Wookieepedia:Featured article nominations

The featured articles of the wiki are articles that represent the best Wookieepedia has to offer.


 * /History
 * /Queue
 * Community vote on the renomination of previous FAs

So just what makes a featured article? Well, we've prepared a list just in case someone should ask that, and it is as follows.

An article must...


 * 1) ...be well written and detailed
 * 2) ...be unbiased, non-point of view
 * 3) ...be sourced with all available sources and appearances
 * 4) ...follow the Manual of Style and the Layout Guide
 * 5) ...not be the object of any ongoing edit wars
 * 6) ...not be tagged with any sort of improvement tags (i.e. more sources, expand, etc)
 * 7) ...have a succint proper lead that can be used for the front page featured box
 * 8) ...have a reasonable amount of red links; use common sense
 * 9) ...have a complete, detailed biography if it's a character article

For more information on what makes a featured article, see Wikipedia:What is a featured article.

How to nominate:


 * 1) First, nominate an article you find is worthy of featured status, putting it at the bottom of the list below; see criteria above.
 * 2) 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 (errors, style, organization, images, notability, sources).
 * 3) Supporters adjust the article until the objectors (with reasonable objections) are satisfied.
 * 4) The article is placed on the featured article list and added to the front page queue.
 * 5) Also, if, at least a week after the article's nomination, that article has 5 supports and no objections, it will be added the queue, and will be officially known as a "featured article".

How to vote:


 * 1) Before doing anything, be sure to read the article completely, keeping a sharp eye out for mistakes.
 * 2) Afterwards, 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.
 * 5) Once all objectors' complaints have been solved (or the article has 5 supports and no objections after at least a week), the article will be added to the queue and be officially known as a "featured article".

Also remember to add nominated at the top of the article you are nominating.

Every Sunday the next article in the queue will be highlighted on the Main Page as featured, marked with the featured template and removed from the list of nominations. The beginning of the article then appears on the Main Page via the featured article template. Nominees that are inactive for a month will be eliminated from the nominations list.

Imperial Ruling Council
Objections
 * 1) Cull Tremayne 21:13, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) &mdash; Silly Dan 00:36, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) Thanos6 02:27, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) KEJ 10:17, 3 March 2006 (UTC) (could use some more images though)
 * 5) Kuralyov 04:34, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) Needs a better introduction that focuses less on its name. It also needs a picture to go with the introduction. --Imp 07:02, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) It's not bad, but: No Behind the scenes, no 1st appearance, no databank, WP or CUSWE links (there has to be at least one), no note on where the photo came from, and some other minor things. --UVnet 06:24, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't get it. There has to be at least one what? Link to databank, WP or CUSWE? Doesn't say so in the nine points under An article must... KEJ 12:19, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Comments
 * Well written and provides an insightful look into the progression of the Empire after Palpatine's death.Cull Tremayne 21:13, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Naga Sadow

 * 1) --MarcK [talk] 22:34, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Mandalorian Crusader 21:30, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) SFH 01:56, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Objections Comments
 * 1) Lacks a Behind the scenes section and some external links. And to be honest it's not THAT long (though this character hasn't really appeard in many works). --UVnet 06:29, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) *There really isn't anything to say in a BTS section, nor are there any interesting links to put in external links. As for the length, see Galactic Republic Chancery election, 32 BBY. --MarcK [talk] 06:39, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) Besides, BTS' are not requirements, they just look nice. My only problem with this is that he doesn't have a lead in quote, but, same with BTS. -- SFH 01:56, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) *So what if they're not requirements? This if FA. This is supposed to be the best of the best. Besides, i'm trying for some time now to bring it into requirements. --UVnet 06:03, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 5) **It may be supposed to be the best of the best, but having a "Behind the scenes" is not necessarily a measure of quality. If anything, having an unnecessary one would detract from the article; if you don't have anything to say on it, then having it in out of a sense of obligation is just clutter.  And honestly, what can you say on some of these?  "Naga Sadow was a comic book character."  Also it should be noted that Galactic Republic Chancery election, 32 BBY didn't have one. - Lord Hydronium 06:31, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 6) The Powers and abilities section pretty much sucks. It's full of misspellings and bad grammar, and even the tense is wrong. KEJ 12:08, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I'll stop nominating TOTJ articles soon, promise. --MarcK [talk] 22:34, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Naga Sadow is cool guy. I want him on the main page.--Mandalorian Crusader 13:28, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Battle of Kashyyyk (Clone Wars)
Objections Comments
 * 1) --Xilentshadow900 22:58, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) --TIEPilot051999 04:33, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) --SkywalkerPL 11:52, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) I would really love to see a battle on the front page, but this is not yet there. A few examples: I know we can't tell the exact numbers yet, but on Casualties, seeing "many droids", or "many wookies/clone troopers" just looks bad; also one picture has no heading; under combatants: "wookies". I mean, come on; also, intro is too short. --UVnet 23:05, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) I've done a little bit of reworking.TIEPilot051999 04:33, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) Where are sources? SkywalkerPL 11:52, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) I think the article should have an 'aftermath' section (separately from the section that's called "Battle") in which the post-battle event are described. KEJ 11:55, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 * This would be the first battle on the front page, and because it's a great, detailed article, it should be featured.--Xilentshadow900 22:59, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Pre-Republic
Objections
 * 1) TIEPilot051999 07:56, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) MoffRebus 11:27, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) Kuralyov 05:51, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) Sith Lord Remi 03:27, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I just like this subject too much to see it being awarded so soon. I think it could do better, and i'd love to help. This is a perfect example where a wikipedia style peer review could help. Any suggestions? --UVnet 14:01, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree with UV. This can be expanded a hole lot more. And it also needs more sources. --Imp 14:54, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Heck, I'll agree with that, though I appreciate the nomination. I'd be curious what you feel can be added, so I've put it up for Peer review.  I basically culled the NEC for this, but I'm sure I missed things from other sources (the Sharu are mentioned on the talk page, for example). - Lord Hydronium 04:28, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Comments
 * This reminds me of the Rokur Gepta article: a sorry state of affairs one week, FA worthy the next. Many props to Lord Hydronium for that. TIEPilot051999 07:56, 14 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Being the originator of its first poor and hopeless version, I concur. MoffRebus 11:27, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) Sith Lord Remi 03:25, 25 March 2006 (UTC)    I have an immense interest in pre-Republic time, although this article was copied nearly word for word from the new essential chronology.
 * Actually owning the NEC, I can tell you that you're definately incorrect. QuentinGeorge 10:04, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Kadann

 * 1) Thanos6 15:56, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) QuentinGeorge 10:03, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) 66.25.174.183 16:12, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Objections

Comments
 * Gah...now you've actually made me work on the page again!! It needs a longer opening crawl before it can be featured at the very least. S'all I can really think of besides that. &mdash;Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 02:56, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Could do with a Behind the scenes section, though. QuentinGeorge 10:03, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Done. :) Better? &mdash;Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 11:27, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Booster Terrik

 * 1) Razzy1319 14:56, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) &mdash;Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 22:14, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) TIEPilot051999 23:46, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) Danik Kreldin 23:49, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 5) CooperTFN 23:51, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 6) ThrawnRocks 02:04, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 7) --[[Image:BFguy.gif]]--Inmobilus 17:06, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 8) Darth Benobi 17:58, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 9) QuentinGeorge 10:06, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Hey, this article kicks ass! KEJ 11:45, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) &mdash;Darth Culator   (talk)  12:39, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Objections
 * The article is good. I can't argue that. A little heavy on the quotes to my taste. But the introduction in very un-encyclopedic. Also some of the headers are somewhat ambiguous; what does "Stability and purpose" mean? --UVnet 18:30, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The intro is supposed to summarize the guy's life and character in a paragraph. If I can't be any more florid than "Booster Terrik was a smuggler who owned a Star Destroyer", I might as well stop now. http://media.ign.com/boardfaces/9.gif I would think "stability and purpose" would be self-explanatory to anyone who knew what the words meant and read the article, but it's referring to his financial stability in the wake of Yaga Minor and his protection of the Jedi students giving him a higher purpose for his life, pulling him into the moral cause of the war. CooperTFN 03:54, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * What's so complicated? How about something like he was a smuggler, from corellia, the father of mirax terrik who would later marry corran horn, took sides with the new republic and the NJO and the owner and commander of the star destroyer errant venture. Now take all that and make it encyclopedic ("an imposing gundark of a Human"?) and voila. And for the example "Stability and purpose" - how about splitting it into two different sections (it is quite long any way), and naming them something like "Financial stability" and "joining the war" or "protection of the Jedi students" or somthing like that. --UVnet 18:45, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * It's not a matter of complicated, it's a matter of good and bad. On the other points, I just disagree in general. CooperTFN 04:22, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Comments
 * Just about time too... It may need some more images but basically it looks great. --Razzy1319 14:56, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * It sure looked a hell of a lot better than it did the last time I checked it (which was two days ago).TIEPilot051999 23:46, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Looks pretty good. --Danik Kreldin 23:49, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I was gonna give it a few days in Peer Review first, but whatever. http://media.ign.com/boardfaces/4.gif CooperTFN 23:51, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Hell, yeah! The article looks great, Cooper! ThrawnRocks 02:04, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * BTS = Thumbs up! --UVnet 18:03, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I like. Especially the BTS about Zahn and Stackpole. I love that kind of stuff. And the writing style just works for me, so I also vote to encourage its proliferation. &mdash;Darth Culator   (talk)  12:39, 27 March 2006 (UTC)