Wookieepedia:Comprehensive article nominations

 This page is for the nomination of "comprehensive articles." For a list of "comprehensive articles," see Category:Wookieepedia comprehensive articles.


 * Comprehensive article nominations history
 * Comprehensive article nominations archiving checklist

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 "EduCorps," which is made up of the Inquisitorius, the AgriCorps, 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 A forum will be used to nominate articles that have fallen out-of-date. Members of the EduCorps 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, the article body, 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.
 * 14) &hellip;if the nominated article reaches 200 words or greater, the nominator must either provide an intro or draft an intro and provide a link to the revision in the nomination, showing that the intro does not elevate the article over 250 words. Exceptions can be made for articles wherein the majority of the text is in the "Behind the scenes" section.

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 CAnom at the top of the article you are nominating.
 * 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) Users may not vote on their own articles.
 * 7) 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 EduCorps votes will count towards the total, although anyone may choose to vote in that window. If two members of the EduCorps support a nomination in that window, and there are no outstanding objections, the article can be considered a "Comprehensive article" and be tagged with the template 48 hours after the initial nomination.  The talk page will also be tagged with the CA template. When the 48 hours are up, any user's votes will contribute towards the total. If one EduCorps member has voted for an article after a week, three regular votes will be required. After the 48 hour period, an article can still also pass with just two EduCorps votes.
 * 6) Once a nomination is successful, it will be placed on the Comprehensive article list. Instructions on how to archive nominations, successful or otherwise, can be found here. 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 EC 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 EduCorps members if objections are not addressed, or at least not answered, after a period of 1 week.

Please remember to archive your nomination beforehand if you plan on taking it to the Good Article Nominations page.

Unidentified Trandoshan criminal

 * Nominated by: Gal-icon.jpg  OLIOSTER  (talk) 14:44, August 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Probably the shortest article I've ever nominated.

(2 ECs/2 Users/4 Total)
Support
 * 1) &mdash; Cal Jedi Infinite Empire.svg (Personal Comm Channel) 15:52, August 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) 501st  dogma ( talk ) 18:36, August 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * 3) Hanzo Hasashi (talk) 19:15, August 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * 4)  Exiled Jedi  Oldrepublic crest.svg  (Greetings)  00:17, August 22, 2012 (UTC)

Object Comments
 * 1) Do we know for certain that the Trandoshan was from Trandosha? He could have been born on Dantooine for all we know.  501st  dogma ( talk ) 16:55, August 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * No, this is an assumption. I shall excise it. Gal-icon.jpg  OLIOSTER  (talk) 18:17, August 21, 2012 (UTC)

Pius Dea Spaceport

 * Nominated by: 501st  dogma ( talk ) 21:26, August 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Operation: Keep CAN page alive!

(1 ECs/1 Users/2 Total)
Support
 * 1) Hanzo Hasashi (talk) 00:11, August 22, 2012 (UTC)
 * 2)  Exiled Jedi  Oldrepublic crest.svg  (Greetings)  13:44, August 22, 2012 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) Exiled Jedi
 * 2) * I would at least mention the Pius Dea in the BTS, just to let the reader know that it exists. Just say something like: "The Pius Dea were a fanatic religious cult who controlled the Galactic Republic starting from 11,987 BBY to around 10,966 BBY, though not explicit connection was made between the cult and the spaceport in Star Wars: Darth Plageuis." That way the readers will know that the cult existed and there is still no speculation. -- Exiled Jedi  Oldrepublic crest.svg (Greetings)  00:16, August 22, 2012 (UTC)
 * 3) **Fixed. 501st  dogma ( talk ) 13:40, August 22, 2012 (UTC)

Comments
 * I notice that the Pius Dea crusades article doesn't even list the Plagueis book among its sources. Is it explicitly stated the Spaceport is named after those crusades? Hanzo Hasashi (talk) 22:39, August 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * No, but it can be reasonably assumed so. However, it you think not, I'll add "presumably named after blah blah blah...." 501st  dogma ( talk ) 22:49, August 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * Not an expert on the article in question, but I thought so too, just wanted to check. No "presumably" however, as that violates WP:MOS. Hanzo Hasashi (talk) 22:59, August 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * Would "most likely" work? 501st  dogma ( talk ) 23:10, August 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * Only if some source says something along the lines of "presumably," "most likely," etc. Hanzo Hasashi (talk) 23:46, August 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * No source does. Took the info out. 501st  dogma ( talk ) 23:59, August 21, 2012 (UTC)

Umbriss

 * Nominated by: Cade   Calrayn  StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit.svg 02:54, August 22, 2012 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Don't mess with Darth Angral, kiddies. He'll take your money and your apprentices. And your house, too!

(0 ECs/1 Users/1 Total)
Support
 * 1) I must not tell lies. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 03:27, August 22, 2012 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) Exiled Jedi
 * 2) *How about an article for Umbriss's estate?
 * 3) *In the body, could you make it clearer what timeframe the events happened in.-- Exiled Jedi  Oldrepublic crest.svg (Greetings)  13:48, August 22, 2012 (UTC)
 * 4) dogma
 * 5) *Context for Darth Angral. 501st  dogma ( talk ) 14:00, August 22, 2012 (UTC)

Comments

Razik

 * Nominated by: Cade   Calrayn  StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit.svg 03:41, August 22, 2012 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Some Sith names are downright stupid. Others, like Umbriss and Razik, are semi-cool.

(0 ECs/1 Users/1 Total)
Support
 * 1) As long as EJ's objections are dealt with. 501st  dogma ( talk ) 14:22, August 22, 2012 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) Exiled Jedi
 * 2) *Shouldn't it be around 3,642 BBY?
 * 3) **At the recommendation of several others on the GAN and FAN pages, I've just been going with in 3,642 BBY until we learn otherwise.
 * 4) *Double stripe?-- Exiled Jedi  Oldrepublic crest.svg (Greetings)  13:54, August 22, 2012 (UTC)
 * 5) **We have an article on a haircut? o_O Cade   Calrayn  StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit.svg 14:39, August 22, 2012 (UTC)

Comments

Marilite

 * Nominated by:  Exiled Jedi  Oldrepublic crest.svg (Greetings)  13:32, August 22, 2012 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Project Nights

(0 ECs/1 Users/1 Total)
Support
 * 1) I support! 501st  dogma ( talk ) 14:47, August 22, 2012 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) I object!
 * 2) * "Jax Pavan, a Jedi Knight turned investigator mentioned went to question Baron Vlaçan Umber..." What's this supposed to say?
 * 3) **Oops, fixed.-- Exiled Jedi  Oldrepublic crest.svg (Greetings)  14:28, August 22, 2012 (UTC)
 * 4) *Looks good otherwise. 501st  dogma ( talk ) 14:21, August 22, 2012 (UTC)

Comments