Wookieepedia:Featured article nominations/Voss Parck


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

Voss Parck
Support
 * 1) Havac 05:05, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) .  .  .  .  05:45, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Cull Tremayne 14:38, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) jSarek 21:38, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Aeods 18:29, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Lord Hydronium 23:52, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) --Eyrezer 05:50, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) Great article. Atarumaster88  21:41, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Oppose
 * 1) Some or most of the pics have got to go.  The article currently has only one relevant image, in use in his infobox; the rest are a collection of Thrawn pictures with captions trying desperately to give them enough relevance to be shoehorned in. Their lack of relevance make them of poor quality for this article, and thus in violation of Rule 15. Note that there are still one or two images from "Mist Encounter," if we need a replacement or two. jSarek 10:24, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) *Sort of the same with Zsinj though... Cull Tremayne 14:38, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) **If there are pics that you feel are more relevant, feel free to put them in. I generally don't mind when an article has pictures of something other than the subject so long as they're somewhat illustrative, like the Mist Encounter Thrawn one or the this-is-the-ship-he-was-on one. Especially when there are no other decent pics. But if you think it needs to be changed, change it up. Havac 18:24, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) ***I went ahead and thinned out some of the pics. The rest, I think, are sufficiently relevant -- especially the first two -- and the article benefits from having a little something to look at, even if it's not a picture of Voss Parck. Havac 21:31, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) ****Much better. As for a more relevant picture, someone with the issue and a scanner can get one on page 43 of Star Wars Adventure Journal 7.  I agree that somewhat illustrative images are sometimes appropriate, just not in the numbers previously used here.  Now, though, it's good. jSarek 21:38, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) *****That picture, incidentally, has been added. Havac 01:49, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Comments

'''Approved by Inquisitorius - Inq:Voss Parck 07:52, 18 April 2007