Wookieepedia:Good article nominations/Spelunker probe droid


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

Spelunker probe droid

 * Nominated by: &mdash;Darthtyler (Talk) 04:18, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: I tried my best...

(1 ACs/2 Users/3 Total)
Support
 * 1) -  Cavalier One [[Image:FarStar Logo.jpg|20px]]( Squadron channel ) 08:46, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 2)  IFYLOFD  ( And now, young Skywalker, you will die. ) 00:53, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 3) SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie ) 08:02, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Object
 * From the squadron briefing of Cavalier One:
 * 1) * In the Description section, some details on the droids specifications before its conversion to a battle droid is needed.
 * 2) **What do you mean?&mdash;Darthtyler (Talk) 20:37, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 3) ***Basically, since the droid was converted from a mining droid, it should be noted what systems the droid had before its conversion (if known). - Cavalier One [[Image:FarStar Logo.jpg|20px]]( Squadron channel ) 10:34, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 4) ****There. I split the section and added some content.&mdash;Darthtyler (Talk) 19:00, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 5) * In Description: This enabled the droid to become transparent to observers. However, in the intro, you state: Thus, the droid did not actually make itself transparent, but made itself invisible. Which is it?
 * 6) **I changed both to "camouflaged." It makes sense now, thanks for catching that.&mdash;Darthtyler (Talk) 20:37, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 7) * Under Clone Wars: During the battle, three of the chameleon droids used their cloaking device, presumably to hide from clone  troopers or Republic vehicles. "Presumably" is speculative; please reword or remove.
 * 8) **Deleted the last part of that sentence.&mdash;Darthtyler (Talk) 20:37, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 9) * Context is needed on who Padmé Amidala, Gregar Typho, Yoda, C-3PO, and R2-D2 are. Also, any information on why they arrived for a rescue mission? Did they receive a distress signal, Force sense, etc?
 * 10) **Gave background on Yoda sensing the call for help and on all characters.&mdash;Darthtyler (Talk) 20:37, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 11) * These units were presumably de-activated after the execution of the Separatist Council by Darth Sidious's new apprentice, Darth Vader. Again, speculative. Were they or were they not deactivated? -  Cavalier One [[Image:FarStar Logo.jpg|20px]]( Squadron channel ) 10:58, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 12) **Deleted "presumably" because all of the droids were deactivated following the control signal.&mdash;Darthtyler (Talk) 20:37, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 13) SoresuMakashi
 * 14) *I made a quite a few changes to make the article flow better.
 * 15) **Thank you.&mdash;Darthtyler (Talk) 22:20, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 16) * The fact that they were refitted exploration droids needs to be said in the intro. I suggest something like Originally mining exploration droids, they were outfitted with weaponry for military service between senteces 2 and 3.
 * 17) **Done.&mdash;Darthtyler (Talk) 22:20, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 18) * You need to explain the origin of the name of the droid (Spelunker) and what it means.
 * 19) **Done.&mdash;Darthtyler (Talk) 22:20, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 20) IFYLOFD:
 * 21) * Lots of short, choppy sentences that mess up the flow. Combine some together.
 * 22) **I believe Soresumakashi fixed that.&mdash;Darthtyler (Talk) 22:20, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 23) ***I just went through and fixed a few more. SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie ) 05:41, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 24) * What do you mean by "pure" cloaking device?
 * 25) **Explained.&mdash;Darthtyler (Talk) 22:20, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 26) * "The Commerce Guild owned mining spots on several planets." Such as?  IFYLOFD  ( And now, young Skywalker, you will die. ) 18:54, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 27) **No available information, the databank and the New Essential Guide to Droids don't give any examples, and no other source gives any, either.&mdash;Darthtyler (Talk) 22:20, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 28) Taking a second read through, there is 1 sentence I'm concerned about. Worried about Yoda's delayed return, Amidala destroyed several more droids with a blaster, along with her two droids, C-3PO and R2-D2. I suggest you reword this, because it sounds to me like 3PO and R2 were one of the droids she destroyed. You also use droid twice.  SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie ) 05:41, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 29) *Fixed.&mdash;Darthtyler (Talk) 18:57, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 30) Two things:
 * 31) *"The "cloaking device" in the droid actually just made the droid seem invisible." This could be written better.
 * 32) *"first use was at the Battle of Geonosis." Same as above. Please change the phrasing to make it flow better.
 * 33) *Otherwise, nice work.  Chack Jadson  (Talk) 03:36, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * 34) Toprawa:
 * 35) *Since this is a droid class article, I'd like to see it formatted similar to the Mini-Huvicko/Yuzabi Dowser binary hydromech droid article, with the same sectioning. Toprawa and Ralltiir 22:17, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Comments
 * Since the combat version is radically different from the basic mining version, should we have articles for each different version? - Cavalier One [[Image:FarStar Logo.jpg|20px]]( Squadron channel ) 10:58, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't know, since they were the same model.&mdash;Darthtyler (Talk) 20:37, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * While being the same model, they have different roles and specifications. Two articles may be warranted. What does anyone else think? - Cavalier One [[Image:FarStar Logo.jpg|20px]]( Squadron channel ) 10:34, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I actually originally thought it was an article on only the combat version, and it was merely providing some background info on the origins of the droid. It was only until about halfway through the body that I realised it covered both sunbjects. That kinda wierded me out. I'm trying to think of an example article and see what that one has done, but I can't think of one. SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie ) 10:39, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * That being said, I am marginally in favor of a split. It wasn't just some slapped together improvement like an extra sensor or something. This was a complete remodel and conversion, with entirely different roles from its predecessor. SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie ) 10:48, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

AC Removal Vote

 * 1) Nobody's touched this thing since November. DC 04:54, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) A bit reluctantly, but I want to get inactive noms off the page. It's getting crowded.  Chack Jadson  (Talk)  22:16, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * 3) Per 3-week idle policy. Toprawa and Ralltiir 02:52, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * 4) Unhappily agree. The nominator hasn't been on the site for over a month. Cylka  -talk- 03:09, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Do not remove

 * 1)  An article is not to be considered inactive due to lack of reviewing. It needs to have outstanding objections more than 3 weeks old, which this nomination does not have. It's not the nominator's fault no one has looked at this. Toprawa and Ralltiir 22:21, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) Per Tope. Ignore my vote above, because, to put it simply, I screwed up.  Chack Jadson  (Talk)  22:27, 7 January 2009 (UTC)