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 A forum will be used to nominate articles that have fallen out-of-date.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.

Still Life - Kite Plant

 * Nominated by:  OLIOSTER  (talk) 21:32, April 15, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: A painting players were never meant to have.

(1 ECs/3 Users/4 Total)
Support Object Comments
 * 1) &mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 22:51, April 15, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) This was a triumph. I'm making a note here: HUGE SUCCESS! NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 18:30, April 16, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) ~  Savage  BOB sig.png 18:18, April 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) good job GTQ ( Problems? ) 22:27, May 15, 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Axinal
 * 2) * As we write articles in past tense, should the first sentence say "rumored to have been created" rather than "rumored to be created"?
 * 3) **Fixed.  OLIOSTER  (talk) 22:27, April 15, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) * Just one more, regarding the phrase "non-player owned buildings": are these buildings owned by non-player characters, or simply buildings that are not owned by players? I suggest saying "non-player character owned" for the former, or "non-player-owned" for the latter. I'd just like to make this sentence a bit less ambiguous without removing your individual writing style. &mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 22:37, April 15, 2011 (UTC)
 * 5) **Clarified.  OLIOSTER  (talk) 22:48, April 15, 2011 (UTC)
 * 6) ***Cool, thank you.&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 22:51, April 15, 2011 (UTC)

Crab-stuffed creampuff

 * Nominated by: NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 00:54, April 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: What can I say? They amuse me.

(0 ECs/2 Users/2 Total)
Support
 * 1) I remember these things. Ugh, crabs.  Holocron Greatholocron.jpg (Complain) 16:01, April 26, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) &mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 18:02, May 4, 2011 (UTC)

Object
 * Someone got lazy and just added the note that "Life Day means birthday" (in not so many words) to the article Life Day, but in reality, we've got two different phenomena here: the Wookiee holiday, and the birthday analog. In short, I think the link to Life Day should be changed to Life Day (Mon Calamari) or somesuch so this will be cleared up. Other than that, it's all good! ~ Savage  BOB sig.png 05:32, May 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * Done. There's that buzzword again. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 02:39, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * Per the naming policy, the article should probably be named Crab-stuffed creampuff.&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 01:42, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * Done. Nice catch. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 02:39, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * Can the name Dac be sourced to The Doomsday Ship?
 * The specific name isn't what needs to be sourced. That it is from their homeworld is clear from the quote in the article. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 21:13, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, that it is from their homeworld can be sourced with The Doomsday Ship, but the fact that their homeworld is Dac still needs a source, maybe from Geonosis and the Outer Rim Worlds.&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 00:09, May 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm gonna plead no contest to this. The name itself is not what needs to be sourced, merely the information that it comes from the Mon Cal homeworld (which is called Dac). However, I don't feel like arguing over this. I'm busy this week. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 17:57, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm fairly certain that the name still needs to be sourced For example, I use "Bright Tree Village" in a lot of my Star Wars: Ewoks noms, but since the village is never named in the series, I'm told to source it to The Essential Guide to Characters or something. Either way, that's my last objection, so good work.&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 18:02, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * Just de-pluralize the name in the infobox, and I think that's all I have. Nice work!&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 11:55, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * Sofixit next time. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 21:13, May 2, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Felloux

 * Nominated by: NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 03:51, April 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Greetings, fellows

(1 ECs/3 Users/4 Total)
Support
 * 1) Nice.  Imperators II (Talk) 23:44, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) Another good article, Naru.&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 00:16, April 29, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) ~  Savage  BOB sig.png 17:04, May 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) Nice job, Naru! --Gmalek ( Hit Me Up ) 23:42, May 5, 2011 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) Imperators II
 * 2) * Ummm, why Category:Musicians?  Imperators II (Talk) 22:33, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) **No clue. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 23:40, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) Axinal
 * 5) * I don't own the New Essential Chronology, so I'm just asking to be sure: can all the details you mentioned of the battle&mdash;specifically, the date&mdash;be sourced to the NEC? If yes, obviously no change is needed.
 * 6) **For future reference, if it came from the NEC, it's dated. Every section has it's own BBY year or a specific span of years. A lot of times (as in this case) the date is given in parentheses. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 23:40, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * 7) ***Cool, thanks for letting me know that.
 * 8) * I might link sky to atmosphere, but that's just me.
 * 9) **Good thought. Pretty much like Realspace. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 23:40, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * 10) * I'm assuming we don't know the name of the poem?
 * 11) **Do not. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 23:40, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * 12) * Per Imperators, why the musicians category? If he was a musician as well as a poet, or if the poem was also a piece of music, that should be mentioned.
 * 13) **He wasn't a musician. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 23:40, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * 14) *Aside from that, nice work.&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 22:53, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * 15) Trayus
 * 16) *Per them, but also, is there an article for the poem itself? Darth Trayus ( Trayus Academy ) 22:58, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * 17) **Made a redlink. I'll fill it later. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 23:40, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * 18) ***Created. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 17:53, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * Can you add categories for gender and species? ~ Savage  BOB sig.png 05:33, May 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * D'oh. I hate it when I know I'm forgetting something. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 07:08, May 1, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Otavon XII's second moon

 * Nominated by: NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 05:37, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Arbitrary numbering is arbitrary.

(1 ECs/2 Users/3 Total)
Support
 * 1) Nice.&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 00:22, April 29, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2)  Imperators II (Talk) 21:20, April 30, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) Over the moon. ~  Savage  BOB sig.png 05:38, May 1, 2011 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) I find the first sentence a bit lengthy. Do you think you could split it into two just for ease of reading, or maybe replace a couple of commas with emdashes?&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 21:44, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) *I subbed in Jon's version. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 00:00, April 29, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

88th Mechanized Assault Group

 * Nominated by: NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 02:45, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Why aren't these just one group?

(0 ECs/4 Users/4 Total)
Support
 * 1) Cool&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 17:19, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2)  Imperators II (Talk) 15:39, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) I never would have thought of making an article on something from the pocketmodels. Good job.--Exiledjedi 18:58, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) Before CAs, I had the onerous task of trying to make sure these battle groups were added in and/or were accurate. Thanks for helping with these, excellent work!  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 01:22, May 9, 2011 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) Axinal
 * 2) * Should 4 BBY be 4 ABY?&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 15:50, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) **Remedied. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 17:11, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) * Also, the article needs a BTS.&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 15:51, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 5) **Added. (There's that feeling again) NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 17:11, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 6) Gethralkin
 * 7) * Needs to have the same standards applied as I mentioned concerning the 221st nomination. That is, the characteristics need a separate category from the article summary, the bts needs to be reworded to avoid stating that a specific TIE Crawler is being represented in the game. No blaster upgrades, though, like the 221st had.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 08:07, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * 8) **CAs do not necessarily need to be subsectioned. Made the change to the BTS you asked for. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 17:40, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * 9) ***Good enough for me.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 01:22, May 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * 10) **** One last thing (sorry). Blue is such a relative description of color. One of the battle groups actually has dark blue stripes that are strikingly different from the shade of blue on the century tanks of the 88th. Can you specify that these are a light blue? The same would go for the 221st.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave  04:31, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * 11) *****Also, the 88th used stock century tanks, and the other assault groups used century tanks that were modified in some way depending on the group.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 17:19, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * 12) ******What the explicit source for them being stock crawlers? The card doesn't say that. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 21:25, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * 13) *******The 88th TIE Crawler miniature is without added equipment icons, and the stats are basic. In order to keep games balanced between two or more players, WizKids used a formula to derive "stock" values for certain miniatures. Then, they would modify one or two of those values&mdash;in addition to adding extra equipment&mdash;when creating other miniatures of the same type. This was to create a variety of common and uncommon units that a collecting player could use in a game without being required to possess powerful rare miniatures. In this instance, 88th TIE Crawler units are the standard and the 71st Elite, 221st, and the 98th Elite are modified and upgraded in different ways. If you type "Mechanized" at the bottom of the search box in the official gallery of the units, you will see what I mean. Having the 88th as a baseline could be something that could also be mentioned in the Bts, now that I think of it.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 15:15, May 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * 14) * Just a heads-up, but unit redirects to an article about a Sith battle group.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 02:51, May 13, 2011 (UTC)

Comments
 * 1) *I have uploaded an image of a TIE Crawler from the 88th and posted it on the Talk page (same with the 221st).  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 01:43, May 13, 2011 (UTC)

221st Mechanized Assault Group

 * Nominated by: NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 02:45, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Because canon, that's why.

(0 ECs/4 Users/4 Total)
Support
 * 1) &mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 17:19, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2)  Imperators II (Talk) 15:40, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) Exiledjedi 19:00, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) Nicely done.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 01:48, May 9, 2011 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) Axinal
 * 2) * As with 88th, needs a BTS, and should 4 BBY be 4 ABY?
 * 3) **It should. I work in one era too much. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 17:09, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) * Also, as the infobox and intro identify the group as part of the Imperial Remnant, the history section should also include that information.&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 15:56, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 5) **Please ignore that there was a History section. Not my doing. The original version had that info. I don't see any blueish hue on the figure and there is no baseline TIE Crawler to compare its defensive capabilities with. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 17:09, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 6) ***After taking another look at its stats, I think its fair enough to say they were augmented for defense because they have no attack modifier and a higher defense than the 88th's tanks. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 17:28, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 7) ****Works for me.&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 17:31, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 8) Gethralkin
 * 9) * The blaster modifications are canon, as they are part of the game piece description symbols. The countermeasures are a canon game effect of the stats. It is basically a forced miss of an attack. In ships, this would be maneuverability, whereas in slower-moving ground assault units this would be countermeasures. It is not a shield result, because shields are calculated differently in the game. The mention of the coloring of the vehicles is according to the art on the actual game pieces. 221st TIE crawlers are more a lighter blue than the others.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 13:34, May 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * 10) ** The 221st and the 88th are both blue colored. The 71st and 98th are both dark gray colored.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 13:47, May 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * 11) *** "Defense-augmented" is a good way to avoid saying for sure what prevents accurate attack. Might be a better way to say it, but I can't think of one right now.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 21:16, May 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * 12) ****Added "blue." Didn't know there were other tanks in the set to reference. If you're talking about the match symbol, that's game mechanics. A corporeal unit doesn't become stronger just because a certain other unit enters the fray. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 22:52, May 7, 2011 (UTC)
 * 13) ***** Icons are not just game mechanics. The game does not make units stronger when certain other units "enter the fray." Icons do not "activate" when they match icons on other units. Units without icons use standardized equipment. Units with icons are equipped with advanced capabilities. This is where the cards come in. Cards that match icons use the extra equipment that is shown on the base of the unit. The Star of the Tion canonically has a turbolaser installed due to the icon the SWPM unit was equipped with. That is why 221st TIE Crawlers canonically have blaster upgrades, making them more powerful than other vehicles that have no blaster icon. Just so you know my credentials, I was a promotional envoy for the former Star Wars brand line for Topps/WizKids and even helped to establish the copyright to the PocketModels brand.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 06:04, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * 14) ****** Still don't like the wording of the description&mdash;makes it look like 221st has tanks augmented with blue defenses. Without hyphenation would be better, ergo "...blue century tanks with augmented defenses..." And why is this not in a Characteristics category (like for instance, 327th Star Corps)?  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 07:50, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * 15) ******* One more thing. In the Bts, you state "one of the tanks." This actually is not the case. All units are representative in the SWPM unless identified with a character's name. That means that if a unit is printed showing a 221st TIE Crawler, then the info on that unit represents all TIE Crawlers of the 221st. That is why duplicates are allowed to be used in the game, because they do not necessarily identify just one starfighter or vehicle.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 08:05, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * 16) ******I'll take your word for it, but the Star of Tion has a turbolaser on the figure anyway. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 17:30, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * 17) *******The Star of Tion unit used the same die as the Millennium Falcon figure; in styrene, they are structurally the same Tion, Falcon. But, thanks for the change.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 01:48, May 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * 18) *******Changed. Comprehensive articles do not necessarily need to be subsectioned. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 17:30, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * 19) ********I defer. Good enough for me.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 01:48, May 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * 20) ********Changed, though considering the nature of TCGs it could work either way. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 17:30, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * 21) * I left an image of a TIE Crawler form the battle group on the article's talk page for you.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 19:38, May 12, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Belyssa Romey

 * Nominated by: Eyrezer 08:53, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Just to break up the barn-burner

(0 ECs/3 Users/3 Total)
Support
 * 1) &mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 14:04, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2)  Imperators II (Talk) 15:29, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) Coolio. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 21:12, May 4, 2011 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) Axinal
 * 2) * I'm thinking it might be worthwhile to move the intro to a Biography section and give a short intro. If not, Rebel Alliance would need to be linked in the P&T.
 * 3) **No, the intro/bio is only 50 words long. An intro is unnecessary as there is insufficient information to need a summary and there is certainly precedent for not needing one. Similarly, in these articles a second link is not added in the P&T. --Eyrezer 09:47, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) ***Just a suggestion, but this is fine with me.&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 14:04, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * 5) * Should there be an asterisk beside 132nd Forward Division rather than a blank space?
 * 6) **I think that looks ugly, but NaruHina has already added one anyway. --Eyrezer 09:47, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * 7) *Otherwise, nice.&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 16:05, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 8) "She achieved the rank of Major, at which time she was an officer in the 132nd Forward Division, which was stationed in the Atrivis sector,[1] located in the northwest region of the Outer Rim Territories." This is a run-on.  NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 21:24, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 9) *Simplified. --Eyrezer 09:47, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * 10) Is there a name for her "generic Rebel" armor and uniform? Might be worth noting that she wore that in P&T. Also, perhaps mentioned that she had an illustration by Trevas? ~ Savage  BOB sig.png 06:45, May 15, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Ree Ohr

 * Nominated by: QuiGonJinn  Senate seal.svg(Talk) 12:15, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: A character so obscure, nobody has bothered to create an article for her for all these years. A rarity, to say the least.

(1 ECs/1 Users/2 Total)
Support
 * 1) &mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 15:29, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) ~  Savage  BOB sig.png 06:47, May 15, 2011 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) Axinal
 * 2) * I think some of the phrases in the first sentence should be swapped around, as the way it's written right now implies that the Clone Wars was the site of a battle between the Republic and the CIS. Otherwise, a well-written article.&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 16:10, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) **Addressed. QuiGonJinn  Senate seal.svg(Talk) 14:53, May 4, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Gwend

 * Nominated by: &mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 19:25, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: How come I hadn't heard of the barn-burner before yesterday?! I'll definitely have to do something with that before the end of the month.

(1 ECs/1 Users/2 Total)
Support
 * 1) NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 21:21, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2)  ~  Savage  BOB sig.png 06:46, May 15, 2011 (UTC)

Object
 * Can you indicate by whom the planet Askaj was oppressed? Tis all. ~ Savage  BOB sig.png 17:38, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * Added. Thanks!&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 20:30, May 8, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Oola's father

 * Nominated by: Winchester 327 22:33, May 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: This is my first nomination. Obscure, but twenty years of sources to gather.

(0 ECs/0 Users/0 Total)
Support

Object
 * 1) Axinal
 * 2) *A nice looking article, I must say; however, before I give it a more thorough review, you should know that per CAN rule #14 (see above), an article that is over 200 words must at least attempt to create an intro to bring the word count to 250 or more. I suggest breaking what's currently written into biography/personality and traits sections and adding a brief intro. This should then be ready for a good article nomination.&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 22:38, May 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) **Crap, rewording things is proving harder than I thought. There isn't any additional information to use. Should I pull it off the noms list until I figure it out? Winchester 327 23:59, May 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) ***I wouldn't say that's totally necessary. I'd say just finish writing the intro and see if it brings it over 250 (you're at 228 now). If it does, just ask in the comments section for the nomination to be removed, and one of the ECs will take care of it. In that case, you can take as much time as you need to reword it. If the addition of an intro doesn't take it over 250, the rewording won't be necessary at all.&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 03:06, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * 5) ****There we go. Finished the intro and reworded the bio a bit for readability. 248 words by my count. I'm unclear on whether I should be linking pages mentioned in the intro again in the bio, however, and do I need to put the table of contents back in? Winchester 327 05:52, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * 6) *****Cool, nice work. At this point, you have a few options: 1) You could add in a few adverbs/adjectives to bring the word count to 250 and nominate as a good article. 2) Because the intro didn't necessarily bring the word count to 250, you could remove it entirely and leave the article the way it was before. 3) You could leave the article just the way it is and leave it as a CAN. Options 1 and 3 are probably better than 2, but because it's your article, it's your choice. As for linking, yes, everything possible should be linked once in the infobox, once in the intro, and once in the main body. And yes, please keep the ToC in.&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 09:13, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * 7) *****Actually, I would leave the article the way it is for right now, because I wouldn't be surprised if other users asked you to add/clarify something, which could bring the article over 250 anyway. I'll also give the article a more thorough review.&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 14:11, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * 8) ******Thanks; I went ahead with the ToC, but otherwise I'll leave the article as-is for now. Winchester 327 17:27, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * 9) Imperators II
 * 10) * Since Category:Heads of government and state is also for "tribal chieftains", I believe it should be added, as well. That would cover his occupation.  Imperators II (Talk) 14:43, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * 11) **Awesome, added it. Does Category:Unidentified political figures apply as well? Winchester 327 17:27, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * 12) ***I think so, since, being a chief of a clan, he was involved in planetary "political matters". Good catch!  Imperators II (Talk) 17:40, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * 13) Guess I'm the guy who will request this article be pushed over 248 words... :) I think you should add a "Personality and traits" section, since we do know that this guy had a dim view of women, etc., as is mentioned in his "Biography." ~ Savage  BOB sig.png 17:42, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * 14) *Haha, can do. I'll start on the section this next week—super swamped in school right now. Winchester 327 00:44, May 15, 2011 (UTC)

Comments
 * I'd like to request this be removed from the nominations list; it'll be over 250 words once I have time to finish it. Winchester 327 00:44, May 15, 2011 (UTC)

132nd Forward Division

 * Nominated by: Eyrezer 09:43, May 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments:

(0 ECs/1 Users/1 Total)
Support
 * 1) &mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 23:13, May 6, 2011 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) Axinal
 * 2) * Could you add an ?
 * 3) * Would it be possible to specify "unit" here? I'm presuming this was part of the Alliance army, so maybe say army unit; if we can't confirm it was part of their army, per se, maybe just "military unit".
 * 4) * Also, I don't believe "Division" should be capitalized in the second sentence. Correct me if I'm wrong.
 * 5) *Other than that, good work.&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 18:43, May 6, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Ur

 * Nominated by: Hanzo Hasashi 20:39, May 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Tusken Raider

(0 ECs/2 Users/2 Total)
Support
 * 1) &mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 23:13, May 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) This was actually on my long-list of articles to write. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 23:53, May 7, 2011 (UTC)

Object

Comments

Urur

 * Nominated by: Hanzo Hasashi 20:39, May 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Tusken Warrior

(0 ECs/2 Users/2 Total)
Support
 * 1) &mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 23:13, May 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 23:56, May 7, 2011 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) Axinal
 * 2) * Just one question. You mention that he was restricted to defending his tribe, and would take his brother's place should he be killed. What "place" would that be? Do we know what Ur could do that Urur couldn't?&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 21:20, May 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) **Nope. All the information I write is all the available info on the card. Hanzo Hasashi 23:09, May 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) ***All right, then. Nice work!&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 23:13, May 6, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Unidentified Wookiee (Sunchoo's village)

 * Nominated by: Bonslywizard  Naboo.svg ( Send a transmission ) 17:51, May 7, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: For the Burn-Barner. Wait...

(1 ECs/1 Users/2 Total)
Support
 * 1) &mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 19:46, May 7, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 17:25, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) --Eyrezer 10:04, May 14, 2011 (UTC)

Object Comments
 * 1) Axinal
 * 2) * You mention that the captured residents were kidnapped "at some point" and returned in 21 BBY. Do we not know what year they were kidnapped?
 * 3) * Does The Way of the Jedi identify itself as a novel? A novel is typically longer and is a cohesive storyline rather than multiple adventure strands. If it does, no problem, but if not, I think it might be better to say book or adventure book.
 * 4) * I think the introduction should be rewritten so that it does not begin with "This," and so that the bold word is Wookiee rather than individual. Wookiee can be linked the second time it is used.
 * 5) *Otherwise, a nice little article, and a fine addition to the barn burner.&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 18:20, May 7, 2011 (UTC)
 * 6) **Nothing on the year, "novel" changed and "Wookiee" bolded, but are you sure about "this"? I mean, 99% of CAs use "this". Other options are "a" or "the", but "a" kinda implies that the article isn't about the guy being duscussed and "the" kinda implies that he's the only unidentified wookiee out there. Bonslywizard  Naboo.svg ( Send a transmission ) 19:19, May 7, 2011 (UTC)
 * 7) ***To be honest, no, I'm not sure about "this." There's no specific rule against it, as far as I know, but I can tell you from experience that whenever I start an article with "This" it gets changed to "A/An" by other reviewers. I think the reasoning is that we don't want the readers to feel like they're reading an online article. But I don't mind letting it go, because it's fine with me. I only mention it because my articles always get changed when I do that. As for the other objections, nice work.&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 19:46, May 7, 2011 (UTC)
 * 8) Hey, hey, here's Tanaka~!
 * 9) *The species of an unidentified character is never bolded as the character's title. Think of something to call him or say "individual" again, though that is frowned upon. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 17:48, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * 10) **Sorry, I didn't realize that. My mistake.&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 15:42, May 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * 11) **Are you sure? Many CAs do so.
 * 12) ***Yes I'm sure. That's not allowed because that denotes their species, not their defining feature (the reason they're notable enough to have an article). Basically, you say "this Human man/woman/individual" if nothing else, which is also discouraged because it preempts a link to sexes. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 02:45, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * 13) ****Unfortunate, but changed back to individual. Bonslywizard  Naboo.svg ( Send a transmission ) 22:56, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * 14) *****Quite so. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 17:25, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * 15) * You don't need the redundant sourcing on the era in the infobox. The book in which the character appears is sufficient.
 * 16) * Does the Annual specifically say that this book's events took place in 21 BBY? If not, then the article should read "around 21 BBY." NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 17:54, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * 17) **All addressed. Thanks for the review! Bonslywizard  Naboo.svg ( Send a transmission ) 22:46, May 9, 2011 (UTC)

71st Elite Mechanized Assault Group

 * Nominated by:  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 08:42, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Star Wars PocketModel TCG unit

(0 ECs/1 Users/1 Total)
Support
 * 1) &mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 21:51, May 15, 2011 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) Ecks Dee
 * 2) *Very short article; characteristics and history could be merged into the intro.
 * 3) **Again, this is not against the CA rules. He can subsection the article if he wants to. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 21:06, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) ***I haven't said it's against the rules; the appearance of the article is just better when half of it isn't headings. 1358  (Talk)  17:35, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * 5) * You don't need to bold the subject outside the intro.
 * 6) **Done.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 16:29, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * 7) *Intro-exclusive info.
 * 8) **What do you mean? Please explain.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 16:29, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * 9) ***"an elite Imperial Remnant battle group during the Imperial Civil War." This information can not be found outside the intro. This could be fixed by just merging the sections. 1358  (Talk)  17:35, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * 10) ****Tell me if what I've got works. If not I'll rework it to merge it.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 01:38, May 13, 2011 (UTC)
 * 11) * Please do not use parenthesis in the prose. 1358  (Talk)  14:55, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * 12) **Done.

Comments

98th Elite Mechanized Assault Group

 * Nominated by:  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 08:42, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Star Wars PocketModel TCG unit

(0 ECs/1 Users/1 Total)
Support
 * 1) &mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 21:58, May 15, 2011 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) * The "Characteristics" section (or rather, sentence) could definitely be fixed up a bit. Right now, it's pretty confusing.
 * 2) **Reworked. How does that sound?  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 16:23, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) * The "History" section is pretty confusing also. Change that a little.
 * 4) **Removed. No specific history recorded that I know of, except that they participated in the Imperial Civil War.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 16:03, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * 5) * Only bold the name in the intro. Never the body.
 * 6) **Done.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 16:03, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * 7) * "Century tanks of the 98th Elite were often called upon to lead strikes on mission objectives." Okay, so what kind of strikes? Does the card say?
 * 8) **Removed. A different elite century tank unit was a lead position assault group, not this one.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 16:03, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * 9) * "Century Tanks" are capitalized the first time, but not the second. Which is it?
 * 10) **No caps. Done.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 16:03, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * 11) * Parentheses are almost never used in articles around here, so it would be best if these were removed.
 * 12) **Done.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 16:03, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * 13) *I'll have another look once these are addressed. Anyway, welcome to the CAN page! :D Bonslywizard  Naboo.svg ( Send a transmission ) 00:00, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * 14) *Okay, you really changed the article alot since last I checked, so I'll re-review. Bonslywizard  Naboo.svg ( Send a transmission ) 21:33, May 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * 15) * Are you sure that this unit existed during the Rebellion era, as the article currently states? Given that they are an Imperial Remnant unit, they could have existed during the Rebellion era, the New Republic era, or later eras. Therefore, you can't make any assumptions about which publishing era they feature in, unless the source dates their existance to a more specific time. If that is the case, then please cite the dating in the article. If not, then please remove any mention of the Rebellion era. --Jinzler 13:55, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * 16) **Removed.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 16:27, May 11, 2011 (UTC)


 * 1) Jinzler
 * 2) * Could you perhaps include some context on what a century tank is?
 * 3) **I thought the link to the century tank article would suffice. It has in the other century tank Assault Group articles&mdash;like the 88th Mechanized Assault Group&mdash;that are nominated on this page. What did you have in mind?  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 04:32, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) ***I was thinking maybe just something along the lines of stating that they were a type of attack vehicle developed by Santhe/Sienar Technologies. Given that a large proportion of the article is related to the tanks, I think that such additional detail would be useful here. What do you think --Jinzler 08:54, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * 5) ****Minor description put in, including reference to alternate name. Didn't want to go into too much detail. How's that?  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 16:27, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * 6) * century tanks of the 98th Elite were more formidable than standard units, such as used by the 88th Mechanized. What do you mean by "standard units" here? I presume this is referring to standard Imperial mechanized units, or something along those lines, but article is currently unclear. Please specify.
 * 7) **The 88th Mechanized used stock century tank units. They would be considered the standard. The 98th and other Assault Groups modified their century tanks to the needs of the particular group they were in.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 04:32, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * 8) * I see that you have now added The New Essential Chronology to the source list. If the unit appears in the NEC, then that might be worth a mention in the "Behind the scenes" section. Also, as there is more than one source you will need a "1stm" template next to whichever one was the first to mention the unit.
 * 9) **Isn't enough?  Gethralkin  Hyperwave  04:32, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * 10) ***I see you logic in using that template, but the Layout Guide [Wookieepedia:Layout_Guide#Appearances advises] that the "1stID" template should only be used when a subject is not named in its first appearance and is first identified by a later source. A "1st" or "1stm" template is still needed for the source that mentions the subject first. --Jinzler 08:54, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * 11) ****Done. NEC was wrong source though, probably copied over accidentally.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 16:27, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * 12) *I look forward to seeing more nominations from you in the future. And my use of timestamping here is correct, per my comments below :P Jinzler 17:09, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * 13) **Yeah, yeah, yeah... ;P  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 04:32, May 11, 2011 (UTC)

Comments
 * I'm curious to know why someone has added the "Unsigned" templates to Bonsly's objections above. While all user comments are required to be signed, this rule has always been interpreted in the context of nomination pages as meaning that just one timestamp is needed to sign all of the objections made by a user at one time. I don't see why things should be any different here. --Jinzler 13:55, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * Bonslywizard did not sign his objection vote at the beginning as is standard, so I could not tell who made the comments. There have been several times when comments were made and then other users addressed each itemization so it obscured who was who. Rules for signing comments is outlined in the Signature policy.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 14:16, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I am fully aware of our signature policy, but it seems that we have differing interpretations of it. Regarding your confusion, when users make a large number of objections to an article on a nominations page at one time, it is commonplace for them to choose only to sign the last objection. You can thus tell who made the objections and when by looking at the bottom of the listed objections, to see who has signed them. This is compliant with the signature policy, because where objections are made together, they can be seen as one combined comment, and so only one signature is needed to serve them, and this should be enough to show who made the comment. Furthermore, if you take a look at the Featured articles nominations page and the Good article nominations page, you will see that the method of making objections used by Bonsly above is regularly used by many users, including administrators and members of the Inquisitorius. It is therefore a seemingly valid interpretation of the signature policy and is used on Wookieepedia on a regular basis. If you believe this interpretation is incorrect, then I recommend you take your concerns to the Senate Hall. I urge you to reconsider your use of the "Unsigned" template on Bonsly's comments above, because he has done nothing wrong. --Jinzler 14:47, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * This topic is perhaps better suited to User Talk pages, as it distracts from this page's purpose. Please leave me a message if you wish to discuss it further. Thanks.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 16:47, May 10, 2011 (UTC)

T81 Division

 * Nominated by:  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 16:43, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Star Wars PocketModel TCG/TCW tie-in unit

(0 ECs/0 Users/0 Total)
Support

Object


 * 1) "TK Tri-Nine"
 * 2) * Needs referencing, as there are multiple sources and appearances. &mdash; TK-999  Era-imp.png( Rise of the Empire ) 16:54, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) **References supplied.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 14:09, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) ***Looks better. I gave it a copy-edit, and will decide whether there are any more issues later.&mdash; TK-999  Era-imp.png( Rise of the Empire ) 15:03, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * 5) * Lacks Star Wars Annual 2011 info: the date for Mission to Rugosa has been supplied. &mdash; TK-999  Era-imp.png( Rise of the Empire ) 16:54, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * 6) * Some links are missing. &mdash; TK-999  Era-imp.png( Rise of the Empire ) 16:54, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * 7) **This should be a quick "do-it-yourself" fix. (Or at least you could tell the nominator which links exactly you've noticed to be missing.)  Imperators II (Talk) 19:16, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * 8) * Since the article has only 108 words (period), I don't think it is necessary to make it have an intro and headings. If the need for sub-sectioning arises, then it should have for better legibility. &mdash; TK-999  Era-imp.png( Rise of the Empire ) 16:54, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * 9) **Just to interject, a CA may be subsectioned according to the LG if the nominator so chooses. This isn't against the CA rules. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 17:37, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * 10) ***Both sofixits done.&mdash; TK-999  Era-imp.png( Rise of the Empire ) 19:36, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * GTQ
 * 1) *Correct me if I am wrong but I don not believe that you should have sources in the introduction GTQ ( Problems? ) 21:56, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) ** It is permissible. See Xizor as a reference.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 16:41, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) ***It is not permissible. Xizor is not an article of status and the reference is marking the pronunciation of his name, not information in the paragraph. Remove them. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 17:23, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) ****Removed.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 01:37, May 13, 2011 (UTC)
 * 5) ****If the article contains a body, the introduction should not have references. 1358  (Talk)  17:32, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * 6) *****Removed.  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 02:15, May 13, 2011 (UTC)
 * 7) Axinal
 * 8) *Please source EVERYTHING in the infobox.
 * 9) *Could we get context on Asajj Ventress, 224, and Jek, Rys, and Thire?
 * 10) *Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe SWA 2011 places most of TCW around 21 BBY, so "Circa 21 BBY" might be better than "In 21 BBY"&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 22:04, May 15, 2011 (UTC)
 * 11) *Also, the article is missing a BTS.&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 22:05, May 15, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Alain (Human)

 * Nominated by: Hanzo Hasashi 20:49, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Unit Scrounge

(0 ECs/0 Users/0 Total)
Support

Object

Comments
 * 1) Hanzo Hasashi
 * 2) * I believe there is no evidence that he necessarily fought the 501st during the events of ANH, as the card never explicitly states it, nor does his CSWE entry. Does anybody else believe otherwise? Hanzo Hasashi 20:49, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) *Text from his Quick Draw card: fighting against oppression can be dangerous business. Oppressors carry blasters, and so does Alain. I do not believe any of this is necessarily from his POV, and chose not to include it as any new info in his bio. As with above, if somebody else believes otherwise, please respond. Hanzo Hasashi 21:07, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) Axinal
 * 5) *In the Personality and Traits, you mention a Hakin. Who is Hakin? I figure this is supposed to be Alian and would therefore qualify as a Sofixit, but I want to be sure Hakin's name isn't there for some other purpose.
 * 6) *Could you tell us what a scrounge is?&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 22:09, May 15, 2011 (UTC)

Precht

 * Nominated by: Hanzo Hasashi 20:49, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Green Recruit

(0 ECs/1 Users/1 Total)
Support
 * 1) &mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 22:14, May 15, 2011 (UTC)

Object

Comments
 * Same as above with Private Alain. Hanzo Hasashi 20:49, May 8, 2011 (UTC)

Chasdemonus Route

 * Nominated by: &mdash; TK-999  Era-imp.png( Rise of the Empire ) 17:02, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Obscure Unknown Regions hyperlane. Comes complete with infobox and reflist.

(0 ECs/1 Users/1 Total)
Support
 * 1) &mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 22:17, May 15, 2011 (UTC)

Object

Comments
 * 1) Changed "this" to "that" since "this" is indicating present.  Imperators II (Talk) 18:03, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) *Thanks for the copy-edit. I never notice such tiny inconsistencies.&mdash; TK-999  Era-imp.png( Rise of the Empire ) 18:05, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) Is this your first CAN? If so, welcome!&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 22:17, May 15, 2011 (UTC)

72nd Flight

 * Nominated by:  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 19:08, May 13, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: SWPM

(0 ECs/0 Users/0 Total)
Support

Object
 * 1) Axinal
 * 2) *If you're going to source the article, every bullet in the infobox must be sourced. However, since it only has one appearance, I would argue that sourcing is unnecessary, but the decision is yours.
 * 3) *The article needs a Behind the scenes section.&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 22:22, May 15, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) **The BTS requirement also applies to your other current CANs.&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 22:25, May 15, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

128th Flight

 * Nominated by:  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 19:08, May 13, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: SWPM

(0 ECs/0 Users/0 Total)
Support

Object

Comments

28th Flight

 * Nominated by:  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 19:08, May 13, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: SWPM

(0 ECs/0 Users/0 Total)
Support

Object

Comments

31st Flight

 * Nominated by:  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 19:08, May 13, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: SWPM

(0 ECs/0 Users/0 Total)
Support

Object

Comments

Sanctuary III

 * Nominated by:  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 19:57, May 13, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: SWPM TCW:SOM miniature

(0 ECs/0 Users/0 Total)
Support

Object
 * At 227 words, this can be easily brought up to 250 words by expanding the intro. And even if doing so won't bring the article over the GAN limit, the intro still needs expansion. QuiGonJinn  Senate seal.svg(Talk) 16:18, May 14, 2011 (UTC)
 * How's that?  Gethralkin  Hyperwave 06:09, May 15, 2011 (UTC)
 * Good, but now it qualifies as a good article nomination. :P&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 22:24, May 15, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Nala Hetsime

 * Nominated by: Hanzo Hasashi 22:18, May 13, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Same first name as The Lion King main female character

(0 ECs/1 Users/1 Total)
Support
 * 1) &mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 22:42, May 15, 2011 (UTC)

Object

Comments

Ururur

 * Nominated by: Hanzo Hasashi 22:18, May 13, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: "The Sandpeople are easily startled but they will soon be back and in greater numbers."

(0 ECs/1 Users/1 Total)
Support
 * 1) &mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 22:28, May 15, 2011 (UTC)

Object

Comments

Battle staff

 * Nominated by: GTQ ( Problems? ) 03:24, May 15, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments:

(0 ECs/0 Users/0 Total)
Support

Object Comments
 * 1) Bonzlywizard
 * 2) * Context on Mermeru.
 * 3) * If the staff's only mention is in the DB, what info did you get from the Campaign Guide?
 * 4) *Could you maybe try to get a picture of it, assuming it's what Mermeru's holding in the DB pic?
 * 5) **Okay, better, but the pic's waaay too small. Could you see if you can get a bigger version? If you can't I could give it a try. Bonslywizard  Naboo.svg ( Send a transmission ) 21:57, May 15, 2011 (UTC)
 * 6) *This your first nom? If so, welcome! If not, er...welcome back. Bonslywizard  Naboo.svg ( Send a transmission ) 18:12, May 15, 2011 (UTC)
 * 7) **Context added on Merumeru picture added too. The campaign guide mentions nothing that is not there but I have made mention of it in behind the scenes GTQ ( Problems? ) 21:43, May 15, 2011 (UTC)
 * 8) ***I'll give the pick another shot GTQ ( Problems? ) 22:03, May 15, 2011 (UTC)
 * 9) ****Quality of the pic is bad but when aiming for such a small area of an already small pic It is hard to get good quality GTQ ( Problems? ) 22:13, May 15, 2011 (UTC)
 * 10) Axinal
 * 11) *Because the article has multiple sources, it needs referencing.
 * 12) *I'd argue that the article could be expanded. Does TCWCG mention when specifically Merumeru used the staff? Even if it doesn't, the pic is from Episode III, so it's probably safe to say he wielded it during the Battle of Kashyyyk.
 * 13) *I removed the 250px designation from the picture, as it became too blurry.&mdash; Axinal  Convocation Chamber 22:37, May 15, 2011 (UTC)
 * 14) **TCWGC only mentions what is in the databank according to Jinzler as I do not have TCWGC but I referenced it. I added ROTS to the appearances and mentioned he used during the battle  GTQ ( Problems? ) 23:35, May 15, 2011 (UTC)