Wookieepedia:Good article nominations/Q-series droideka


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

(+1)
Support
 * 1) I've done a good amount of work on this article. A lot of referencing. -- Joe Butler (Obi Maul12)   talk 04:43, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 2) Inspected via AIM and all my quarrels have been taken care of. --Squishy Vic (discussion) (contributions) 05:13, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 3) Sure, well sourced, good expansion Enochf 17:56, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 4) Certified by the board of Ataru. Atarumaster88  [[Image:Jedi_Order.svg|20px]] ( Talk page ) 03:27, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 5) My objections have been satisfied. 03:28, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Oppose Comments
 * 1) Toprawa:
 * 2) * Kinda don't know where to start with this one, so I'll begin by saying let's not just vote on articles because we like the concept of the article itself.
 * 3) * That being said, this isn't even an article. It's a stub with sourcing.
 * 4) **Much better! Now we have an article on our hands. :) Toprawa and Ralltiir 06:32, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 5) * The intro needs to be expanded.
 * 6) **--It's been expanded. -- Joe Butler (Obi Maul12)   talk
 * 7) * The first paragraph of the history section isn't sourced.
 * 8) **--Its sourced now. -- Joe Butler (Obi Maul12)   talk
 * 9) * There really shouldn't be any information restrictive to the infobox.
 * 10) **--I believe all info in the infobox is included within the article. (excluding eras, of course)
 * 11) * There's no section describing the droid model.
 * 12) ** --Created. -- Joe Butler (Obi Maul12)   talk
 * 13) * There's no BTS.
 * 14) **--Now there is. -- Joe Butler (Obi Maul12)   talk
 * 15) * Your source list doesn't appropriately match the Notes and references. Toprawa and Ralltiir 05:27, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 16) **--I've fixed that. -- Joe Butler (Obi Maul12)   talk
 * 17) * The first section should be titled "Characteristics"
 * 18) **(Done.) -- Joe Butler (Obi Maul12)   talk
 * 19) * Now you don't have a "History" section
 * 20) **(Added.)-- Joe Butler (Obi Maul12)   talk
 * 21) * "Design flaws" should be a subsection of the new "Characteristics" section, not its own section
 * 22) **(Done.) -- Joe Butler (Obi Maul12)   talk
 * 23) * Introduction should not be sourced in this case. Intro should not have any info not also found in the article body.
 * 24) **(Fixed.)-- Joe Butler (Obi Maul12)   talk
 * 25) * I'm not sure why you sourced the non-canon appearances. Toprawa and Ralltiir 17:59, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 26) **(All of your quarrels listed have been fixed.) -- Joe Butler (Obi Maul12)   talk
 * 27) * One of your appearances or sources needs to indicate when the droid was first identified as the "Q-series" droideka.
 * 28) **I'm not sure I know what you mean. In the article, the "Q-series" title for the droideka is first mentioned in the intro, where I can't source it. Are you asking which source first came out with the Q-series and dubbed it so?-- Joe Butler (Obi Maul12)   talk 00:47, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 29) ***A tag is there. --  Joe Butler (Obi Maul12)   talk 11:04, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 30) **** You need a tag. Toprawa and Ralltiir 18:25, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 31) *****Done. -- Joe Butler (Obi Maul12)  (Chow)
 * 32) ****** Now you have two 1stID tags. They can't both be the first. Toprawa and Ralltiir 17:04, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * 33) *******Fixed. -- Joe Butler (Obi Maul12)  (Chow) 17:14, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * 34) * Also, please format your responses as they appear above so as to not interfere with other users' comments. Toprawa and Ralltiir 23:48, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 35) *Your era template and era infobox field do not match. Also, Obimaul, you seem to think that my objections alone are holding up this nomination. I will kindly remind you that all objections must be resolved before a nomination passes. You have several other users you need to be getting in contact with, not just myself. Toprawa and Ralltiir 02:09, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * 36) As Tope has said, this surely needs major expansion before GA ready. --Eyrezer 06:14, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 37) There are appearances in the source list, and, puzzlingly, things repeated in both lists. Thefourdotelipsis 06:41, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 38) *Is that bad? -- Joe Butler (Obi Maul12)   talk 06:47, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 39) **Quite. I touched it up for you, though. Also, for future reference, sourcebooks, such as RPG materials and books like the Essential Guides and Visual Dictionaries go in the ==Source== field, and novels, comics, books, and video games go in the ==Appearances== field. 15:42, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 40) From Jorrel Fraajic
 * 41) * Are you sure on some of those sources? If Ep. III was its first appearance, how did it appear in Ep. II? Also, I'm almost positive both Lego Star Wars entries aren't accurate; unless it states somewhere in the booklet or Prima guide that they are Q-series, they didn't "technically" make an appearance. I'm pretty sure this applies to many of your sources (FoC, being another one - if it does appear there, let me know).
 * 42) * A lot of this information seems to apply as a general overview of the Droideka, not specifically the Q-series. Correct me if I'm wrong.
 * 43) *Those are the two major ones I see. Sourcing-wise, it's very good. How accurate the sources are, however, could be a different matter. 15:42, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 44) **--The original model of the droideka was very similar to the Q-series droideka, that's why a lot of the info seems to be a general of overview of the droideka. Also, the Prima Official Guide for LEGO Star Wars: The Video Game and the guide for LEGO Star Wars: The Complete Saga both list the droideka model as Q-series. I forgot to source this, and will do it now. Thirdly, it was my mistake adding AotC in the appearances. Lastly, the Q-series droideka was the main droideka model manufactured after the Battle of Coruscant featured in RotS, the source being the novel I recently read, but I also forgot to source this; that's why most appearances are after the time of RotS. Thanks for notifying me. What is FoC, though? --  Joe Butler (Obi Maul12)   talk 16:11, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 45) ***Alright, that's good. Now that things are source, it makes more sense. Had not known about the Prima guides, so good to that as well. Also, FoC = Empire at War: Forces of Corruption. 16:21, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 46) ****I'll remove that. Is there anything else? (I'm currently creating the article LEGO Star Wars: The Complete Saga: Prima Official Game Guide so I can source the game.) -- Joe Butler (Obi Maul12)   talk 16:30, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 47) *****I see nothing else. And good, with both the creation and removal. ;). 03:28, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 48) From the desk of Atarumaster88
 * 49) * I didn't change this because I wasn't sure, but I'm used to seeing the Confederacy abbreviated as "CIS", not "C.I.S." If it's that way in the source, then keep it.
 * 50) * Need a bit more context on the Colicoids in the intro. Doesn't quite flow very well where the way it's currently structured.
 * 51) * If possible, detail what exactly was upgraded from W-series to Q-series.
 * 52) * From what I've played of Republic Commando, I don't recall them identifying the droidekas as Q-series specifically. Correct me if I'm wrong.
 * 53) **All information, such as the droideka dispenser bit, that's referenced from Republic Commando will need to be removed if the droids in question are not actually Q-series.
 * 54) * Present tense in the Design Flaws section is absolutely unacceptable.
 * 55) * Kindly check with other droid GAs to ensure that you're following precedent on organization/sectioning. I'm not sure, but I have a sneaky suspicion that it's not exactly in line.
 * 56) * "Additionally, there were limits when a droideka could fire at a target." Reword this sentence. I get what you're going for, but there has to be a better way to say it.
 * 57) * While this might not be a concern for GA, it'd be nice to have Galaxies information included in the article. (From Star Wars Galaxies: An Empire Divided)
 * 58) *Have a Super Terrific Friendly Un-frustrating day. Atarumaster88  [[Image:Jedi_Order.svg|20px]] ( Talk page ) 19:30, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 59) I hate to be Imp, but that second image is distorted as hell and just overall horrible. It needs to be reuploaded or ditched. Havac 02:33, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 60) History section needs expansion, and is missing Galaxies info. Also, nothing from the NEGTD? Also, and pardon me if I'm being thick here, why is the Episode I visual dictionary where the majority of stuff comes from when this subject first appeared in Episode III? Could also do with a {[1stID]} and a lead quote. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 07:32, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 61) *I will expand the history, and add Galaxies info. The reason that the majority of the references come from The Visual Dictionary is that the original droideka and the Q-series droideka are very similar in design, so many of the characteristics of the original droideka apply to the Q-series. -- Joe Butler (Obi Maul12)   talk 08:12, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 62) *The history has been expanded. As far as the Galaxies info, I haven't played the game myself, but upon searching through the article itself I could not find any information relating to the Q-series droideka. -- Joe Butler (Obi Maul12)   talk 08:44, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 63) **If you want to use the Episode I VD, then you'll need to provide a source stating that the Q-series had everything the other droideka had. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 17:22, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 64) ***That has been done; Revenge of the Sith: Incredible Cross-Sections, a book about vehicles and droids. -- Joe Butler (Obi Maul12)   talk 23:11, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 65) ****Could you post a quote? It's not that I think you made it up or anything, but I'd like to make sure it's not been misinterpreted or anything. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 14:27, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 66) Are they definitely Q-series in Survivor's Quest and Battlefront? Frankly, half the article looks like you've taken info about the regular droideka and used it for the Q-series's article. Unless models appearing are specifically identified as Q-series, then the info cannot be included. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 22:00, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 67) *I've added an additional quote. As for the rest of the article, well, yeah, some of the information is the same, because it has to be, since, like I said above, there are very few differences between the original droideka and the Q-series. And yes, in some of the levels, the type of droideka is Q-series, specifically because the only type of droideka that was produced after the Battle of Coruscant was Q-series, because of its upgrades. -- Joe Butler (Obi Maul12)   talk 20:16, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 68) **Sorry; what I meant by "quote" was the quote (to be listed here, not on the article) from ROTS:ICS which establishes that the Q-series had everything the original had. Also, unless a source either states outright or indicates (i.e. it's stated the droid was produced after Coruscant, or any special features unique to the droid are described) that the droideka in it is a Q-series, the info cannot be included in the article. Please try and format your responses as other have been. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 22:00, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 69) ***I can't find the quote from the book, but all appearances that do not outright state that the droideka is Q-series have been removed. What do you need me to do? Though I can't find the source, it's fairly obvious that the original and Q-series were almost exactly the same; a simple examination and comparison between the two shows this.-- Joe Butler (Obi Maul12)  (Chow) 19:04, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll note that while a Behind the scenes (BTS) is often preferred in articles, a BTS is not required per the current GAN rules. It's fine to ask if one can be created using any available information, but it's not a requirement, per se. Greyman  @wikiajanitor ( Talk ) 05:34, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * A stub worth sourcing? I've seen shorter articles than this. -- Joe Butler Obi Maul12   talk 05:50, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Do you remove your opposition, or what else needs to be done? -- Joe Butler Obi Maul12   talk 06:36, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Obimaul, you should never touch or edit another person's comments on a page without his or her permission. I originally posted my comment above because that's where I wanted it to be seen. Please don't move it into the "Comments" section like you did. Also, my objections will not be "removed." You will know when they are no longer in effect when they are stricken, as the first two currently are. And, only I can strike my own objections. A nominator should never do that himself. Toprawa and Ralltiir 06:50, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Alright, sorry. -- Joe Butler (Obi Maul12)   talk 12:47, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Quick question to the GA faithfull: Are there guidelines on how sources are "implied" or not? 15:42, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Comments