enough canonical information to make an assumption without OR. Other deleted scenes have been re-integrated into canon in slightly different ways (e.g., Tosche Station scene) so this could just as easily be one of them. — Milo Fett [Comlink] 02:02, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 9) ********I'm still finding that there are enough similarities between the two scenes to draw the conclusion, and until different reasoning is provided, this is the way it's staying.  CC7567  (talk) 06:39, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 10) ********* I made changes before I noticed it was nominated, but I see that the issue I was trying to address is the being discussed here. I corrected this problem some time ago based on the following precedents: Shaak Ti and Dash Rendar. Both characters had death scenes that were reverted to keep their characters for future use in the Expanded Universe. Shaak Ti was killed by Grievous in a cutscene from Episode III, and Dash Rendar was killed in a collision during the explosion of the Falleen's Fist in the novelization. Gethralkin 22:56, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 11) **********Gethralkin, this has already been settled, and it's already been changed in the article. I don't see what the point of continuing the discussion is.  CC7567  (talk) 22:59, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 12) ***********Having a slow computer day today. The changes weren't showing up on my end. Gethralkin 23:04, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 13) IFYLOFD:
 * 14) * "Lieutenant Hawk later served in the Battle of Teth, ferrying Skywalker, his Padawan, Ahsoka Tano, Clone Captain CC-7567, and a squad of troops to the surface of Teth. " Reword, since it sounds like Skywalker's Padawan and Ahsoka and separate entities.
 * 15) **Addressed.
 * 16) *In the intro: Context for Rotta the Huttlet and for why Anakin and Ahsoka were looking for him in the first place.
 * 17) **The context is "Huttlet", and I don't see why more context would be relevant or necessary to the intro.  CC7567  (talk) 21:35, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 18) ***No, it is not. That's only stating Rotta's species. And context is relevant as to tell why they were there in the first place.  IFYLOFD  ( You will pay the price for your lack of vision! ) 21:41, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 19) ****Sorry that I forgot to put something here, but I fixed this a while back.  CC7567  (talk) 22:01, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 20) *Nice work.  IFYLOFD  ( You will pay the price for your lack of vision! ) 21:31, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 21) Mauser redux:
 * 22) * Born on Kamino. Clone of Jango. Trained to be a pilot. - add that to the bio.
 * 23) **Addressed.
 * 24) * "CC-7567 and a squad of troops": not just squad - the Torrent Company. Both in intro and the bio.
 * 25) **I'm only adding "from Torrent Company". I'm rather doubtful that the whole company could fit in one cramped gunship.
 * 26) ***You have a point there.
 * 27) * No links in quotes are allowed, right?
 * 28) **Except when they're not linked elsewhere, and this is the case here.
 * 29) * Maybe Armor and Appearance could be merged into P&T?
 * 30) **I know both are rather scanty, but I don't believe that's a good enough reason for a merge. Both supply an accurate amount of info.
 * 31) * The Pocketmodels card of Hawk for some strange reason shows him in regular Phase I clone trooper armor instead of the pilot gear. Good BTS material.
 * 32) **Addressed.
 * 33) * Now, I really hate to say this, but: Star Wars: The Clone Wars (junior novelization), Star Wars: The Clone Wars: Battle at Teth Star Wars: The Clone Wars Official Movie Storybook and The Clone Wars: Decide Your Destiny: Tethan Battle Adventure all have to be checked for any appearances or indirect mentions of Hawk. I know this will take a while and I'm sorry, but that's what a movie nom means - even if it's the TCW movie.
 * 34) **I'm quite sure I've checked all except the Storybook and Tethan Battle Adventure; I'll get after them as soon as I can get to Borders this week.  CC7567  (talk) 23:46, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 35) ***Unfortunately, it appears these two titles are currently only available in the UK, whereas I'm in the US. I'll get back to you on this as soon as I can find someone who has access to them.  CC7567  (talk) 16:58, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 36) ****Okay, I've been informed that Hawk appears only in the movie storybook. I'd prefer to verify this myself, but it's going to take me a few weeks to get those two books, as they have to ship from the UK. It's up to you to decide whether that is sufficient.  CC7567  (talk) 23:15, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 37) * Mauser  Comlink 11:52, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 38) Gethralkin:
 * 39) * The term "EVAC" in the quote from the Hidden Enemy episode is an acronym for EV(acuation) AC(tion) and, therefore, should be spelled in uppercase letters: Hawk, we need an EVAC on the South tower.
 * 40) **The episode guide states it's lowercase, and you're going to need to provide an accurate source to override that.
 * 41) ***Good enough for me...unless the subtitles for the episode shows something different, I'm good.
 * 42) * Word repetition: "...kept Skywalker updated with comprehensive updates ..." Can a better phrasing be found? How about: "... apprised with comprehensive updates"
 * 43) **Addressed.  CC7567  (talk) 23:52, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 44) * More repetition: "...was an excellent pilot ,...using him as an exemplary pilot ..." Perhaps: "...excellent pilot ,...using his exemplary skills ..."
 * 45) ** That incorrectly changes the meaning of the sentence, and I don't see a suitable substitute.  CC7567  (talk) 00:31, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 46) *** I was taking into consideration that they were talking about planning, which the skills of piloting would be used and not the actual piloting at the time of planning, as the sentence suggests. Gethralkin 01:10, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 47) ****The way it is now means that he was being "used as an example of comparison". I understand your want for word variation, but I don't feel changing the meaning of the sentence will be helpful.  CC7567  (talk) 01:29, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 48) ***** I didn't understand it the way you describe it here. Perhaps this would clarify the meaning: "Hawk was an excellent pilot, and both Skywalker and Rex noted his abilities, using him as an archtype during planning an escape from the Teth monastery." Alternatives can be, standard, precedent. Gethralkin 01:47, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 49) ******I'm just going to remove it already.
 * 50) *******Fine, but I liked where you were headed with the thought, and I think "archtype" would have been a good word to use, but that's just me.
 * 51) * There seem to be an excess of links that are repeated in several places, where only the first instance of the link would suffice.
 * 52) ** Once in the intro, once in the bio. That's how it is, and it was decided at the September 8, 2008 Mofference.
 * 53) *** I was speaking more in reference to the main body. For example, "The clone trooper nicknamed Hawk was born on the planet of Kamino to serve in the Grand Army of the Republic.[1] Trained as a clone pilot, he was also a lieutenant in the Republic army and was well-noted for his piloting abilities. In 22 BBY,[2] Hawk was dispatched with a contingent of clone troopers to liberate the planet of Christophsis from the Confederacy of Independent Systems." (Can we have a little less blue, please?)
 * 54) ****The redundant linking is gone.  CC7567  (talk) 03:50, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 55) * Much of the biography is in the introduction. His missions can be relegated to the biography to keep the article simple and less redundant.
 * 56) **Really, now? That's the precedent for all articles. Since there's so little information, all of it goes in the intro. I see no reason to change it.
 * 57) * Including information from different character viewpoints is shifting the focus of the article away from Hawk: For example: "Although they sustained heavy casualties, Skywalker and Tano were able to rescue Rotta and return the Huttlet to his father." It would be more concise and to the point to state that Hawk was involved in the mission to help recover Rotta and that the outcome was a success. Any hardships concerning the mission would be more relevant if posed from his point of view.
 * 58) **Yes, it's not entirely relevant, but there's no reason to leave the reader hanging.  CC7567  (talk) 01:59, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 59) *** The irrelevant side-notes would do better in the main body than in the intro, which should be more to the point. Leaving the missions he was on is okay, but details are main body material. Gethralkin 04:22, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 60) ****Fine, addressed.  CC7567  (talk) 04:24, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 61) * A callsign is not a nickname.
 * 62) **Addressed.  CC7567  (talk) 03:50, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Comments


 * Don't worry, I made sure to confirm that it was under 1,000 words after I nominated it for FAN. 9_9  CC7567  (talk) 08:16, 21 July 2009 (UTC)