Wookieepedia:Good article nominations

This page is for the nomination of Good Articles.

What is a Good Article?
A Good Article is an article that adheres to quality standards, but cannot reach FA status due to its limited content.

A Good Article has the following attributes.

1. It is well written. In this respect:


 * (a) it has compelling prose, and is readily comprehensible to non-specialist readers;
 * (b) it follows a logical structure, introducing the topic and then grouping together its coverage of related aspects; where appropriate, it contains a succinct lead section summarising the topic, and the remaining text is organised into a system of hierarchical sections (particularly for longer articles);
 * (c) it follows the Wookieepedia Manual of Style;
 * (d) necessary technical terms or jargon are briefly explained in the article itself, or an active link is provided.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable. In this respect:


 * (a) it provides references to any and all sources used for its material;
 * (b) sources should be selected in accordance with the guidelines for reliable sources;
 * (c) it contains no elements of original research.

3. It is broad in its coverage, addressing all major aspects of the topic (this requirement is slightly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required by WP:FA, and allows shorter articles and broad overviews of large topics to be listed);.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy. In this respect:


 * (a) viewpoints are represented fairly and without bias;
 * (b) all significant points of view are fairly presented, but not asserted, particularly where there are or have been conflicting views on the topic.

5. It is stable, i.e., it 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. It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic. In this respect:


 * (a) the images are tagged and have succinct and descriptive captions;
 * (b) a lack of images does not in itself prevent an article from achieving Good Article status.

Nomination of Good Articles
To nominate an article for Good Article status, list it here. If it has more than five votes after a week, the article will be considered a "Good Article" and tagged with the template. The talk page will also be tagged with the GA template.

Viqi Shesh
Objections Comments
 * 1)  StarNeptune Talk to me! 01:01, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * 01:25, 13 July 2006 (UTC) I support, now that I've had my go at it.
 * 1) Darth Kevinmhk 02:40, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Riffsyphon1024 05:20, 13 July 2006 (UTC) Support, however redlinks are needed fill to reach a higher status as well as everything else that comes with featured status.
 * 1) --Eyrezer 08:31, 13 July 2006 (UTC). Sorry to be the first to object, but I'd like to see some of those specifics fleshed out, ie more about finding Elan, alerting Nas Choka, working with Pedric Cuf. I think some of those parts could be expanded. This probably comes under the "broad in its coverage" heading.
 * 2) --Cull Tremayne 02:11, 18 July 2006 (UTC) I agree with Eyrezer. She was a major character in the NJO novels, the broad overview that is there now is kind of odd for such a main antagonist.

Ommin
Objections
 * 1) Darth Kevinmhk 02:40, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) --Eyrezer 21:49, 13 July 2006 (UTC) Have you tried running it for FA?
 * 3) -- Snoop 14:50, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Comments

Amanoa

 * 1) Darth Kevinmhk 02:40, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Objections

Comments

Hirog
Objections
 * 1) --Eyrezer 08:36, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Darth Kevinmhk 12:50, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * 16:03, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) Let's hear it for the glorious destiny etc. etc. &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 03:16, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Comments

Self-Propelled Heavy Artillery

 * 1) RMF 00:38, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) --Eyrezer 01:26, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * 04:16, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) Supported this on IRC when it was nominated. &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 02:58, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Objections

Comments Fairly comprehensive and accurate, I think. RMF 00:38, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Alema Rar

 * 1) --Eyrezer 07:40, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Objections
 * 16:06, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Comments
 * I'd like to see some more info before I support, including the Mission to Myrkr (mission). 16:06, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Good point--Eyrezer 00:14, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Cade Skywalker
Objections
 * 1) Mark14 18, July 2006 (UTC)
 * 2)  StarNeptune Talk to me! 01:16, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) Riffsyphon1024 14:53, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) Roron Corobb 9:09, 18 July 2006 (UTC) It could be a good article, but       Star Wars: Legacy 2 isnt probably his last appearance forever, i think we should wait until Legacy progresses, and then we could add more content and then it could even be a featured article.
 * Although he's only been in a few comics, there is a wealth of info there. It's got all the makings of a Good Article, and once we get more content, it might even be FA material if we keep it at that level of quality.  StarNeptune Talk to me! 01:16, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Is it possible to be a good and featured article? Roron Corobb  10:39, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * This was discussed briefly in the Senate Hall thread. Basically, no. Featured staus overrides good status. --Eyrezer 23:26, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Then i think it shouldn't so it can be featured, because by Legacy 13, theres alot of information thats gonna be there. Look at all the info thats there now and only Legacy 2 is out.  Or oce a article is an official good article, could it still be nominated for featured?  If not, no way. Roron Corobb 8:27, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Comments
 * Must wait for more issues to then expand on him. -- Riffsyphon1024 14:53, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Rodian

 * 1) &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 02:58, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) RMF 03:00, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Objections

Comments

Rejected from FA status due to length a long time ago, but no one suggested improvements on Peer review. Must therefore fall somewhere between "awesome" and "hopeless." &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 02:58, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Gotal

 * 1) &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 02:58, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Objections

Comments

Human
Objections
 * 1) &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 02:58, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) RMF 03:00, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) Riffsyphon1024 14:59, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Comments

Subject may be too inherently silly for FA status, but it's interesting nonetheless. &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 02:58, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * One must understand themselves by expanding this. -- Riffsyphon1024 14:59, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Imperial Ruling Council

 * 1) &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 02:58, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) RMF 03:00, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) Roron Corobb 10:43, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Objections

Comments

Rejected from FA status, primarily due to a lack of images. But the text! Look at all that text! &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 02:58, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree, tons of text. Roron Corobb 10:43, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Flint

 * 1)  StarNeptune Talk to me! 06:22, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Objections

Comments