Wookieepedia:Featured article nominations/Antinnis Tremayne


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

(6 Inqs/1 Users/7 Total)
Support
 * :D Thefourdotelipsis 15:31, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) "Master torturer," indeed. &mdash;Graestan  [[Image:Jedi_Order.jpg|20px]] ( This party's over ) 01:23, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
 * 2)  Greyman ( Paratus ) 03:03, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
 * 3)  Chack Jadson  (Talk)  00:47, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Havac 01:34, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Fat Tremayne FTW. --  Darth Culator  (Talk) 14:51, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Green Tentacle (Talk) 22:20, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Oppose
 * 1) "Dark Vendetta featured Tremayne as the central character, and it provided a degree back story for the High Inquisitor" What is a degree backstory? --Eyrezer 03:15, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) *It's a mistake. Fixed. Thefourdotelipsis 04:16, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) As per previous Consensus Track's, cut content is to be included in the main body with the Cutstart and Cutend templates surrounding it. &mdash;Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 06:18, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) *Could you please cite which CTs these were? I'm honestly curious. Thefourdotelipsis 06:25, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) **The last CT I know of ended in no consensus. Which in that case meant to keep doing what we've been doing. So per precedent, the cut content should be integrated. -- Darth Culator  (Talk) 02:07, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * It shouldn't have to come to this, but I'll have to formally oppose on rule 9 until the cut content is properly integrated. -- Darth Culator  (Talk) 02:35, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) ***Objection struck by Inquisitorius as it's been rectified and user is away. Green Tentacle (Talk) 22:35, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Main quote needs a source. Also, the BTS says that elements of Tremayne's backstory contradicted with the prequels. What specific things were contradictory? Otherwise, very nice.  Chack Jadson  (Talk)  17:03, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) *Fixed. Thefourdotelipsis 08:50, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Good article, but I'd have to say that the EA sections read as too play-by-playish and there should me more detail on just what conflicts between EA and DV. And two-sentence subsections? Really? That's . . . not good formatting. Havac 01:09, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Comments

'''Approved by Inquisitorius 22:23, 7 November 2007 (UTC)