Wookieepedia:Comprehensive article nominations



THIS IS A TRIAL RUN.

'''Comprehensive articles are not in effect&mdash;this is merely a trial run to determine whether or not the system can actually work. As such, certain rules may change over the course of the trial run, as we sample different possibilities and variations. If you would like to see any tweaks or amendments or even any additions sampled during the trial run, please make a note of them on the talk page, and we will attempt to work them into the itinerary. This trial is scheduled to conclude on July 1, 2010, after which the entire process will be taken to the Consensus track for either approval or rejection. For further reading, please consult the original Senate Hall thread suggesting this initiative.'''

This page is for the nomination of "comprehensive articles". For a list of "comprehensive articles", see Category:Wookieepedia comprehensive articles. (Will not be created until trial period is over.)

What is a "comprehensive article?"

A "comprehensive article" is an article that contains all information regarding the topic. Often, "comprehensive articles" cannot reach Featured or Good Article status due to their limited content. This process is intended to recognize articles that contain all relevant canon information, yet are still under the 250 word limit required for a Good Article. The purpose of this is twofold&mdash;firstly, to help users distinguish what is a stub, and what is merely a short article with no further relevant material to be added, and, more importantly, to highlight for the reader when they are reading something that has been judged definitely "comprehensive"&mdash;that is, a guarantee to the reader that whatever they are reading contains the sum total of all available content.

Nominations and promotions of the Comprehensive article process are overseen by a collective of users known as the "Gray Cadre," which is made up of the Inquisitorius, the AgriCorps, the heads of the prominent WookieeProjects, and various other experienced users who are considered qualified to adequately judge the nominated material.

Lucasfilm Ltd. and its many licensees continue to expand the Star Wars universe. Since new information might become available, it may be necessary to revoke a "comprehensive article's" status. A forum will be used to nominate articles that have fallen out-of-date. (Note: This is not applicable during the trial period.) Members of the Gray Cadre will then post a warning template on that page, and a grace period of one week will be instituted in which the article can been improved. If there is a significant amount of new information, it is likely that once updated, the article will become eligible for Good article status, and thereby ineligible for Comprehensive article status.

READ THIS FIRST!

An article must&hellip;


 * 1) &hellip;be well-written and detailed.
 * 2) &hellip;be unbiased, non-point of view.
 * 3) &hellip;be sourced with all available sources and appearances.
 * 4) &hellip;follow the Manual of Style, Layout Guide, and all other policies on Wookieepedia. This is, of course, within reason. If a topic only has a very limited degree of content that cannot be divided up into the relevant article sections, it is not required that it follow the Layout Guide precisely. This is to be judged on a case-by-case basis.
 * 5) &hellip;following the review process, be stable, i.e., 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) &hellip;not be tagged with any sort of improvement tags (i.e. more sources, expand, etc).
 * 7) &hellip;have no redlinks.
 * 8) &hellip;have all relevant canon information presented.
 * 9) &hellip;be completely referenced for all available material and sources. See Sourcing for more information. While this is not required for an article possessing a singular source, it is encouraged, as it provides both uniformity and a good infrastructure should the topic be referenced in any future materials.
 * 10) &hellip;have all quotes and images sourced.
 * 11) &hellip;provide at least one relevant quote on the article if available.
 * 12) &hellip;include a "Behind the scenes" section for In-Universe articles.
 * 13) &hellip;counting the introduction and "Behind the scenes" material, must not exceed 250 words in length (not including captions, quotes, or headers, etc). Any articles exceeding the limit should be taken to the Good Article nominations page for consideration.

How to nominate:


 * 1) First, nominate an article you find is worthy of comprehensive status, putting it at the bottom of the list below. Nominated articles must meet all thirteen requirements stated above.
 * 2) Add at the top of the article you are nominating. (This will not be done during the trial period.)
 * 3) Be sure to place sign in the "Nominated by" line when the nomination is posted for voting.
 * 4) Others will object to the nomination if they disagree that the article is good enough; they will then supply reasons for doing so, and ways to improve the article in accordance with the established rules.
 * 5) Nominators and supporters will adjust the article until the objectors (with reasonable objections) are satisfied. Objectors may also make alterations&mdash;if there is any reason for contention on a given point, it should be settled in a civil manner in the nomination field itself.
 * 6) There is no limit to the amount of nominations a given user can submit at any given time.

How to vote:


 * 1) Before doing anything, be sure to read the article completely, keeping a sharp eye out for mistakes.
 * 2) Afterward, compare the article to the criteria listed above, and then either support or object the article's nomination.
 * 3) *If you object, please supply concrete reasons for doing so, and how it can be improved.
 * 4) As stated above, any objections will be looked upon by the nominator, supporters, and anyone willing to improve the article, and action will be taken to please the objectors. Do not strike other users' objections; it is up to the objector to review the changes and strike if they are satisfied.
 * 5) There are several ways in which an article can receive the required number of votes. Within a 48-hour period of nomination, only Gray Cadre votes will count towards the total, although anyone may choose to vote in that window. If two members of the Gray Cadre support a nomination in that window, and there are no outstanding objections, the article can be considered a "Comprehensive article" and by tagged with the template 48 hours after the initial nomination.  The talk page will also be tagged with the  template. (This will not be done during the trial period.) When the 48 hours are up, any user's votes will contribute towards the total. If no Gray Cadre members have voted for an article, a total of six votes from regular users will be required. If one Gray Cadre member has voted for an article, three regular votes will be required. After the 48 hour period, an article can still also pass with just two Gray Cadre votes.
 * 6) *Additionally, members of the Gray Cadre can bypass the nomination process. Not including the writer of the article, two Gray Cadre members can sign off on an article's talk page in unison, and those articles will also be instantaneously promoted. This action can only be initiated by someone on the approved Gray Cadre list, and is performed internally. Regular users must go through the nomination process. (This will not be done during the trial period.)
 * 7) Once a nomination is successful, it will be placed on the Comprehensive article list. During the trial period, however, all nominations will be archived on this subpage, and will be divided up into successful and unsuccessful nominations. If the process proves successful, these will retroactively be granted true Comprehensive article status, and the nominations will be more properly archived. Anyone can archive a nomination&mdash;just make sure it has the correct number of votes, has been nominated for at least a week (or 48 hours if there are two GC votes, and that there are absolutely no outstanding objections. If you are not sure how to do this, just ask, and someone will likely be more than willing to help you. Also, if you think you can slip one past us, think again&mdash;someone is always watching you.

All nominations will be considered idle and are subject to instantaneous removal by Gray Cadre members if objections are not addressed, or at least not answered, after a period of 2 weeks.

Topas dosLa

 * Nominated by: Thefourdotelipsis 11:53, June 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Interesting stuff!

(2 GCs/6 Users/8 Total)
Support
 * 1) --Skippy Farlstendoiro 12:11, June 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) Imperialles 14:07, June 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) -- TK-299  (Click Here) Imperial_Emblem.svg 07:43, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 11:06, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 5)  JMAS  Jolly Trooper.png Hey, it's me! 13:23, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 6) NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 01:01, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 7) ~ SavageBob 16:07, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * 8)  —Xwing328 (Talk) 04:13, June 7, 2010 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) Farl: Can you specify in the intro what an Overliege is? A planetary leader or something... --Skippy Farlstendoiro 12:08, June 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) *Tweaked. Thefourdotelipsis 12:10, June 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) Should the d in "dosLa" be capitalized at the beginning of a sentence?  NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 02:51, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) *Ehh... good question. I'm not sure how this is normally handled... anyone else can feel free to butt in, because I genuinely have no idea. Thefourdotelipsis 13:06, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 5) **I have no clue what would be proper here either. If it's alright, I just changed it to "Overliege dosLa" to solve the issue. -  JMAS  Jolly Trooper.png Hey, it's me! 13:09, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 6) ***Good thinking. Thanks. :) Thefourdotelipsis 13:12, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 7) Does the OS capitalize "Overliege" in all instances? Typically, we should only capitalize titles when used in front of a name, so "the king ate custard" but "King George ate custard." Of course, SW does lots of stuff weird, so what's the OS do? ~ SavageBob 15:58, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 8) *It doesn't say, but I agree with you that we should not capitalize those titles. It's just that I've seen the incorrect capitalization enforced wholesale elsewhere, and was loathe to rock the boat. However, I'll gladly change it here. Thefourdotelipsis 00:45, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 9) You have dosLa in Category:Males, but this is never stated in the article or infobox. Is it even defined in canon?  —Xwing328 (Talk) 05:55, June 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * 10) *No. Removed. Thefourdotelipsis 01:39, June 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * 11) **Ok, added dosLa to Category:Unidentified gender instead. —Xwing328 (Talk) 04:13, June 7, 2010 (UTC)

Comments

Relus

 * Nominated by: Xicer9 [[Image:atgar.svg|20px]]( Combadge) 21:04, June 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Way to go, Artoo.

(1 GCs/5 Users/6 Total)
Support
 * 1)  NAYAYEN : TALK 22:20, June 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) Imperialles 06:49, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) -- TK-299  (Click Here) Imperial_Emblem.svg 08:54, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 23:47, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 5) Nice --Jinzler 14:31, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 6) Thefourdotelipsis 08:16, June 5, 2010 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) I think the details of the infobox should all really be mentioned somewhere in the prose section of articles, in the same way that intros cannot contain unique information.  SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 10:47, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) *I already mentioned everything except its sun and grid coordinate. Since I already mentioned the system, naming the sun seems sort of redundant and unnecessary. As for the grid coordinate, we don't typically use those in article bodies, at least from the articles I've seen. They're just more for reference. Xicer9 [[Image:atgar.svg|20px]]( Combadge) 16:41, June 2, 2010 (UTC)

Comments
 * P. 120 of TEA gives us an approximate date for its discovery. Might be worth mentioning. --Imperialles 06:49, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * That maps seems sort of contradictory. It lists 1000-25 BBY as the settlement dates of the Deep Core, but page 10 of the Atlas says Palpatine didn't begin sending probots to search for viable routes into the Deep Core until the Clone Wars. I think I'll just leave it out for now. Xicer9 [[Image:atgar.svg|20px]]( Combadge) 16:41, June 2, 2010 (UTC)

Battle of Mimban

 * Nominated by:  JangFett  (Talk) 22:29, June 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Giving this a go. :P

(2 GCs/7 Users/9 Total)
Support
 * 1) Looks good after 3 attempts at a copy-edit and an edit conflict headache. :P &mdash; Master Jonathan New Jedi Order.svg ( Jedi Council Chambers ) 22:38, June 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2)  Jonjedigrandmaster  ( Talk ) 23:48, June 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 02:31, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) Imperialles 07:05, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 5) -- TK-299  (Click Here) Imperial_Emblem.svg 09:19, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 6) SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 11:10, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 7)  NAYAYEN : TALK 11:24, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 8)  Clone Commander Lee  Talk 18:38, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 9) SOTME references in TCW? Good Lord. Thefourdotelipsis 04:31, June 6, 2010 (UTC)

Object Comments
 * 1) Just a couple things
 * 2) * Kill that OOU "unidentified" in the infobox; even something as simple as like "Opposition to the Republic" might work better there
 * 3) **Addressed
 * 4) * How important is it to mention who heard the shout-out? Not really a request that you remove that bit; more of a suggestion. I won't obsess over it if you wanna keep it there. :P
 * 5) **The clones heard the shout-out, and it was mentioned onscreen, not off. :P If you want, I could remove it.  JangFett  (Talk) 23:45, June 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * 6) ***No problem, like I said, I'm not gonna obsess over that one. Jonjedigrandmaster  ( Talk ) 23:48, June 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * 7) * Jonjedigrandmaster ( Talk ) 23:36, June 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * 8) Even if it's barely anything, there still needs to be some kind of body. As it stands, the article is just a Bts.  NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 01:26, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 9) * Oh, I agree with you. But sadly, those are the rules. Even if I can follow the LG, and I would, there's very limited amount of information in the article that cannot adhere to the GAN requirements.  JangFett  (Talk) 02:10, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 10) **For this process, one should follow the LG if possible, but it is not a requirement due to the limited content of these articles. In this case, the "intro" really is the body, which is why it's sourced. Jonjedigrandmaster  ( Talk ) 02:17, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 11) ***Ehhh, that don't sit right with me. If you open that door to not writing up any body, you open the door to people doing that for articles that can have a body (Which is any article, really, but I digress). NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 02:31, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 12) ****Read rule 4 above. If it's within reason, then yes, there should be a body. But this is treated case-by-case, because a lot of these articles are just too small for that to be practical. Jonjedigrandmaster  ( Talk ) 02:40, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 13) Can you state in the body/intro/intrody thing who gave the shout-out? Darth Trayus ( Trayus Academy ) 07:06, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 14) *Addressed; hope that takes care of it, Trayus.  JangFett  (Talk) 21:51, June 3, 2010 (UTC)

Borna

 * Nominated by: -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 22:33, June 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Let's give this a try.

(1 GCs/5 Users/6 Total)
Support
 * 1)  NAYAYEN : TALK 23:13, June 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) Thefourdotelipsis 00:02, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) Imperialles 12:07, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 23:49, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 5) ~ SavageBob 16:33, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * 6) Looking good --Jinzler 18:01, June 6, 2010 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) Nayayen has an objection AND A HALF!
 * 2) * "Borna was a composer who lived during the Imperial Period. Borna was a member of the Alliance to Restore the Republic..." Could this be reworded so it doesn't sound like two intros bolted together?
 * 3) **Done.
 * 4) * "However, the Empire did not take kindly to such activism, and Borna died while still very young..." The way you word this implies that the Empire killed him. Can you clarify as to whether they did or not?
 * 5) **Well, the wording in the source isn't clear on this, but the implication is very clear, so I've tried to reflect that in the article.
 * 6) *CANs are fun aren't they?  NAYAYEN : TALK 22:55, June 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * 7) **Most certainly. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 23:11, June 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * 8) "Borna died while still very young at some point between 2 BBY and 5 ABY." What are these dates based on? --Imperialles 06:51, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 9) *Added an explanatory footnote, should be good now. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 12:06, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 10) Savage
 * 11) * "However, as he was a member of the Rebel Alliance—founded in 2 BBY according to The New Essential Chronology—his date of death must be between the Alliance's conception and when Dark Forces: Jedi Knight is set, in 5 ABY." The change in tense here is a bit jarring; change the "must be" to "must have been"?
 * 12) *The first three sentences could be joined into a single paragraph and it wouldn't seem so choppy. Otherwise, solid work! ~ SavageBob 00:40, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 13) **Done and done. Thank you very much. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 16:22, June 5, 2010 (UTC)

Comments

Pelemaxian

 * Nominated by: ~ SavageBob 00:33, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Let's give this a shot. ~ SavageBob 00:33, June 2, 2010 (UTC)

(1 GCs/2 Users/3 Total)
Support
 * 1) Loving the sheer amount of references. --Imperialles 07:02, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 07:59, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) Thefourdotelipsis 08:47, June 5, 2010 (UTC)

Object

Comments

224th

 * Nominated by: NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 02:33, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: 222 words. I'd like it to go to GA if anyone has an idea on what I could add.

(2 GCs/2 Users/4 Total)
Support Object
 * 1) Imperialles 07:09, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) Thefourdotelipsis 09:04, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) -- TK-299  (Click Here) Imperial_Emblem.svg 12:59, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4)  JangFett  (Talk) 04:20, June 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Fett
 * 2) * Seeing a couple of sourcing issues. Make sure you source "around 22 BBY" and "Rise of the Empire" to the TCW novel.As for Echo and Hevy's clone numbers, they weren't mentioned in the episode, but rather introduced in the TCW Ultimate Battles visual guide. You can pipe link to show their nicknames only, however.
 * 3) **The numbers themselves don't have to be sourced, the person is the same and we use the numbers if we have them per precedent. As for the "Around 22 BBY" and such, sourced. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 05:27, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) ***I suggest that you pipe link their articles to their nicknames then. It would be more accurate, since you don't want to source them. There clone numbers weren't mentioned in the episode.
 * 5) ****There's no reason to source their numbers, that's their official name. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 15:14, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * 6) *****They weren't mentioned in the episode, however. You currently have them sourced to it. Please either pipelink to their nicknames, or properly source it.  JangFett  (Talk) 23:54, June 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * 7) ******Honestly, that's dumb. It's been done on the other articles though, so I fold. --Naru
 * 8) * In the intro, what do you mean "that included Mud-Jumpers"? The 224th? the Grand Army of the Republic? That line seems out of place, as it doesn't have the necessary context. Perhaps you can create a new sentence explaining who they are.
 * 9) **Fixed. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 05:27, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 10) *"The shout-out, dedicating the following song to the group, was heard by their fellow clone troopers" Whose "fellow" clone troopers?
 * 11) **Addressed. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 05:27, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 12) ***Now it sounds like Fives, Echo, Hevy, Cutup, and other clones listed were part of the 224th. Please fix this.
 * 13) ****Fixed. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 15:14, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * 14) * Do we know for sure that patrolling the listening post was the rookie troops first assignment?
 * 15) **I believe they said that in the episode but I removed it. That didn't have to be mentioned. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 05:27, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 16) * Other than that, the bts could use some shaping up. You can take a look at other TCW-related articles to see what's usually done.  JangFett  (Talk) 03:18, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 17) **How's this? NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 05:27, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 18) ***Better, but do you need to mention the sentence about the comic book mentioning the battle? In the comic itself, it doesn't mention anything about the 224th.  JangFett  (Talk) 03:00, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 19) ****I think so, since it is such a narrow, mostly unexplored event, it's noteworthy that the battle was metioned in another source. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 15:14, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * 20) L'Imperialles
 * 21) * Intro: "fighting to defend the Republic" Do we know that they were defending the planet, not attacking it? If not, best drop that line.
 * 22) **Removed. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 00:40, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 23) * BTS: "It was in that issue that the 44th was introduced to Star Wars continuity." How is the 44th relevant to this BTS?
 * 24) **Removed. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 00:40, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * --Imperialles 07:14, June 2, 2010 (UTC)

Comments
 * It seemed one of your Notes and references was broken, so I feekstit. :D  TK-299  (Click Here) Imperial_Emblem.svg 10:57, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. NaruHina  Talk Anakinsolo.png 00:40, June 3, 2010 (UTC)

Unidentified Dark Jedi (Endar Spire)

 * Nominated by: SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 07:29, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments:

(1 GCs/3 Users/4 Total)
Support
 * 1) -- TK-299  (Click Here) Imperial_Emblem.svg 11:20, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) Imperialles 11:52, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) &mdash; Master Jonathan New Jedi Order.svg ( Jedi Council Chambers ) 00:10, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) -- 1358  (Talk) 04:51, June 3, 2010 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) Is that image of him? If so, put it in the infobox. How do you know his opponent was a Jedi Master? --Imperialles 07:58, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) *Are you sure we're meant to put battle scenes into infoboxes? I could crop the image a bit, but it might look ugly due to pixelation. I've reffed the Jedi Master bit to the Prima guide. Thanks for the review :D SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 08:07, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) **Well, it is the only image we have of the guy, regardless of quality. --Imperialles 08:08, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) ***Done. SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 10:26, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 5) I'm taking Xd's question below and making it a full objection. I'm pretty certain the "Dark" in "Dark Jedi" is always capitalized, so please correct that unless you can point to a source where it is not. &mdash; Master Jonathan  New Jedi Order.svg ( Jedi Council Chambers ) 16:45, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 6) *Well, I took the name from the quote, in which dark is not capitalised. However, I've changed it and moved the article, since it is capped in the Prima Guide and in a GA. Thanks. SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 23:32, June 2, 2010 (UTC)

Comments
 * Can an admin delete the redirect here? Thanks. SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 07:29, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Imp took care of it. SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 07:54, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Why isn't "dark" capitalized? In this article, nommed for FA, it is capitalized. -- 1358  (Talk) 12:38, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * See my response to Jonathan above. Thanks, SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 23:32, June 2, 2010 (UTC)

Nigel III

 * Nominated by: Imperialles 07:49, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Followup to Nigel VI

(0 GCs/3 Users/3 Total)
Support
 * 1) SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 07:53, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) -- TK-299  (Click Here) Imperial_Emblem.svg 11:14, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3)  NAYAYEN : TALK 12:28, June 2, 2010 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) In the Bts, can't you just say that it isn't explicitly stated whether it is in the Nigel system rather than smack of speculation and say "could very well"?  NAYAYEN : TALK  11:23, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) *Better? --Imperialles 11:42, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) **Much ^_^  NAYAYEN : TALK 12:28, June 2, 2010 (UTC)

Comments

Canary

 * Nominated by: ~ SavageBob 04:00, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Tweet.

(1 GCs/3 Users/4 Total)
Support
 * 1) Thefourdotelipsis 16:15, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) Imperialles 16:17, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 23:16, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) -- TK-299  (Click Here) Imperial_Emblem.svg 13:13, June 5, 2010 (UTC)

Object
 * Hmm, how do we know that they're birds? Thefourdotelipsis 04:28, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * I see your point, but I'd say it's a case of the duck test (canary test?). So, the same way we call someone who looks human but isn't explicitly called a Human a Human. In other words, we have no reason to believe Smith meant something other than tweety-bird canaries. ~ SavageBob 04:39, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't know that the duck test is really applicable, since we don't know what a Star Wars canary looks like, and it's probably more something that falls under authorial intent, which we can't always use. I know this sounds pedantic, but... I'd probably say yeah if they were said to look like Quorsavs, but they aren't, as far as I'm aware. Thefourdotelipsis 04:49, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * No, I understand your argument, and it's sensible. The thing is, though, I see this as falling into the "English" assumption we all make all the time. If we see a standard English word used in a source with no further context, we just assume that that word means the same thing in Star Wars as it does in the real world. We don't second-guess words like "blanket" or "window" or "heart attack"; we take them to mean what they mean in the real world (these are made-up examples, mind you, although I can dig up specific examples if folks want). In other words, barring any reason to think otherwise, canaries in Star Wars should probably just be taken to be canaries like ours. If this is beyond the scope of the CA page, though, I'll rescind the nomination, because SH or CT might be more appropriate. Tweet. ~ SavageBob 16:10, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * No no, that's sound enough logic for me. :) Thefourdotelipsis 16:15, June 3, 2010 (UTC)

Comments

Agorffi

 * Nominated by: --Eyrezer 10:45, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments:

(1 GCs/3 Users/4 Total)
Support
 * 1) Thefourdotelipsis 10:55, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) Imperialles 10:56, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) ~ SavageBob 16:15, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 02:45, June 4, 2010 (UTC)

Object

Comments

Aldereenian

 * Nominated by: --Eyrezer 11:53, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: My third A species

(1 GCs/4 Users/5 Total)
Support
 * 1) Killiks? Thefourdotelipsis 13:44, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) Imperialles 14:33, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) ~ SavageBob 22:19, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) Jinzler 18:20, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * 5) SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 04:17, June 6, 2010 (UTC)

Object

Comments
 * I know inferred Atlas info is less applicable for species than it is for planets, but is there nothing? ~ SavageBob 16:18, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well I perfer to only infer it if it actually appears on a map, which is obviously a different approach to that taken with Perlemaxian... --Eyrezer 21:46, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * Noted. I, of course, think it's pertinent to note that such-and-such a species's homeworld was in territory considered Fubar Space in the Imbricated Period or whatever, but it's cool without as well. ~ SavageBob 22:19, June 3, 2010 (UTC)

Aplocaph

 * Nominated by: --Eyrezer 11:53, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: My fourth A species

(1 GCs/1 Users/2 Total)
Support
 * 1) Imperialles 14:37, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) ~ SavageBob 16:19, June 3, 2010 (UTC)

Object

Comments
 * Is the gleaming skin for the entire species? Or just for Nagag? SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 10:28, June 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * It might be just him, so I have removed it from the infobox. --Eyrezer 11:38, June 7, 2010 (UTC)

My Ar'krai

 * Nominated by: Imperialles 16:06, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Borsk Fey'lya, the biggest badass in galactic politics. After Pwoe, of course.

(1 GCs/3 Users/4 Total)
Support
 * 1) ~ SavageBob 16:37, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2)  Xicer9 [[Image:atgar.svg|20px]]( Combadge) 19:43, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) Yay Atlas etc. Thefourdotelipsis 05:40, June 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 10:41, June 6, 2010 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) Do we know it was a book per se? Our article on that subject makes books out to be old-school paper-and-ink jobbies. If the OS doesn't specify, perhaps "work" might be substituted to reflect the uncertainty of medium? ~ SavageBob 16:11, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) *Well, if we want to be entirely accurate it would have to be worded as something like "was an object or concept associated with Fey'lya." You have a point, of course; we don't know that it was a book. "Work" is just about vague enough to be accurate, provided we apply WP:DUCK to the matter. Anyway, wording changed. --Imperialles 16:17, June 5, 2010 (UTC)

Comments
 * Actually, I did a bit of searching, and our article is apparently wrong; books in Star Wars can exist on datapads and the like. Stay tuned. ~ SavageBob 16:37, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yep, I just corrected the book article; the term refers to holobooks and flimsiplast as well, so feel free to change the wording back how you had it. ~ SavageBob 16:49, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Alright, changed back. --Imperialles 16:53, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * You could probably explain what "ar'krai" means in it. Either way ar'krai should probably be linked to somewhere. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 19:44, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Added. Sorry about that, I was under the impression that ar'krai was an Atlas invention for some reason. --Imperialles 21:31, June 5, 2010 (UTC)

Vossk

 * Nominated by: Tm T 19:59, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: Not much of my contribution but had this in mind already...

(0 GCs/0 Users/0 Total)
Support

Object
 * 1) It needs to be sourced, and if there's any info from Insider that needs to be added too. I'd say it could expanded a little bit overall too, in terms of context at least. And the BtS needs improvement. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 20:08, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) Can you really source the BtS? If not, then it must go. --Skippy Farlstendoiro 20:26, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) Could you add some quotes to the article? --Jinzler 14:01, June 6, 2010 (UTC)

Comments

Melik Galerha

 * Nominated by:  21:51, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: None.

(0 GCs/1 Users/1 Total)
Support
 * 1) Epic sideburns + moustache = win. SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 10:45, June 6, 2010 (UTC)

Object
 * 1) Just one small thing --- wasn't it the Republic who was sieging the Outer Rim? Menkooroo 04:37, June 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) *Fixed, thanks for the review!-- 05:30, June 6, 2010 (UTC)

Comments

Aleemas

 * Nominated by: —Xwing328 (Talk) 06:52, June 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: None

(1 GCs/3 Users/4 Total)
Support
 * 1) Thefourdotelipsis 10:44, June 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 10:48, June 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) -- TK-299  (Click Here) Imperial_Emblem.svg 10:54, June 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4)  Grunny  ( talk ) 01:45, June 7, 2010 (UTC)

Object

Comments

Pollux Hax

 * Nominated by:  Lele Mj New_Jedi Order.svg ( Holoprojetor ) 14:03, June 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: None

(0 GCs/0 Users/0 Total)
Support

Object
 * 1) Jinzler
 * 2) *The article needs to be sourced, in accordance with Sourcing
 * 3) *You should add a quote, anything suitable from the Coruscant chapter of The Illustrated Star Wars Universe will do
 * 4) *Are you sure that it is appropriate to put him in the Near-Humans category? As far as I am aware, he species is completely unknown, he may be Human or he may not be Near-Human, so unless you know of a source that explicitly calls him a Near-Human, you should remove this
 * 5) *You could perhaps mention in the "Behind the scenes" section the author of The Illustrated Star Wars Universe, and the year in which it was published
 * 6) *TISWU says that Hax served as the Emperor's propaganda chief for several years, you should mention this in the article
 * 7) *You should add a "Personality and traits" section to the article and add a brief description of his appearance, per his picture in TISWU
 * 8) *You possible also mention in a P&T that Hollux was pro-Imperial, supported the Empire, etc
 * 9) *In his Coruscant article, Hax mentions that it is unknown what planet the ch'hala tree comes from. This sort of conflicts a bit with a number of sources in the Living Force campaign, where it is well-known that the ch'hala is from the planet Cularin. You may want to consider something about this to the "Behind the scenes" section
 * 10) *Generally, you need to do more work on the article. I hope this list isn't too daunting, so if you need any help with anything, feel free to ask me or any other users --Jinzler 17:45, June 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * 11) The article should also note who illustrated him. Is his portrait concept art or was it an original work by McQuarrie for TISWU? ~ SavageBob 20:41, June 6, 2010 (UTC)

Comments

Babb

 * Nominated by: --Eyrezer 11:42, June 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: A B species

(0 GCs/0 Users/0 Total)
Support

Object

Comments

Barrckli

 * Nominated by: --Eyrezer 11:42, June 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: A B species

(0 GCs/0 Users/0 Total)
Support

Object

Comments

Bomodon

 * Nominated by: --Eyrezer 11:42, June 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: A B species

(0 GCs/0 Users/0 Total)
Support

Object

Comments

Brogune

 * Nominated by: --Eyrezer 11:42, June 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: A B species

(0 GCs/0 Users/0 Total)
Support

Object

Comments