Wookieepedia:Good article nominations/Voorpee

Voorpee

 * Nominated by: ProfessorTofty (talk) 23:15, September 23, 2014 (UTC)
 * Nomination comments: My first try at a good article nomination. I've checked everything, read it over and all the rules and I think it qualifies, but I guess we'll see.

Ecks Dee

 * Lacks sourcing throughout.
 * Linking really needs to be checked.
 * Still lacking throughout, particularly past the intro.
 * This still isn't fixed. 1358  (Talk)  22:29, October 8, 2014 (UTC)
 * I'll review it again once these glaring issues have been fixed. 1358  (Talk)  20:22, October 4, 2014 (UTC)
 * I have added additional references on Behind the scenes and added what links I could find. There is really only one reference and one appearance for the main content: Jedi Academy: Return of the Padawan. Are you just saying that I should link it in more places? I do seem to recall though reading that it doesn't need to be referenced in the intro. As for the linking, I think that's about all that can be done, unless you believe that certain items mentioned in the article are worthy of their own articles that haven't been created yet. ProfessorTofty (talk) 00:43, October 5, 2014 (UTC)
 * You need to source everything. Every paragraph, every infobox item, needs a reference. See other GAs for examples. 1358  (Talk)  08:46, October 5, 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, well, easy enough. Done! ProfessorTofty (talk) 15:54, October 6, 2014 (UTC)
 * Please use the same layout for pets as for individuals (see Gor for precedent).
 * References go after punctuation. 1358  (Talk)  14:59, October 7, 2014 (UTC)
 * Done and done. Doesn't really have much in the way of a personality, sort of a Star Wars tribble, but I did what I could. As for the linking, again, I really think that's about all that can be done, unless you think maybe something like Roan's journal or the care center would be article-worthy. ProfessorTofty (talk) 18:01, October 8, 2014 (UTC)
 * Still present in the infobox.
 * Please use bullet lists for infobox fields with multiple entries.
 * You don't need to source the name in the infobox.
 * To be honest, I think most of the big glaring issues in this article could be fixed by reading other Good Articles. They should give you a general idea of what a GAN should look like. 1358  (Talk)  22:29, October 8, 2014 (UTC)
 * Objections regarding punctuation and using bullets taken care of. Well, actually, the latter really took care of the former. As for your latter point, I'm looking at Ceasar right now, and it actually seems like you're holding me to a higher standard, as that article has no references or sourcing whatsoever. Anyway, I've answered all of your objections, save the bit about the linking. Again, unless you feel that more links should be added because other subjects are article-worthy, I don't see anything else to be linked. I can't just conjure them. ProfessorTofty (talk) 22:34, October 9, 2014 (UTC)
 * Just interjecting here, Ceasar is an anomaly with the lack of sourcing which will be fixed. All GANs need to be sourced. 501st  dogma ( talk ) 22:49, October 9, 2014 (UTC)