Wookieepedia:Featured article nominations/Cornelius Evazan

Cornelius Evazan/Canon

 * Nominated by:  AV-6R7 User talk:AV-6R7 04:37, August 22, 2015 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: With all the previous objections taken care of and other aditions, the page exceeded 1,000 words. Thus, I am running this for FA status.

Support

 * 1) Cevan IMPpress.svg (talk) 20:18, November 1, 2015 (UTC)
 * 2) Nivlacanator (talk)  00:15, November 4, 2015 (UTC)

Jang

 * I'll post this here instead of the KB, but in the Annotated Screenplays, on page 44, he's called a "Human." Lucas doesn't give him any other description, but he's later described as "unpleasant" when Obi-Wan intervenes.  JangFett  (Talk) 06:07, November 10, 2015 (UTC)
 * Revised Fourth Edition, I assume? -  AV-6R7  Crew Pit 06:14, November 10, 2015 (UTC)
 * This will be an interesting case because most screenplay drafts, with complied edits and changes, are marked with the same date, even outside Star Wars. Unless we can track down and find all of the edited fourth draft screenplays, including the revised ones, it'll be tough to precisely determine the title. The Annotated Screenplays doesn't actually say where "Human" is from, unfortunately. Both it and this script dated January 15, 1976, both use "Human." Using the data I've collected from the Screenplays (listed in your KB), both "Human" and "Int. Death Star corridor" are used in the website, so it's safe to say Revised, although I'm not sure of the date. On another similar note: I'm not sure where "grubby" came from, if you want to keep that.  JangFett  (Talk) 06:25, November 10, 2015 (UTC)
 * Intresting. I've done as you've requested and did a little clean up in that area. The descriptor "short, grubby Human" is given in the script you've posted a link to, so do you think that would be OK to use? Also, I'm thinking of replacing the Bts quote with a sentence from the original novelization. -  AV-6R7  Crew Pit 06:35, November 10, 2015 (UTC)
 * Re: "grubby"&mdash;Ah, cool, I've missed that. Yes, it's safe to use. Source it to the website. But since we can't pinpoint the dates (I wouldn't trust what the website says in this case), a ref note needs to be used instead of a direct ref to Annotated Screenplays. It doesn't need to be complex, just one indicating the inaccurate dating. Using the website and what the Screenplays says, you can assume that they're both in one of the Revised Fourth Drafts. As for the quote, that would work better, since you're using Legends information.  JangFett  (Talk) 06:43, November 10, 2015 (UTC)
 * I've put up a quote from the novelization. Just to clarify, the above description is used in the draft included in the Annotated Screenplays and I need to source the online script? -  AV-6R7  Crew Pit 14:15, November 10, 2015 (UTC)
 * Try this: The ref note should go after "In the Revised Fourth Edition script for A New Hope," and then you can source "grubby" and "unpleasant Human" to the website, since they're both present there.  JangFett  (Talk) 14:24, November 10, 2015 (UTC)
 * Ok, cool, but how would you word the ref note. I've never written one before, so an example that could be used in the article would be appreciated. -  AV-6R7  Crew Pit 14:33, November 10, 2015 (UTC)
 * Something along the lines of: "Several revised fourth drafts were released from mid-1976 to 1977, per the Screenplays, but the actual content of these scripts are unknown. A copy of a revised fourth draft shows identical descriptors present in Screenplays, but the date is incorrect. Therefore, this article assumes that only the identical descriptors are correct.  JangFett  (Talk) 14:48, November 10, 2015 (UTC)
 * Mind if I "borrow" that? -  AV-6R7  Crew Pit 14:56, November 10, 2015 (UTC)
 * Sure. :P  JangFett  (Talk) 14:57, November 10, 2015 (UTC)
 * It is finished. -  AV-6R7  Crew Pit 19:15, November 10, 2015 (UTC)