Wookieepedia:Featured article nominations/Rugosa


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

Rugosa

 * Nominated by: --Eyrezer 01:45, December 1, 2009 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: A GA tipped over 1k by Star Wars: The Clone Wars: The Official Episode Guide: Season 1

(5 Inqs/3 Users/8 Total)
Support
 * 1)  JangFett  (Talk) 03:17, December 12, 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) Cool planet moon. ~ SavageBob 00:04, December 14, 2009 (UTC)
 * 3) *Well, actually it's a moon. :P  JangFett  (Talk) 02:58, December 16, 2009 (UTC)
 * 4) Green Tentacle (Talk) 11:54, December 24, 2009 (UTC)
 * 5) —Tommy9281  Dark side Master SWGTCG.jpg ( Mechno-chair ) 05:17, January 20, 2010 (UTC)
 * 6) Skippy Farlstendoiro 08:47, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * 7)  Chack Jadson  (Talk)  22:25, March 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * 8)  CC7567  (talk) 18:51, March 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * 9)  Cavalier One FarStar Logo.jpg( Squadron channel ) 00:08, March 9, 2010 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) Fett
 * 2) * "After five thousand years of galactic dominance, plague caused the collapse of the Infinite Empire and eventually the end of their presence on the moon." Sort of confusing when you say "their" as opposed to "its" since you're talking about an organization. Due to TEA, wouldn't the Rakata dominate Rugosa? Therefore, you possibly could replace Infinite Empire with Rakata, and leave "their".
 * 3) * "However, this plan was intercepted by a Confederacy of Independent Systems listening post on the Mid Rim world of Ruusan, and reported to the Confederacy leader Count Dooku." Their was no listening post in the planet of Ruusan IIRC. Their was, however, a listening post in Ruusan's moon, Ruusan 2.
 * 4) *A very good read, Ey. :)  JangFett  (Talk) 23:36, December 8, 2009 (UTC)
 * 5) **Thanks for the review, Jang. Both should hopefully be addressed now. --Eyrezer 02:09, December 12, 2009 (UTC)
 * 6) The clone
 * 7) * Can you expand the Mission to Rugosa content at all? The level of detail is rather inadequate at the moment, as a whole episode was dedicated to it. While I'm not looking for a length to rival that of the article, it could really use some expansion.
 * 8) **Sure, will do so. --Eyrezer 11:00, January 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * 9) ***How about now? (Just in the nick of time) --Eyrezer 09:49, February 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 10) * The episode is not a source for the Separatists' interception of the transmission.
 * 11) **I never referenced it to the Episode, but rather to the Databank entry... I've modified it anyway. --Eyrezer 11:00, January 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * 12) *More to come after these have been fixed.  CC7567  (talk) 08:07, January 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * 13) * Needs to conform to the Manual of Style as far as capitalization goes.
 * 14) **I'm actually not sure what you are referring to here. The only thing I thought you might be referring to was the Assault Tank, which I've decapitalized, but I couldn't detect any problems with the ranks and titles. If I've still missed it, can you point it out?
 * 15) ***Mainly "king," which is basically the only title you use most throughout the article.  CC7567  (talk) 05:44, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * 16) ****Hopefully that should do it. --Eyrezer 06:07, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * 17) * Context on 224.
 * 18) **Context added.
 * 19) *I frankly feel that your TCW expansion was made more out of time constraints than anything else. There are a lot of little errors here and there (erroneous comma usage and "compliment" instead of "complement," to name a few) that make me unsure if this is the best you believe that you can do. Please try to proofread your update and try to catch these things.  CC7567  (talk) 20:07, February 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 20) **I've gone back over it and cleaned up a few points. Again, I'm sorry to say I'm not sure of the specific comma problems, but the complement error has been cleaned up. --Eyrezer 05:39, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * 21) Farlstendoiro is glad to see you back
 * 22) * Any approximate date (or even century) for the Hutt plague?
 * 23) **The only information that the source directly provides is "centuries before the Clone Wars," which is hardly enough to infer even an approximate date.  CC7567  (talk) 20:07, February 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 24) * Contex for "the last rocket"
 * 25) **Added in a bit earlier about depleted munitions.
 * 26) * Do we really need a description of the Rakata? Particularly considering that it does not describe their relationship with the planet (Unlike the Toydarians, who fly in the atmosphere of Rugosa)
 * 27) **I've only really devoted one sentence to describing them, which I don't think is extravagant.
 * 28) * The artist Russell Chong (...) was himself a scuba diver You mean he is no longer a scuba diver? If that's the case, I think you should write "was a scuba diver at that time"; otherwise "is a scuba diver" would be correct &mdash; We're not talking about a long time ago in BtS.
 * 29) **Modified.
 * 30) * Several sources (including many Databank entries) do not appear as footnotes in the article. Are you sure you can't reference anything with them?
 * 31) **None of them contribute any information that is not covered by other sources...
 * 32) *As an in-joke, Spanish-English dictionary: "Rugosa: (adjective) rough" Don't even try to add that to the article! ·:P Skippy Farlstendoiro 12:02, February 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 33) Attack II
 * 34) * Why did Katuunko wish to negotiate with the Republic?
 * 35) **I've added a paragraph explaining how these events fit into the larger scheme of the Clone Wars including a brief mention of the treaty with the Hutts, etc. --Eyrezer 23:47, March 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * 36) * "After these three encounters": what three encounters? You imply that you've mentioned this before but you haven't. Please clarify.
 * 37) **Should be addressed.
 * 38) * I'm sure you can name the clone troopers much earlier in the article&mdash;say, when they're first mentioned?
 * 39) **Done.
 * 40) * "Attempting to go back on her deal, Ventress was ordered by Dooku via hologram to kill Katuunko." How so? How does Ventress attempt to do something while she's being ordered to do it?
 * 41) *I'll get through the rest later. Overall, the main issue I'm noticing is coherency with the TCW storyline. Please try to watch the episode again to make sure that you have all the necessary detail in the article.  CC7567  (talk) 19:08, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * 42) **I've given the Clone Wars section a pretty thorough overhaul, including tying it into the larger context of TCW and addressing the specific objection on Ventress' attempt to kill the King. Thanks you for your patience. --Eyrezer 01:55, March 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * 43) * "While the fight was again won by the Republic": doubtful, if it was the clones who retreated.
 * 44) **But the Republic troops crushed and destroyed the droidekas under coral. --Eyrezer 01:34, March 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * 45) ***Could you mention that, then? If possible, please try to add more detail as to the impact that the skirmishes on Rugosa left on the moon's landspace throughout the article.  CC7567  (talk) 02:08, March 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * 46) ****Toppling coral mentioned as well as a note on damage in the Description section. --Eyrezer 20:26, March 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * 47) *I'll be running through this one more time with you to make sure everything is in good shape.  CC7567  (talk) 22:45, March 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * 48) Once more, for luck
 * 49) * Can the "Formerly" be replaced with something more specific, say "pre–Clone Wars" or something? The article shouldn't specifically be based around a certain time period.
 * 50) **Done.
 * 51) * Can you clarify the exclusion of the Neebray from the infobox's immigrated species field? (If it's only supposed to be used for sentient species, then nevermind.)
 * 52) **Yep, for sentients.
 * 53) * Please limit the use of "requested" in the Clone Wars section.
 * 54) **One of the two occurrences of requested modified.
 * 55) * Can the Thief's Eye be mentioned somewhere in the History? If it's relevant enough to make it to the "Description" section, it should be in the History as well.
 * 56) **Added. --Eyrezer 08:30, March 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * 57) *That should be it.  CC7567  (talk) 07:28, March 8, 2010 (UTC)

Comments