Wookieepedia:Comprehensive article nominations



THIS IS A TRIAL RUN.

'''Comprehensive articles are not in effect&mdash;this is merely a trial run to determine whether or not the system can actually work. As such, certain rules may change over the course of the trial run, as we sample different possibilities and variations. If you would like to see any tweaks or amendments or even any additions sampled during the trial run, please make a note of them on the talk page, and we will attempt to work them into the itinerary. This trial is scheduled to conclude on July 1, 2010, after which the entire process will be taken to the Consensus track for either approval or rejection. For further reading, please consult the original Senate Hall thread suggesting this initiative.'''

This page is for the nomination of "comprehensive articles". For a list of "comprehensive articles", see Category:Wookieepedia comprehensive articles. (Will not be created until trial period is over.)

What is a "comprehensive article?"

A "comprehensive article" is an article that contains all information regarding the topic. Often, "comprehensive articles" cannot reach Featured or Good Article status due to their limited content. This process is intended to recognize articles that contain all relevant canon information, yet are still under the 250 word limit required for a Good Article. The purpose of this is twofold&mdash;firstly, to help users distinguish what is a stub, and what is merely a short article with no further relevant material to be added, and, more importantly, to highlight for the reader when they are reading something that has been judged definitely "comprehensive"&mdash;that is, a guarantee to the reader that whatever they are reading contains the sum total of all available content.

Nominations and promotions of the Comprehensive article process are overseen by a collective of users known as the "Gray Cadre," which is made up of the Inquisitorius, the AgriCorps, the heads of the prominent WookieeProjects, and various other experienced users who are considered qualified to adequately judge the nominated material.

Lucasfilm Ltd. and its many licensees continue to expand the Star Wars universe. Since new information might become available, it may be necessary to revoke a "comprehensive article's" status. A forum will be used to nominate articles that have fallen out-of-date. (Note: This is not applicable during the trial period.) Members of the Gray Cadre will then post a warning template on that page, and a grace period of one week will be instituted in which the article can be improved. If there is a significant amount of new information, it is likely that once updated, the article will become eligible for Good article status, and thereby ineligible for Comprehensive article status.

READ THIS FIRST!

An article must&hellip;


 * 1) &hellip;be well-written and detailed.
 * 2) &hellip;be unbiased, non-point of view.
 * 3) &hellip;be sourced with all available sources and appearances.
 * 4) &hellip;follow the Manual of Style, Layout Guide, and all other policies on Wookieepedia. This is, of course, within reason. If a topic only has a very limited degree of content that cannot be divided up into the relevant article sections, it is not required that it follow the Layout Guide precisely. This is to be judged on a case-by-case basis.
 * 5) &hellip;following the review process, be stable, i.e., 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) &hellip;not be tagged with any sort of improvement tags (i.e. more sources, expand, etc).
 * 7) &hellip;have no redlinks.
 * 8) &hellip;have all relevant canon information presented.
 * 9) &hellip;be completely referenced for all available material and sources. See Sourcing for more information. While this is not required for an article possessing a singular source, it is encouraged, as it provides both uniformity and a good infrastructure should the topic be referenced in any future materials.
 * 10) &hellip;have all quotes and images sourced.
 * 11) &hellip;provide at least one relevant quote on the article if available.
 * 12) &hellip;include a "Behind the scenes" section for In-Universe articles.
 * 13) &hellip;counting the introduction and "Behind the scenes" material, must not exceed 250 words in length (not including captions, quotes, or headers, etc). Any articles exceeding the limit should be taken to the Good Article nominations page for consideration.

How to nominate:


 * 1) First, nominate an article you find is worthy of comprehensive status, putting it at the bottom of the list below. Nominated articles must meet all thirteen requirements stated above.
 * 2) Add at the top of the article you are nominating. (This will not be done during the trial period.)
 * 3) Be sure to place sign in the "Nominated by" line when the nomination is posted for voting.
 * 4) Others will object to the nomination if they disagree that the article is good enough; they will then supply reasons for doing so, and ways to improve the article in accordance with the established rules.
 * 5) Nominators and supporters will adjust the article until the objectors (with reasonable objections) are satisfied. Objectors may also make alterations&mdash;if there is any reason for contention on a given point, it should be settled in a civil manner in the nomination field itself.
 * 6) There is no limit to the amount of nominations a given user can submit at any given time.

How to vote:


 * 1) Before doing anything, be sure to read the article completely, keeping a sharp eye out for mistakes.
 * 2) Afterward, compare the article to the criteria listed above, and then either support or object the article's nomination.
 * 3) *If you object, please supply concrete reasons for doing so, and how it can be improved.
 * 4) As stated above, any objections will be looked upon by the nominator, supporters, and anyone willing to improve the article, and action will be taken to please the objectors. Do not strike other users' objections; it is up to the objector to review the changes and strike if they are satisfied.
 * 5) There are several ways in which an article can receive the required number of votes. Within a 48-hour period of nomination, only Gray Cadre votes will count towards the total, although anyone may choose to vote in that window. If two members of the Gray Cadre support a nomination in that window, and there are no outstanding objections, the article can be considered a "Comprehensive article" and by tagged with the template 48 hours after the initial nomination.  The talk page will also be tagged with the  template. (This will not be done during the trial period.) When the 48 hours are up, any user's votes will contribute towards the total. If no Gray Cadre members have voted for an article, a total of six votes from regular users will be required. If one Gray Cadre member has voted for an article, three regular votes will be required. After the 48 hour period, an article can still also pass with just two Gray Cadre votes.
 * 6) *Additionally, members of the Gray Cadre can bypass the nomination process. Not including the writer of the article, two Gray Cadre members can sign off on an article's talk page in unison, and those articles will also be instantaneously promoted. This action can only be initiated by someone on the approved Gray Cadre list, and is performed internally. Regular users must go through the nomination process. (This will not be done during the trial period.)
 * 7) Once a nomination is successful, it will be placed on the Comprehensive article list. During the trial period, however, all nominations will be archived on this subpage, and will be divided up into successful and unsuccessful nominations. If the process proves successful, these will retroactively be granted true Comprehensive article status, and the nominations will be more properly archived. Anyone can archive a nomination&mdash;just make sure it has the correct number of votes, has been nominated for at least a week (or 48 hours if there are two GC votes, and that there are absolutely no outstanding objections. If you are not sure how to do this, just ask, and someone will likely be more than willing to help you. Also, if you think you can slip one past us, think again&mdash;someone is always watching you.

All nominations will be considered idle and are subject to instantaneous removal by Gray Cadre members if objections are not addressed, or at least not answered, after a period of 2 weeks.

224th

 * Nominated by: NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 02:33, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: 222 words. I'd like it to go to GA if anyone has an idea on what I could add.

(2 GCs/2 Users/4 Total)
Support Object
 * 1) Imperialles 07:09, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) Thefourdotelipsis 09:04, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) -- TK-299  (Click Here) Imperial_Emblem.svg 12:59, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4)  JangFett  (Talk) 04:20, June 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Fett
 * 2) * Seeing a couple of sourcing issues. Make sure you source "around 22 BBY" and "Rise of the Empire" to the TCW novel.As for Echo and Hevy's clone numbers, they weren't mentioned in the episode, but rather introduced in the TCW Ultimate Battles visual guide. You can pipe link to show their nicknames only, however.
 * 3) **The numbers themselves don't have to be sourced, the person is the same and we use the numbers if we have them per precedent. As for the "Around 22 BBY" and such, sourced. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 05:27, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) ***I suggest that you pipe link their articles to their nicknames then. It would be more accurate, since you don't want to source them. There clone numbers weren't mentioned in the episode.
 * 5) ****There's no reason to source their numbers, that's their official name. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 15:14, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * 6) *****They weren't mentioned in the episode, however. You currently have them sourced to it. Please either pipelink to their nicknames, or properly source it.  JangFett  (Talk) 23:54, June 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * 7) ******Honestly, that's dumb. It's been done on the other articles though, so I fold. --Naru
 * 8) * In the intro, what do you mean "that included Mud-Jumpers"? The 224th? the Grand Army of the Republic? That line seems out of place, as it doesn't have the necessary context. Perhaps you can create a new sentence explaining who they are.
 * 9) **Fixed. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 05:27, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 10) *"The shout-out, dedicating the following song to the group, was heard by their fellow clone troopers" Whose "fellow" clone troopers?
 * 11) **Addressed. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 05:27, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 12) ***Now it sounds like Fives, Echo, Hevy, Cutup, and other clones listed were part of the 224th. Please fix this.
 * 13) ****Fixed. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 15:14, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * 14) * Do we know for sure that patrolling the listening post was the rookie troops first assignment?
 * 15) **I believe they said that in the episode but I removed it. That didn't have to be mentioned. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 05:27, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 16) * Other than that, the bts could use some shaping up. You can take a look at other TCW-related articles to see what's usually done.  JangFett  (Talk) 03:18, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 17) **How's this? NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 05:27, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 18) ***Better, but do you need to mention the sentence about the comic book mentioning the battle? In the comic itself, it doesn't mention anything about the 224th.  JangFett  (Talk) 03:00, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 19) ****I think so, since it is such a narrow, mostly unexplored event, it's noteworthy that the battle was metioned in another source. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 15:14, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * 20) L'Imperialles
 * 21) * Intro: "fighting to defend the Republic" Do we know that they were defending the planet, not attacking it? If not, best drop that line.
 * 22) **Removed. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 00:40, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 23) * BTS: "It was in that issue that the 44th was introduced to Star Wars continuity." How is the 44th relevant to this BTS?
 * 24) **Removed. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 00:40, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * --Imperialles 07:14, June 2, 2010 (UTC)

Comments
 * It seemed one of your Notes and references was broken, so I feekstit. :D  TK-299  (Click Here) Imperial_Emblem.svg 10:57, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 00:40, June 3, 2010 (UTC)

Unidentified Dark Jedi (Endar Spire)

 * Nominated by: SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 07:29, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments:

(1 GCs/4 Users/5 Total)
Support
 * 1) -- TK-299  (Click Here) Imperial_Emblem.svg 11:20, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) Imperialles 11:52, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) &mdash; Master Jonathan New Jedi Order.svg ( Jedi Council Chambers ) 00:10, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) -- 1358  (Talk) 04:51, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 5) ~ SavageBob 20:09, June 7, 2010 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) Is that image of him? If so, put it in the infobox. How do you know his opponent was a Jedi Master? --Imperialles 07:58, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) *Are you sure we're meant to put battle scenes into infoboxes? I could crop the image a bit, but it might look ugly due to pixelation. I've reffed the Jedi Master bit to the Prima guide. Thanks for the review :D SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 08:07, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) **Well, it is the only image we have of the guy, regardless of quality. --Imperialles 08:08, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) ***Done. SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 10:26, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 5) I'm taking Xd's question below and making it a full objection. I'm pretty certain the "Dark" in "Dark Jedi" is always capitalized, so please correct that unless you can point to a source where it is not. &mdash; Master Jonathan  New Jedi Order.svg ( Jedi Council Chambers ) 16:45, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 6) *Well, I took the name from the quote, in which dark is not capitalised. However, I've changed it and moved the article, since it is capped in the Prima Guide and in a GA. Thanks. SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 23:32, June 2, 2010 (UTC)

Comments
 * Can an admin delete the redirect here? Thanks. SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 07:29, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Imp took care of it. SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 07:54, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Why isn't "dark" capitalized? In this article, nommed for FA, it is capitalized. -- 1358  (Talk) 12:38, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * See my response to Jonathan above. Thanks, SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 23:32, June 2, 2010 (UTC)

Nigel III

 * Nominated by: Imperialles 07:49, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Followup to Nigel VI

(0 GCs/3 Users/3 Total)
Support
 * 1) SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 07:53, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) -- TK-299  (Click Here) Imperial_Emblem.svg 11:14, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3)  NAYAYEN : TALK 12:28, June 2, 2010 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) In the Bts, can't you just say that it isn't explicitly stated whether it is in the Nigel system rather than smack of speculation and say "could very well"?  NAYAYEN : TALK  11:23, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) *Better? --Imperialles 11:42, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) **Much ^_^  NAYAYEN : TALK 12:28, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) No inferred info from the Atlas? When became part of the greater galaxy, whom the surrounding territory was allied with at various points in history, etc.? Otherwise, looks solid. ~ SavageBob 20:07, June 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * 5) *We don't know the planet's exact placement, so there is no information to infer from maps. It's probably in the Nigel system, but that's never stated or even hinted at (beyond the name). Nigel VI's isolation makes me hesitant to assume Nigel III is in the same system. --Imperialles 20:17, June 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * 6) **I'd say it's not a stretch to say it is in the Nigel system, since that's what Wallace and Fry were trying to convey with the limited space they had in the Atlas. I mean, is there any reason to assume it's not the same system? But I can understand the extreme caution approach too. Consider this my objection stricken though. ~ SavageBob 20:47, June 7, 2010 (UTC)

Comments

Canary

 * Nominated by: ~ SavageBob 04:00, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Tweet.

(1 GCs/4 Users/4 Total)
Support
 * 1) Thefourdotelipsis 16:15, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) Imperialles 16:17, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 23:16, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) -- TK-299  (Click Here) Imperial_Emblem.svg 13:13, June 5, 2010 (UTC)

Object
 * Hmm, how do we know that they're birds? Thefourdotelipsis 04:28, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * I see your point, but I'd say it's a case of the duck test (canary test?). So, the same way we call someone who looks human but isn't explicitly called a Human a Human. In other words, we have no reason to believe Smith meant something other than tweety-bird canaries. ~ SavageBob 04:39, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't know that the duck test is really applicable, since we don't know what a Star Wars canary looks like, and it's probably more something that falls under authorial intent, which we can't always use. I know this sounds pedantic, but... I'd probably say yeah if they were said to look like Quorsavs, but they aren't, as far as I'm aware. Thefourdotelipsis 04:49, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * No, I understand your argument, and it's sensible. The thing is, though, I see this as falling into the "English" assumption we all make all the time. If we see a standard English word used in a source with no further context, we just assume that that word means the same thing in Star Wars as it does in the real world. We don't second-guess words like "blanket" or "window" or "heart attack"; we take them to mean what they mean in the real world (these are made-up examples, mind you, although I can dig up specific examples if folks want). In other words, barring any reason to think otherwise, canaries in Star Wars should probably just be taken to be canaries like ours. If this is beyond the scope of the CA page, though, I'll rescind the nomination, because SH or CT might be more appropriate. Tweet. ~ SavageBob 16:10, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * No no, that's sound enough logic for me. :) Thefourdotelipsis 16:15, June 3, 2010 (UTC)

Comments

Agorffi

 * Nominated by: --Eyrezer 10:45, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments:

(1 GCs/5 Users/6 Total)
Support
 * 1) Thefourdotelipsis 10:55, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) Imperialles 10:56, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) ~ SavageBob 16:15, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 02:45, June 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * 5) I researched this species for a RPG. I couldn't find more info than what Eyrezer says. --Skippy Farlstendoiro 12:00, June 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * 6) -- TK-299  (Click Here) Imperial_Emblem.svg 08:29, June 8, 2010 (UTC)

Object

Comments

Aldereenian

 * Nominated by: --Eyrezer 11:53, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: My third A species

(1 GCs/5 Users/6 Total)
Support
 * 1) Killiks? Thefourdotelipsis 13:44, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) Imperialles 14:33, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) ~ SavageBob 22:19, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) Jinzler 18:20, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * 5) SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 04:17, June 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * 6) -- TK-299  (Click Here) Imperial_Emblem.svg 08:31, June 8, 2010 (UTC)

Object

Comments
 * I know inferred Atlas info is less applicable for species than it is for planets, but is there nothing? ~ SavageBob 16:18, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well I prefer to only infer it if it actually appears on a map, which is obviously a different approach to that taken with Perlemaxian... --Eyrezer 21:46, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * Noted. I, of course, think it's pertinent to note that such-and-such a species's homeworld was in territory considered Fubar Space in the Imbricated Period or whatever, but it's cool without as well. ~ SavageBob 22:19, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure, and I am more comfortable doing this when I know they were part of the galaxy from X date. Here, we only know they are part of the galaxy during the NR period. --Eyrezer 23:57, June 8, 2010 (UTC)

Aplocaph

 * Nominated by: --Eyrezer 11:53, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: My fourth A species

(1 GCs/3 Users/4 Total)
Support
 * 1) Imperialles 14:37, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) ~ SavageBob 16:19, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) -- TK-299  (Click Here) Imperial_Emblem.svg 08:34, June 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 11:25, June 8, 2010 (UTC)

Object

Comments
 * Is the gleaming skin for the entire species? Or just for Nagag? SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 10:28, June 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * It might be just him, so I have removed it from the infobox. --Eyrezer 11:38, June 7, 2010 (UTC)

Vossk

 * Nominated by: Tm T 19:59, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Not much of my contribution but had this in mind already...

(0 GCs/0 Users/0 Total)
Support

Object
 * 1) It needs to be sourced, and if there's any info from Insider that needs to be added too. I'd say it could expanded a little bit overall too, in terms of context at least. And the BtS needs improvement. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 20:08, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) Can you really source the BtS? If not, then it must go. --Skippy Farlstendoiro 20:26, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) Could you add some quotes to the article? --Jinzler 14:01, June 6, 2010 (UTC)

Comments

Melik Galerha

 * Nominated by:  21:51, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: None.

(0 GCs/1 Users/1 Total)
Support
 * 1) Epic sideburns + moustache = win. SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 10:45, June 6, 2010 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) Just one small thing --- wasn't it the Republic who was sieging the Outer Rim? Menkooroo 04:37, June 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) *Fixed, thanks for the review!-- 05:30, June 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) The lightsaber image needs to be removed, it's technically in violation of fair use. --Imperialles 19:48, June 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) *Done, although I would like to know why it violates fair use.-- 01:07, June 8, 2010 (UTC)

Comments

Pollux Hax

 * Nominated by:  Lele Mj New_Jedi Order.svg ( Holoprojetor ) 14:03, June 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: None

(0 GCs/0 Users/0 Total)
Support

Object
 * 1) Jinzler
 * 2) *The article needs to be sourced, in accordance with Sourcing
 * 3) *You should add a quote, anything suitable from the Coruscant chapter of The Illustrated Star Wars Universe will do
 * 4) *Are you sure that it is appropriate to put him in the Near-Humans category? As far as I am aware, he species is completely unknown, he may be Human or he may not be Near-Human, so unless you know of a source that explicitly calls him a Near-Human, you should remove this
 * 5) *You could perhaps mention in the "Behind the scenes" section the author of The Illustrated Star Wars Universe, and the year in which it was published
 * 6) *TISWU says that Hax served as the Emperor's propaganda chief for several years, you should mention this in the article
 * 7) *You should add a "Personality and traits" section to the article and add a brief description of his appearance, per his picture in TISWU
 * 8) *You possible also mention in a P&T that Hollux was pro-Imperial, supported the Empire, etc
 * 9) *In his Coruscant article, Hax mentions that it is unknown what planet the ch'hala tree comes from. This sort of conflicts a bit with a number of sources in the Living Force campaign, where it is well-known that the ch'hala is from the planet Cularin. You may want to consider something about this to the "Behind the scenes" section
 * 10) *Generally, you need to do more work on the article. I hope this list isn't too daunting, so if you need any help with anything, feel free to ask me or any other users --Jinzler 17:45, June 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * 11) The article should also note who illustrated him. Is his portrait concept art or was it an original work by McQuarrie for TISWU? ~ SavageBob 20:41, June 6, 2010 (UTC)

Comments

Babb

 * Nominated by: --Eyrezer 11:42, June 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: A B species

(0 GCs/4 Users/4 Total)
Support
 * 1) --Skippy Farlstendoiro 12:03, June 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) Say g'night, Babbs. "G'night, Babbs." ~ SavageBob 19:42, June 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) Imperialles 19:49, June 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 11:25, June 8, 2010 (UTC)

Object

Comments

Barrckli

 * Nominated by: --Eyrezer 11:42, June 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: A B species

(0 GCs/0 Users/0 Total)
Support

Object
 * 1) Farl: Individual article for the individual? --Skippy Farlstendoiro 12:03, June 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) The OS doesn't specify whether Barrckli refers to a species or some other organization. Can you reframe it to make them an undefined social group? ~ SavageBob 19:44, June 7, 2010 (UTC)

Comments

Bomodon

 * Nominated by: --Eyrezer 11:42, June 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: A B species

(0 GCs/3 Users/3 Total)
Support
 * 1) ~ SavageBob 19:46, June 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) --Skippy Farlstendoiro 07:40, June 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 11:12, June 9, 2010 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) Farl: 2nd and 3rd paragraph of the main body are related to each other? I mean, Greedo saw the Bomodons in 0 BBY? I think it's ambiguous wording. --Skippy Farlstendoiro 12:03, June 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) *I've now connected the two sentences. --Eyrezer 00:03, June 9, 2010 (UTC)

Comments

Brogune

 * Nominated by: --Eyrezer 11:42, June 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: A B species

(0 GCs/3 Users/3 Total)
Support
 * 1) -- TK-299  (Click Here) Imperial_Emblem.svg 11:52, June 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) --Skippy Farlstendoiro 07:41, June 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 11:11, June 9, 2010 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) Context on "Bossban".  --Skippy Farlstendoiro 12:03, June 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) *Done. --Eyrezer 00:21, June 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) Another article on the concubine? ~ SavageBob 19:47, June 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) *Done. --Eyrezer 00:21, June 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie the truth  ) 11:30, June 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) *Is this meant to be a support vote? --Eyrezer 00:21, June 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) **Haha! Right you are, Eyre. SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 11:11, June 9, 2010 (UTC)

Comments

SE-14 blaster pistol

 * Nominated by: --KievanMereel 18:32, June 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: A commonly-used sidearm in many video games.

(0 GCs/0 Users/0 Total)
Support

Object Comments
 * 1) Consider reading the rules first. -- 1358  (Talk) 17:54, June 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) Per Rule 8 and 9, the article must be properly sourced, and all sources should be checked prior to nomination. The article fails to do both; please familiarize yourself with the rules above.  JangFett  (Talk) 17:57, June 8, 2010 (UTC)

SE-14r light repeating blaster

 * Nominated by: --KievanMereel 18:32, June 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: The Stormtrooper pistol.

(0 GCs/0 Users/0 Total)
Support

Object Comments
 * 1) Consider reading the rules first. -- 1358  (Talk) 17:54, June 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) Per Rule 8 and 9, the article must be properly sourced, and all sources should be checked prior to nomination. The article fails to do both; please familiarize yourself with the rules above.  JangFett  (Talk) 17:57, June 8, 2010 (UTC)

SE-14C blaster pistol

 * Nominated by: --KievanMereel 18:32, June 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Dr. Evazan's blaster.

(0 GCs/0 Users/0 Total)
Support

Object Comments
 * 1) Consider reading the rules first. -- 1358  (Talk) 17:55, June 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) Per Rule 8 and 9, the article must be properly sourced, and all sources should be checked prior to nomination. The article fails to do both; please familiarize yourself with the rules above.  JangFett  (Talk) 17:57, June 8, 2010 (UTC)

Unidentified deputy minister of trade

 * Nominated by: &mdash; Master Jonathan New Jedi Order.svg ( Jedi Council Chambers ) 01:11, June 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: 151 words. Inspired by today's Quote of the Day. This can be considered a guest nom for WP:LE if the CA system is ultimately approved.

(1 GCs/0 Users/1 Total)
Support
 * 1) I thought about GAing this a while back, but didn't think I could get up the word count. Good job on CAing her instead.  Jonjedigrandmaster  ( Talk ) 01:17, June 9, 2010 (UTC)

Object

Comments
 * For the record, I tried this with proper intro and bio sections, and it just didn't work IMO. &mdash; Master Jonathan New Jedi Order.svg ( Jedi Council Chambers ) 01:11, June 9, 2010 (UTC)