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 A forum will be used to nominate articles that have fallen out-of-date.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

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 2 weeks.

CT-43/76-9155

 * Nominated by: QuiGonJinn  Senate seal.svg(Talk) 19:05, March 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: One more

(1 ECs/1 Users/2 Total)
Support
 * 1)  Clone Commander Lee  Talk 10:38, March 22, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) Menkooroo 07:24, March 28, 2011 (UTC)

Object
 * This may be impossible, but is it possible to avoid the wording, "commanded by the Commanders..." Is there a synonym you could use for "commanded"? ~ SavageBob 05:36, March 30, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

CT-53/21-8778

 * Nominated by: QuiGonJinn  Senate seal.svg(Talk) 08:27, March 22, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments:

(1 ECs/1 Users/2 Total)
Support
 * 1)  Clone Commander Lee  Talk 10:38, March 22, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) Green is clean. Menkooroo 11:51, March 28, 2011 (UTC)

Object

Comments

CT-12/12-0068

 * Nominated by: QuiGonJinn  Senate seal.svg(Talk) 09:17, March 22, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments:

(1 ECs/1 Users/2 Total)
Support
 * 1) One fine day, all clones will be either CAs, GAs or FAs.  Clone Commander Lee  Talk 10:38, March 22, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) Let me know if the "in 22 BBY" is OK. Menkooroo 04:42, March 30, 2011 (UTC)

Object

Comments

Corellian Seaside

 * Nominated by:  OLIOSTER  (talk) 13:34, March 22, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Corellia is probably the best planet in SWG.

(0 ECs/0 Users/0 Total)
Support

Object Comments
 * 1) *Can you mention the trees?
 * 2) **Any suggestions on how to mention them would be welcome.  OLIOSTER  (talk) 18:13, March 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) ***Nothing too crazy. I'd take "There were some trees on the beach." Menkooroo 04:45, March 30, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) * Is the sentence at the end of the bts necessary? Menkooroo 07:30, March 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * 5) **I suppose not. Removed.  OLIOSTER  (talk) 18:13, March 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) **I suppose not. Removed.  OLIOSTER  (talk) 18:13, March 28, 2011 (UTC)

No Division

 * Nominated by:  OLIOSTER  (talk) 14:06, March 22, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Its a "poster" this time!

(1 ECs/1 Users/2 Total)
Support
 * 1) It's not a postah! Menkooroo 06:30, March 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) It's not pasta without Fiolli. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 18:37, March 28, 2011 (UTC)

Object Comments
 * 1) * Are there a few words of context that can be said about Combat Upgrade? Or a pipelink to its section heading within the Galaxies article might be good, too. Menkooroo 07:30, March 23, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) **Good?  OLIOSTER  (talk) 13:30, March 23, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) Perhaps you could say the helmet was bisected along its vertical line of symmetry, with the standard white and black coloring on the right side and the inverse on the left.  NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 05:52, March 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) *Done.  OLIOSTER  (talk) 17:03, March 27, 2011 (UTC)

Fighter's Courage

 * Nominated by:  OLIOSTER  (talk) 18:45, March 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: I'm not even close to done with SWG's paintings and posters.

(0 ECs/0 Users/0 Total)
Support

Object

Comments
 * Again, my description reads pretty flat. Any help would be appreciated.  OLIOSTER  (talk) 18:52, March 24, 2011 (UTC)

CT-8770

 * Nominated by: QuiGonJinn  Senate seal.svg(Talk) 15:51, March 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments:

(1 ECs/1 Users/2 Total)
Support
 * 1)  Clone Commander Lee  Talk 18:19, March 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) Menkooroo 07:33, March 28, 2011 (UTC)

Object

Comments

CT-8910

 * Nominated by: QuiGonJinn  Senate seal.svg(Talk) 15:51, March 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments:

(1 ECs/1 Users/2 Total)
Support
 * 1)  Clone Commander Lee  Talk 18:19, March 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) Menkooroo 07:25, March 28, 2011 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) Boo!
 * 2) * "were issued Order 66, which them to kill their..." missing word? I'd add it myself but I think you can probably come up with a better one. :D
 * 3) **Done.
 * 4) * "the 2008 The Complete Star Wars Encyclopedia" sounds a little weird with the two instances of "the." Can you make it a bit more smooth? Menkooroo 18:32, March 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * 5) **Done. QuiGonJinn  Senate seal.svg(Talk) 19:18, March 27, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Unidentified pilot

 * Nominated by: QuiGonJinn  Senate seal.svg(Talk) 09:55, March 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: And now for something completely different.

(1 ECs/0 Users/1 Total)
Support
 * 1) Menkooroo 10:33, March 28, 2011 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) Imperators II
 * 2) *Again, I think you should add to the Bts section that the pilot was not named in Dynasty of Evil. Otherwise, good job.  Imperators II (Talk) 17:53, March 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) Jujiggum
 * 4) *There's enough info to subsection into a biography and an intro. I doubt that it will bring the article over 250 words, but there's enough information that it should still be done.
 * 5) *The article's name needs some kind of additional identifier. We already have a ton of "unidentified pilot" articles. Please add at least "male," and I would suggest some sort of further parameter in parentheses at the end, as well.
 * 6) *You have a brief tense deviation in the artcle. Please ensure that you stay strictly within the past tense in all IU sections.
 * 7) * Jonjedigrandmaster ( Talk ) 15:04, March 29, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Qid Proko

 * Nominated by: Demos Traxen 05:21, March 30, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments:

(0 ECs/0 Users/0 Total)
Support

Object

Comments