Wookieepedia:Good article nominations/Vhiin Thorla


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

Vhiin Thorla (+1)
Support Object
 * Greyman 03:53, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Cull Tremayne 03:53, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Humbone 20:43, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Comments
 * This could possibly be an FA with a longer intro. Still a little confused with a random funeral pyre placed in the article. Same with the Ryloth slavers one. I know they somewhat represent those events, but they are different and seem to only confuse the reader. Cull Tremayne 03:53, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The intro's been expanded as suggested. Cheers! Greyman 14:41, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I updated the pictures with better captions that made them flow better within the article. Greyman 19:52, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I really liked this article! Cull Tremayne has the right idea that this could be a FA. Humbone 20:43, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I couldn't find reference to Vhiin in either of the online Wizards articles linked to. Is he there? --Eyrezer 02:04, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The pictures kind of bother me. The whole "this isn't actually it but it looked kinda like this" thing strikes me as kind of fanonish. -- Darth Culator  (Talk)(Kills) 02:09, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * You think we should just get rid of those pics? I've heard both sides of the argument, but whatever the popular consensus is, that's cool.  Greyman 02:27, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, we really should get rid of those pics. Like I said, they only serve to confuse the reader. They don't represent the character, and are only mildly related. It doesn't help that the main pic was basically a fanon image initially. Also, let's maintain a little etiquette here, let me strike my own comments dang it! :-P Cull Tremayne 06:39, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, sorry about that! Haha, didn't realize the striking thing was frowned upon, it won't happen again.:D I'll delete those pics as suggested. Greyman 10:47, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for removing those pics. There are two sections in the article that read a little awkwardly. The first:
 * Even though the plan succeeded in toppling the pirate leaders, tragedy struck during their withdrawal when Thorla's Padawan was killed. A dying pirate caused an explosion that took his life. In only a relatively short manner of time, Master Thorla was able to do the Councils bidding by defeating the pirate incursion and erasing their threat from the Mid Rim.

The transition from, "his Padawan was killed" back to, "he had great success on the mission" seems a little forced and doesn't sync up well. It could use a little rewording. The second confusing section is:
 * Upon completion of the retelling of events, Thorla quietly waited for the other Masters to speak. After several anxious seconds, Master Qel-Bertuk leaned forward in his chair and communicated in a wise voice that the death of the Padawan was not Thorla's fault. Thorla continued as if he had not heard the headmaster. Thorla advised the Council that he believed the only reason his Padawan was dead was that he neglected to pay attention to the Unifying Force, and if he had, then he would have anticipated the pirates intent to cause the explosion. Thorla expressed to the Council that he would accept the punishment they gave him for the negligent death of his Padawan.

This is just a little confusing. He completed his telling of the events, but then he "continued" as though he had not heard them? I understand what is happening, but the whole event is just a little too much detail really. I think it would be fine if you just mentioned that Thorla refused to accept the council's compassion or that his grief allowed him to believe that he was being punished by the council instead of being stricken from blame. Cull Tremayne 19:29, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't mind seeing the articles actually being sources, seeing as I think it's compelte fanon. Twilight Storm was an RPGA run event where players made up their own characters at events...the only canon information about it comes from summaries in later Living Force articles. Friendship in the Order also doesn't mention Vhin at all, other than a reference to a Twi'lek Jedi, and so that can't really be taken as a source. Unless the character is in the Living Force Campaign Guide (please feel free to prove me wrong, as I've not really looked over it), then it's complete fanon. If he is in the Guide, please provide page numbers. &mdash;Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 15:07, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Striking vote until this is proven. Cull Tremayne 23:19, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * That's an interesting point. A lot of the info for the article was compiled from numerous articles in the CUSWE. Likewise a lot of it was also from various pages from a friend who took part in the Twi'light Storm RPGA event.  I apologize if this comes across as fanon, that was not my intent in the least.  I tried compiling information I had available at the time on a character that I hadn't heard of.  If you, Cull Tremayne, Jaymach Ral'Tir, or any other administrator feel that this is a mistaken case of fanon, I 100% agree with the article being taken off of the GA list as a consequence.  Likewise, my vote is being stricken. I apologize for the misunderstanding. Greyman 01:34, 25 February 2007 (UTC)