Wookieepedia:Comprehensive article nominations/Siro


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

Siro

 * Nominated by: Menkooroo 15:04, October 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: My penultimate nom for Gotal week.

(2 ECs/2 Users/4 Total)
Support Object
 * 1) --Eyrezer 09:54, November 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) I somehow overlooked this Gotal. ~ SavageBob 19:55, November 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3)  SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 11:22, November 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4)  OLIOSTER  (talk) 11:54, November 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Even without an intro, you are currently at 252 words, making this ineligible for CA. Give it a mini-intro and take it to the GAN!  Jonjedigrandmaster  ( Talk ) 15:05, October 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) *Count again! :^P I removed some extraneous stuff, and not just for the sake of the word count (for truth! I did it before I read your comment). Yay salience! Menkooroo 15:12, October 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) **Haha, well you're now at 247 words. I still think it would be most beneficial to give this a short intro and put it up to GAN, seeing as it is just three words short and the whole purpose of the CAN was to make it so articles that phsyically couldn't get up to 250 words could still have some sort of status, but I suppose that's up to you. Jonjedigrandmaster  ( Talk ) 15:25, October 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) ***I actually feel pretty bad about the amount of context that's in the article already. I cut out a lot during my first draft in order to keep the article as focused on Siro as it could possibly be, and even so, not very much of it is about the Goat. An intro here would be difficult to do without a lot of context itself, and the repeated detailing of context would, IMO, make the article seem like it was more about the events surrounding Siro's death than about Siro. Keeping it short and sweet gives it the focus that it needs when it's so context-heavy. And I mean, if a character only appears in like, two lines out of the entire book, do we really need to make him a GA when we can just as easily make him a CA? Menkooroo 15:58, October 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * 5) ****Fair enough; like I said, it's up to you. :) Jonjedigrandmaster  ( Talk ) 16:12, October 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * 6) Ranks should be capitalized if they are referring to an individual per our MoS.  1358  (Talk) 19:26, November 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * 7) *Can you point out where I haven't done this? As far as I can see, all instances of Lieutenant Siro, Admiral Klauskin, and Captain Biurk are capitalized. Menkooroo 23:52, November 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * 8) **The ranks need to be capitalized if they are referring to an individual, not only when they are placed in front of a name. Example: "&hellip;convinced the admiral to betray the Galactic Alliance." Admiral should be capitalized, since the title is referring to a specific individual. 1358  (Talk) 15:27, November 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 9) ***Done. Menkooroo 23:59, November 2, 2010 (UTC)

Comments