Wookieepedia

READ MORE

Wookieepedia
Don't have an account?
Register
Advertisement
Register
Wookieepedia
In a galaxy far, far away....
190,480
pages
in: Semi-protected pages, Wookieepedia Comprehensive article nomination pages, Wookieepedia comprehensive articles

Wookieepedia:Comprehensive article nominations

Revision as of 23:59, 17 May 2011 by Bonslywizard (talk | contribs) (→‎(1 ECs/2 Users/3 Total))
View source

Template:Shortcut

Premium-ComprehensiveArticle

This page is for Comprehensive article nominations. A Comprehensive article is an article that adheres to certain quality standards but cannot reach Good or Featured status due to its limited content. On this page, users can nominate articles that they believe are ready to be reviewed to achieve Comprehensive status.

The article-nomination process is not a way to showcase your favorite articles, but rather articles that are of high quality. Articles placed on this page will be extensively reviewed by experienced editors, including the presiding EduCorps review panel. The nomination process will require the article nominator to respond to objections and improve the article until the requisite number of users supports the nomination.

In undertaking a nomination on this page, the nominator is taking responsibility for their nominated article. This means they need to thoroughly read the following instructions, implement them into their nominated article, and respond to given objections. Nominators are encouraged to ask more experienced editors for guidance and assistance, but self-sufficiency is a requirement of the article-nomination process. It is not inherently the job of reviewers to rewrite elements of an article, but rather to guide nominators to be able to fix issues themselves.

Your nomination is your responsibility. Nominations that severely neglect the following rules or otherwise fall idle after one week will be subject to immediate removal.

READ THIS FIRST!

A Comprehensive article must…

  1. …be well-written and comprehensively detailed.
  2. …be unbiased, with a neutral point of view.
  3. …have comprehensive Appearances and Sources lists.
  4. …be fully referenced, including all quotes and images. See Wookieepedia:Sourcing for more information.
  5. …follow the Manual of Style, Layout Guide, and all other policies on Wookieepedia.
  6. …be stable during and following the review process. This means the article does not change significantly from day to day with new content and is not the subject of ongoing edit wars. This does not apply to vandalism or other administrative edits, such as page protection.
  7. …not be tagged with any sort of improvement tags (i.e. more sources, expand, etc).
  8. …have no redlinks.
  9. …provide at least one quote on the article if available. A leading quote at the beginning of the article is preferred but not required if no quotes are available. Although quotes may be placed in the body of the article, a maximum of one quote is allowed at the beginning of each section or subsection.
  10. …include a "Behind the scenes" section for in-universe articles.
  11. …include a reasonable number of images of the highest quality to illustrate the article, as source availability permits.
  12. …provide an introduction that gives a good summary of the topic if the article reaches 165 words, not counting the "Behind the scenes" section (not including captions, quotes, headers, etc). Conversely, an article must not have an introduction if it is less than 165 words (with the exception of articles on out-of-universe products), not counting the "Behind the scenes" section. For clarification, please refer to this flowchart.
  13. …not exceed 250 words in length if it provides an introduction. This word total counts the introduction, the article body, and "Behind the scenes" material, but not captions, quotes, headers, etc. However, any article that does not provide an introduction per Rule #12 is eligible to be nominated for Comprehensive status regardless of word count. For clarification, please refer to this flowchart.
  14. …not be deliberately shortened if it approaches the 165- or 250-word limits.
  15. …be properly titled in accordance with Wookieepedia's treatment of Canon and Legends articles; i.e., no nomination may have "/Canon" in the title.

How to nominate:

  1. Select an article you feel is worthy of Comprehensive status. Nominated articles must meet all fifteen requirements stated above.
  2. Add {{CAnom}} at the top of the article you are nominating, and save the page. Please note that if the article you are nominating has been nominated for Comprehensive article status previously, you will need to specify the number of the nomination as a parameter (e.g. {{CAnom|second}}).
  3. Open the redlink in a new tab to create the nomination page, modifying the preloaded instructions as necessary.
  4. Copy the code provided to the bottom of this page.
  5. Purge the article to update the template.
  6. Other users will object to the nomination with issues and suggested improvements (errors, style, organization, images, notability, sources, etc).
  7. The nominator should then adjust the article until the objections are satisfied. The objector is responsible for striking their objection when it has been addressed, not the nominator. Additionally, reviewers will often copy-edit the article themselves as desired to fix any issues.
  8. Following their review, other users will vote to support the nomination. Users may not vote on their own nomination.
  9. Each user shall be limited to eight active Comprehensive article nominations at any given time. Any additional nominations will be subject to immediate removal.
  10. Users must successfully complete one Comprehensive article nomination before they can have two nominations active on the CAN page at one time. Likewise, users must complete two successful CA nominations before they can have three, and so on.

How to review:

  1. To review an article, users should read the article completely, keeping a sharp eye out for mistakes.
  2. The article should be reviewed with the criteria listed above, and any issues should be placed under the Object section of the article's nomination page. Objections should be clearly explained, and detail how the article can be improved.
  3. Objections should then be addressed by the nominator. Once the objector is satisfied, they should strike their objection. The nominator should not strike reviewers' objections for them.
  4. Once a reviewer is satisfied with the article, they can vote to support it. Please note that in order to support a nomination, you must have 50 mainspace edits.

Result:

  1. If a nomination has been active for over two days and has no active objections, it may pass with a total of either three EduCorps votes or two EduCorps and three user votes.
  2. Once the nomination is successful, the article will be considered a "Comprehensive article." As such, an EduCorps member will archive the nomination using JocastaBot in Wookieepedia's Discord server and place the article on the Comprehensive articles page. Only members of the EduCorps are allowed to perform these archiving tasks.
All nominations will be considered idle and are subject to immediate removal by EduCorps vote if objections are not addressed after a period of 1 week.


This page is for the nomination of "comprehensive articles". For a list of "comprehensive articles", see Category:Wookieepedia comprehensive articles.

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—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"—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 "EduCorps," which is made up of the Inquisitorius, the AgriCorps, 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. Members of the EduCorps will then post a warning template on that page, and a grace period of one week will be instituted in which the article can be 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…

  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, 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. …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. …not be tagged with any sort of improvement tags (i.e. more sources, expand, etc).
  7. …have no redlinks.
  8. …have all relevant canon information presented.
  9. …be completely referenced for all available material and sources. See Wookieepedia: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. …have all quotes and images sourced.
  11. …provide at least one relevant quote on the article if available.
  12. …include a "Behind the scenes" section for in-universe articles.
  13. …counting the introduction, the article body, 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.
  14. …if the nominated article reaches 200 words or greater, the nominator must either provide an intro or draft an intro and provide a link to the revision in the nomination, showing that the intro does not elevate the article over 250 words. Exceptions can be made for articles wherein the majority of the text is in the "Behind the scenes" section.

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 {{CAnom}} at the top of the article you are nominating.
  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—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. Users may not vote on their own articles.
  7. 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.
    • If you object, please supply concrete reasons for doing so, and how it can be improved.
  3. 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.
  4. There are several ways in which an article can receive the required number of votes. Within a 48-hour period of nomination, only EduCorps votes will count towards the total, although anyone may choose to vote in that window. If two members of the EduCorps support a nomination in that window, and there are no outstanding objections, the article can be considered a "Comprehensive article" and be tagged with the {{Eras|comp}} template 48 hours after the initial nomination. The talk page will also be tagged with the {{CA}} template. When the 48 hours are up, any user's votes will contribute towards the total. If one EduCorps member has voted for an article after a week, three regular votes will be required. After the 48 hour period, an article can still also pass with just two EduCorps votes.
  5. Once a nomination is successful, it will be placed on the Comprehensive article list. Instructions on how to archive nominations, successful or otherwise, can be found here. Anyone can archive a nomination—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 EC 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—someone is always watching you.


All nominations will be considered idle and are subject to instantaneous removal by EduCorps members if objections are not addressed, or at least not answered, after a period of 1 week.



Comprehensive article nominations

Crab-stuffed creampuff

  • Nominated by: NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 00:54, April 25, 2011 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: What can I say? They amuse me.

(0 ECs/2 Users/2 Total)

Support

  1. I remember these things. Ugh, crabs. Holocron Greatholocron (Complain) 16:01, April 26, 2011 (UTC)
  2. —Axinal Convocation Chamber 18:02, May 4, 2011 (UTC)

Object

  • Someone got lazy and just added the note that "Life Day means birthday" (in not so many words) to the article Life Day, but in reality, we've got two different phenomena here: the Wookiee holiday, and the birthday analog. In short, I think the link to Life Day should be changed to Life Day (Mon Calamari) or somesuch so this will be cleared up. Other than that, it's all good! ~SavageBOB sig 05:32, May 1, 2011 (UTC)
    • Done. There's that buzzword again. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 02:39, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
  • Per the naming policy, the article should probably be named Crab-stuffed creampuff.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 01:42, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
  • Can the name Dac be sourced to The Doomsday Ship?
    • The specific name isn't what needs to be sourced. That it is from their homeworld is clear from the quote in the article. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 21:13, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
      • Well, that it is from their homeworld can be sourced with The Doomsday Ship, but the fact that their homeworld is Dac still needs a source, maybe from Geonosis and the Outer Rim Worlds.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 00:09, May 3, 2011 (UTC)
        • I'm gonna plead no contest to this. The name itself is not what needs to be sourced, merely the information that it comes from the Mon Cal homeworld (which is called Dac). However, I don't feel like arguing over this. I'm busy this week. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 17:57, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
          • I'm fairly certain that the name still needs to be sourced For example, I use "Bright Tree Village" in a lot of my Star Wars: Ewoks noms, but since the village is never named in the series, I'm told to source it to The Essential Guide to Characters or something. Either way, that's my last objection, so good work.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 18:02, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
  • Just de-pluralize the name in the infobox, and I think that's all I have. Nice work!—Axinal Convocation Chamber 11:55, May 2, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Felloux

  • Nominated by: NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 03:51, April 25, 2011 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: Greetings, fellows

(1 ECs/3 Users/4 Total)

Support

  1. Nice. Imperators II(Talk) 23:44, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Another good article, Naru.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 00:16, April 29, 2011 (UTC)
  3. ECvote ~SavageBOB sig 17:04, May 1, 2011 (UTC)
  4. Nice job, Naru! --Gmalek (Hit Me Up) 23:42, May 5, 2011 (UTC)

Object

  1. Imperators II
  2. Axinal
    • I don't own the New Essential Chronology, so I'm just asking to be sure: can all the details you mentioned of the battle—specifically, the date—be sourced to the NEC? If yes, obviously no change is needed.
      • For future reference, if it came from the NEC, it's dated. Every section has it's own BBY year or a specific span of years. A lot of times (as in this case) the date is given in parentheses. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 23:40, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
        • Cool, thanks for letting me know that.
    • I might link sky to atmosphere, but that's just me.
    • I'm assuming we don't know the name of the poem?
    • Per Imperators, why the musicians category? If he was a musician as well as a poet, or if the poem was also a piece of music, that should be mentioned.
      • He wasn't a musician. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 23:40, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
    • Aside from that, nice work.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 22:53, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
  3. Trayus
  • Can you add categories for gender and species? ~SavageBOB sig 05:33, May 1, 2011 (UTC)
    • D'oh. I hate it when I know I'm forgetting something. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 07:08, May 1, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Otavon XII's second moon

  • Nominated by: NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 05:37, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: Arbitrary numbering is arbitrary.

(1 ECs/2 Users/3 Total)

Support

  1. Nice.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 00:22, April 29, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Imperators II(Talk) 21:20, April 30, 2011 (UTC)
  3. ECvote Over the moon. ~SavageBOB sig 05:38, May 1, 2011 (UTC)

Object

  1. I find the first sentence a bit lengthy. Do you think you could split it into two just for ease of reading, or maybe replace a couple of commas with emdashes?—Axinal Convocation Chamber 21:44, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
    • I subbed in Jon's version. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 00:00, April 29, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

88th Mechanized Assault Group

  • Nominated by: NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 02:45, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: Why aren't these just one group?

(0 ECs/4 Users/4 Total)

Support

  1. Cool—Axinal Convocation Chamber 17:19, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Imperators II(Talk) 15:39, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
  3. I never would have thought of making an article on something from the pocketmodels. Good job.--Exiledjedi 18:58, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
  4. Before CAs, I had the onerous task of trying to make sure these battle groups were added in and/or were accurate. Thanks for helping with these, excellent work! GethralkinHyperwave 01:22, May 9, 2011 (UTC)

Object

  1. Axinal
  2. Gethralkin
    • Needs to have the same standards applied as I mentioned concerning the 221st nomination. That is, the characteristics need a separate category from the article summary, the bts needs to be reworded to avoid stating that a specific TIE Crawler is being represented in the game. No blaster upgrades, though, like the 221st had. GethralkinHyperwave 08:07, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
      • CAs do not necessarily need to be subsectioned. Made the change to the BTS you asked for. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 17:40, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
        • Good enough for me. GethralkinHyperwave 01:22, May 9, 2011 (UTC)
          • One last thing (sorry). Blue is such a relative description of color. One of the battle groups actually has dark blue stripes that are strikingly different from the shade of blue on the century tanks of the 88th. Can you specify that these are a light blue? The same would go for the 221st. GethralkinHyperwave 04:31, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
            • Also, the 88th used stock century tanks, and the other assault groups used century tanks that were modified in some way depending on the group. GethralkinHyperwave 17:19, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
              • What the explicit source for them being stock crawlers? The card doesn't say that. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 21:25, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
                • The 88th TIE Crawler miniature is without added equipment icons, and the stats are basic. In order to keep games balanced between two or more players, WizKids used a formula to derive "stock" values for certain miniatures. Then, they would modify one or two of those values—in addition to adding extra equipment—when creating other miniatures of the same type. This was to create a variety of common and uncommon units that a collecting player could use in a game without being required to possess powerful rare miniatures. In this instance, 88th TIE Crawler units are the standard and the 71st Elite, 221st, and the 98th Elite are modified and upgraded in different ways. If you type "Mechanized" at the bottom of the search box in the official gallery of the units, you will see what I mean. Having the 88th as a baseline could be something that could also be mentioned in the Bts, now that I think of it. GethralkinHyperwave 15:15, May 12, 2011 (UTC)
    • Just a heads-up, but unit redirects to an article about a Sith battle group. GethralkinHyperwave 02:51, May 13, 2011 (UTC)


Comments

    • I have uploaded an image of a TIE Crawler from the 88th and posted it on the Talk page (same with the 221st). GethralkinHyperwave 01:43, May 13, 2011 (UTC)

221st Mechanized Assault Group

  • Nominated by: NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 02:45, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: Because canon, that's why.

(0 ECs/4 Users/4 Total)

Support

  1. —Axinal Convocation Chamber 17:19, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Imperators II(Talk) 15:40, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
  3. Exiledjedi 19:00, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
  4. Nicely done. GethralkinHyperwave 01:48, May 9, 2011 (UTC)

Object

  1. Axinal
    • As with 88th, needs a BTS, and should 4 BBY be 4 ABY?
      • It should. I work in one era too much. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 17:09, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
    • Also, as the infobox and intro identify the group as part of the Imperial Remnant, the history section should also include that information.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 15:56, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
      • Please ignore that there was a History section. Not my doing. The original version had that info. I don't see any blueish hue on the figure and there is no baseline TIE Crawler to compare its defensive capabilities with. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 17:09, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
        • After taking another look at its stats, I think its fair enough to say they were augmented for defense because they have no attack modifier and a higher defense than the 88th's tanks. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 17:28, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Gethralkin
    • The blaster modifications are canon, as they are part of the game piece description symbols. The countermeasures are a canon game effect of the stats. It is basically a forced miss of an attack. In ships, this would be maneuverability, whereas in slower-moving ground assault units this would be countermeasures. It is not a shield result, because shields are calculated differently in the game. The mention of the coloring of the vehicles is according to the art on the actual game pieces. 221st TIE crawlers are more a lighter blue than the others. GethralkinHyperwave 13:34, May 3, 2011 (UTC)
      • The 221st and the 88th are both blue colored. The 71st and 98th are both dark gray colored. GethralkinHyperwave 13:47, May 3, 2011 (UTC)
        • "Defense-augmented" is a good way to avoid saying for sure what prevents accurate attack. Might be a better way to say it, but I can't think of one right now. GethralkinHyperwave 21:16, May 3, 2011 (UTC)
          • Added "blue." Didn't know there were other tanks in the set to reference. If you're talking about the match symbol, that's game mechanics. A corporeal unit doesn't become stronger just because a certain other unit enters the fray. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 22:52, May 7, 2011 (UTC)
            • Icons are not just game mechanics. The game does not make units stronger when certain other units "enter the fray." Icons do not "activate" when they match icons on other units. Units without icons use standardized equipment. Units with icons are equipped with advanced capabilities. This is where the cards come in. Cards that match icons use the extra equipment that is shown on the base of the unit. The Star of the Tion canonically has a turbolaser installed due to the icon the SWPM unit was equipped with. That is why 221st TIE Crawlers canonically have blaster upgrades, making them more powerful than other vehicles that have no blaster icon. Just so you know my credentials, I was a promotional envoy for the former Star Wars brand line for Topps/WizKids and even helped to establish the copyright to the PocketModels brand. GethralkinHyperwave 06:04, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
              • Still don't like the wording of the description—makes it look like 221st has tanks augmented with blue defenses. Without hyphenation would be better, ergo "...blue century tanks with augmented defenses..." And why is this not in a Characteristics category (like for instance, 327th Star Corps)? GethralkinHyperwave 07:50, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
                • One more thing. In the Bts, you state "one of the tanks." This actually is not the case. All units are representative in the SWPM unless identified with a character's name. That means that if a unit is printed showing a 221st TIE Crawler, then the info on that unit represents all TIE Crawlers of the 221st. That is why duplicates are allowed to be used in the game, because they do not necessarily identify just one starfighter or vehicle. GethralkinHyperwave 08:05, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
              • I'll take your word for it, but the Star of Tion has a turbolaser on the figure anyway. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 17:30, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
                • The Star of Tion unit used the same die as the Millennium Falcon figure; in styrene, they are structurally the same Tion, Falcon. But, thanks for the change. GethralkinHyperwave 01:48, May 9, 2011 (UTC)
                • Changed. Comprehensive articles do not necessarily need to be subsectioned. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 17:30, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
                  • I defer. Good enough for me. GethralkinHyperwave 01:48, May 9, 2011 (UTC)
                  • Changed, though considering the nature of TCGs it could work either way. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 17:30, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
    • I left an image of a TIE Crawler form the battle group on the article's talk page for you. GethralkinHyperwave 19:38, May 12, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Ree Ohr

  • Nominated by: QuiGonJinn Senate seal(Talk) 12:15, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: A character so obscure, nobody has bothered to create an article for her for all these years. A rarity, to say the least.

(1 ECs/1 Users/2 Total)

Support

  1. —Axinal Convocation Chamber 15:29, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
  2. ECvote ~SavageBOB sig 06:47, May 15, 2011 (UTC)

Object

  1. Axinal
    • I think some of the phrases in the first sentence should be swapped around, as the way it's written right now implies that the Clone Wars was the site of a battle between the Republic and the CIS. Otherwise, a well-written article.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 16:10, May 2, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Gwend

  • Nominated by: —Axinal Convocation Chamber 19:25, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: How come I hadn't heard of the barn-burner before yesterday?! I'll definitely have to do something with that before the end of the month.

(1 ECs/1 Users/2 Total)

Support

  1. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 21:21, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
  2. ECvote ~SavageBOB sig 06:46, May 15, 2011 (UTC)

Object

  • Can you indicate by whom the planet Askaj was oppressed? Tis all. ~SavageBOB sig 17:38, May 8, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Oola's father

  • Nominated by: Winchester 327 22:33, May 3, 2011 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: This is my first nomination. Obscure, but twenty years of sources to gather.

(0 ECs/0 Users/0 Total)

Support

Object

  1. Axinal
    • A nice looking article, I must say; however, before I give it a more thorough review, you should know that per CAN rule #14 (see above), an article that is over 200 words must at least attempt to create an intro to bring the word count to 250 or more. I suggest breaking what's currently written into biography/personality and traits sections and adding a brief intro. This should then be ready for a good article nomination.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 22:38, May 3, 2011 (UTC)
      • Crap, rewording things is proving harder than I thought. There isn't any additional information to use. Should I pull it off the noms list until I figure it out? Winchester 327 23:59, May 3, 2011 (UTC)
        • I wouldn't say that's totally necessary. I'd say just finish writing the intro and see if it brings it over 250 (you're at 228 now). If it does, just ask in the comments section for the nomination to be removed, and one of the ECs will take care of it. In that case, you can take as much time as you need to reword it. If the addition of an intro doesn't take it over 250, the rewording won't be necessary at all.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 03:06, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
          • There we go. Finished the intro and reworded the bio a bit for readability. 248 words by my count. I'm unclear on whether I should be linking pages mentioned in the intro again in the bio, however, and do I need to put the table of contents back in? Winchester 327 05:52, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
            • Cool, nice work. At this point, you have a few options: 1) You could add in a few adverbs/adjectives to bring the word count to 250 and nominate as a good article. 2) Because the intro didn't necessarily bring the word count to 250, you could remove it entirely and leave the article the way it was before. 3) You could leave the article just the way it is and leave it as a CAN. Options 1 and 3 are probably better than 2, but because it's your article, it's your choice. As for linking, yes, everything possible should be linked once in the infobox, once in the intro, and once in the main body. And yes, please keep the ToC in.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 09:13, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
            • Actually, I would leave the article the way it is for right now, because I wouldn't be surprised if other users asked you to add/clarify something, which could bring the article over 250 anyway. I'll also give the article a more thorough review.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 14:11, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
              • Thanks; I went ahead with the ToC, but otherwise I'll leave the article as-is for now. Winchester 327 17:27, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Imperators II
  3. Guess I'm the guy who will request this article be pushed over 248 words... :) I think you should add a "Personality and traits" section, since we do know that this guy had a dim view of women, etc., as is mentioned in his "Biography." ~SavageBOB sig 17:42, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
    • Haha, can do. I'll start on the section this next week—super swamped in school right now. Winchester 327 00:44, May 15, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

  • I'd like to request this be removed from the nominations list; it'll be over 250 words once I have time to finish it. Winchester 327 00:44, May 15, 2011 (UTC)

132nd Forward Division

  • Nominated by: Eyrezer 09:43, May 6, 2011 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments:

(0 ECs/1 Users/1 Total)

Support

  1. —Axinal Convocation Chamber 23:13, May 6, 2011 (UTC)

Object

  1. Axinal
    • Could you add an {{Organization infobox template}}?
    • Would it be possible to specify "unit" here? I'm presuming this was part of the Alliance army, so maybe say army unit; if we can't confirm it was part of their army, per se, maybe just "military unit".
    • Also, I don't believe "Division" should be capitalized in the second sentence. Correct me if I'm wrong.
    • Other than that, good work.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 18:43, May 6, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Ur

  • Nominated by: Hanzo Hasashi 20:39, May 6, 2011 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: Tusken Raider

(0 ECs/2 Users/2 Total)

Support

  1. —Axinal Convocation Chamber 23:13, May 6, 2011 (UTC)
  2. This was actually on my long-list of articles to write. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 23:53, May 7, 2011 (UTC)

Object

Comments

Urur

  • Nominated by: Hanzo Hasashi 20:39, May 6, 2011 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: Tusken Warrior

(0 ECs/2 Users/2 Total)

Support

  1. —Axinal Convocation Chamber 23:13, May 6, 2011 (UTC)
  2. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 23:56, May 7, 2011 (UTC)

Object

  1. Axinal
    • Just one question. You mention that he was restricted to defending his tribe, and would take his brother's place should he be killed. What "place" would that be? Do we know what Ur could do that Urur couldn't?—Axinal Convocation Chamber 21:20, May 6, 2011 (UTC)
      • Nope. All the information I write is all the available info on the card. Hanzo Hasashi 23:09, May 6, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Unidentified Wookiee (Sunchoo's village)

(1 ECs/2 Users/3 Total)

Support

  1. —Axinal Convocation Chamber 19:46, May 7, 2011 (UTC)
  2. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 17:25, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
  3. ECvote --Eyrezer 10:04, May 14, 2011 (UTC)
  4. --Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 13:52, May 17, 2011 (UTC)

Object

  1. Axinal
    • You mention that the captured residents were kidnapped "at some point" and returned in 21 BBY. Do we not know what year they were kidnapped?
    • Does The Way of the Jedi identify itself as a novel? A novel is typically longer and is a cohesive storyline rather than multiple adventure strands. If it does, no problem, but if not, I think it might be better to say book or adventure book.
    • I think the introduction should be rewritten so that it does not begin with "This," and so that the bold word is Wookiee rather than individual. Wookiee can be linked the second time it is used.
    • Otherwise, a nice little article, and a fine addition to the barn burner.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 18:20, May 7, 2011 (UTC)
      • Nothing on the year, "novel" changed and "Wookiee" bolded, but are you sure about "this"? I mean, 99% of CAs use "this". Other options are "a" or "the", but "a" kinda implies that the article isn't about the guy being duscussed and "the" kinda implies that he's the only unidentified wookiee out there. Bonslywizard Naboo (Send a transmission) 19:19, May 7, 2011 (UTC)
        • To be honest, no, I'm not sure about "this." There's no specific rule against it, as far as I know, but I can tell you from experience that whenever I start an article with "This" it gets changed to "A/An" by other reviewers. I think the reasoning is that we don't want the readers to feel like they're reading an online article. But I don't mind letting it go, because it's fine with me. I only mention it because my articles always get changed when I do that. As for the other objections, nice work.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 19:46, May 7, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Hey, hey, here's Tanaka~!
    • The species of an unidentified character is never bolded as the character's title. Think of something to call him or say "individual" again, though that is frowned upon. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 17:48, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
      • Sorry, I didn't realize that. My mistake.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 15:42, May 9, 2011 (UTC)
      • Are you sure? Many CAs do so.
        • Yes I'm sure. That's not allowed because that denotes their species, not their defining feature (the reason they're notable enough to have an article). Basically, you say "this Human man/woman/individual" if nothing else, which is also discouraged because it preempts a link to sexes. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 02:45, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
    • You don't need the redundant sourcing on the era in the infobox. The book in which the character appears is sufficient.
    • Does the Annual specifically say that this book's events took place in 21 BBY? If not, then the article should read "around 21 BBY." NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 17:54, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
  3. Can you establish that s/he was part of a tribe early in the bio, before the RPG template? Seems like an important fact about him/her.Menkooroo 04:40, May 17, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

71st Elite Mechanized Assault Group

  • Nominated by: GethralkinHyperwave 08:42, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: Star Wars PocketModel TCG unit

(0 ECs/1 Users/1 Total)

Support

  1. —Axinal Convocation Chamber 21:51, May 15, 2011 (UTC)

Object

  1. Ecks Dee
    • Very short article; characteristics and history could be merged into the intro.
      • Again, this is not against the CA rules. He can subsection the article if he wants to. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 21:06, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
        • I haven't said it's against the rules; the appearance of the article is just better when half of it isn't headings. 1358 (Talk) 17:35, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
    • You don't need to bold the subject outside the intro.
    • Intro-exclusive info.
      • What do you mean? Please explain. GethralkinHyperwave 16:29, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
        • "an elite Imperial Remnant battle group during the Imperial Civil War." This information can not be found outside the intro. This could be fixed by just merging the sections. 1358 (Talk) 17:35, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
          • Tell me if what I've got works. If not I'll rework it to merge it. GethralkinHyperwave 01:38, May 13, 2011 (UTC)
    • Please do not use parenthesis in the prose. 1358 (Talk) 14:55, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
      • Done.

Comments

98th Elite Mechanized Assault Group

  • Nominated by: GethralkinHyperwave 08:42, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: Star Wars PocketModel TCG unit

(0 ECs/1 Users/1 Total)

Support

  1. —Axinal Convocation Chamber 21:58, May 15, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Bonslywizard Naboo (Send a transmission) 23:42, May 16, 2011 (UTC)

Object

    • The "Characteristics" section (or rather, sentence) could definitely be fixed up a bit. Right now, it's pretty confusing. —Unsigned comment by Bonslywizard (talk • contribs).
    • The "History" section is pretty confusing also. Change that a little.—Unsigned comment by Bonslywizard (talk • contribs).
      • Removed. No specific history recorded that I know of, except that they participated in the Imperial Civil War. GethralkinHyperwave 16:03, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
    • Only bold the name in the intro. Never the body.—Unsigned comment by Bonslywizard (talk • contribs).
    • "Century tanks of the 98th Elite were often called upon to lead strikes on mission objectives." Okay, so what kind of strikes? Does the card say?—Unsigned comment by Bonslywizard (talk • contribs).
      • Removed. A different elite century tank unit was a lead position assault group, not this one. GethralkinHyperwave 16:03, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
    • "Century Tanks" are capitalized the first time, but not the second. Which is it?—Unsigned comment by Bonslywizard (talk • contribs).
    • Parentheses are almost never used in articles around here, so it would be best if these were removed.—Unsigned comment by Bonslywizard (talk • contribs).
    • I'll have another look once these are addressed. Anyway, welcome to the CAN page! :D Bonslywizard Naboo (Send a transmission) 00:00, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
    • Okay, you really changed the article alot since last I checked, so I'll re-review. Bonslywizard Naboo (Send a transmission) 21:33, May 12, 2011 (UTC)
    • Are you sure that this unit existed during the Rebellion era, as the article currently states? Given that they are an Imperial Remnant unit, they could have existed during the Rebellion era, the New Republic era, or later eras. Therefore, you can't make any assumptions about which publishing era they feature in, unless the source dates their existance to a more specific time. If that is the case, then please cite the dating in the article. If not, then please remove any mention of the Rebellion era. --Jinzler 13:55, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
  1. Jinzler
    • Could you perhaps include some context on what a century tank is?
      • I thought the link to the century tank article would suffice. It has in the other century tank Assault Group articles—like the 88th Mechanized Assault Group—that are nominated on this page. What did you have in mind? GethralkinHyperwave 04:32, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
        • I was thinking maybe just something along the lines of stating that they were a type of attack vehicle developed by Santhe/Sienar Technologies. Given that a large proportion of the article is related to the tanks, I think that such additional detail would be useful here. What do you think --Jinzler 08:54, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
          • Minor description put in, including reference to alternate name. Didn't want to go into too much detail. How's that? GethralkinHyperwave 16:27, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
    • century tanks of the 98th Elite were more formidable than standard units, such as used by the 88th Mechanized. What do you mean by "standard units" here? I presume this is referring to standard Imperial mechanized units, or something along those lines, but article is currently unclear. Please specify.
      • The 88th Mechanized used stock century tank units. They would be considered the standard. The 98th and other Assault Groups modified their century tanks to the needs of the particular group they were in. GethralkinHyperwave 04:32, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
    • I see that you have now added The New Essential Chronology to the source list. If the unit appears in the NEC, then that might be worth a mention in the "Behind the scenes" section. Also, as there is more than one source you will need a "1stm" template next to whichever one was the first to mention the unit.
      • Isn't {{1stID}} enough? GethralkinHyperwave 04:32, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
        • I see you logic in using that template, but the Layout Guide [Wookieepedia:Layout_Guide#Appearances advises] that the "1stID" template should only be used when a subject is not named in its first appearance and is first identified by a later source. A "1st" or "1stm" template is still needed for the source that mentions the subject first. --Jinzler 08:54, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
          • Done. NEC was wrong source though, probably copied over accidentally. GethralkinHyperwave 16:27, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
    • I look forward to seeing more nominations from you in the future. And my use of timestamping here is correct, per my comments below :P Jinzler 17:09, May 10, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

  • I'm curious to know why someone has added the "Unsigned" templates to Bonsly's objections above. While all user comments are required to be signed, this rule has always been interpreted in the context of nomination pages as meaning that just one timestamp is needed to sign all of the objections made by a user at one time. I don't see why things should be any different here. --Jinzler 13:55, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
    • Bonslywizard did not sign his objection vote at the beginning as is standard, so I could not tell who made the comments. There have been several times when comments were made and then other users addressed each itemization so it obscured who was who. Rules for signing comments is outlined in the Wookieepedia:Signature policy. GethralkinHyperwave 14:16, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
      • Yes, I am fully aware of our signature policy, but it seems that we have differing interpretations of it. Regarding your confusion, when users make a large number of objections to an article on a nominations page at one time, it is commonplace for them to choose only to sign the last objection. You can thus tell who made the objections and when by looking at the bottom of the listed objections, to see who has signed them. This is compliant with the signature policy, because where objections are made together, they can be seen as one combined comment, and so only one signature is needed to serve them, and this should be enough to show who made the comment. Furthermore, if you take a look at the Featured articles nominations page and the Good article nominations page, you will see that the method of making objections used by Bonsly above is regularly used by many users, including administrators and members of the Inquisitorius. It is therefore a seemingly valid interpretation of the signature policy and is used on Wookieepedia on a regular basis. If you believe this interpretation is incorrect, then I recommend you take your concerns to the Senate Hall. I urge you to reconsider your use of the "Unsigned" template on Bonsly's comments above, because he has done nothing wrong. --Jinzler 14:47, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
        • This topic is perhaps better suited to User Talk pages, as it distracts from this page's purpose. Please leave me a message if you wish to discuss it further. Thanks. GethralkinHyperwave 16:47, May 10, 2011 (UTC)

T81 Division

  • Nominated by: GethralkinHyperwave 16:43, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: Star Wars PocketModel TCG/TCW tie-in unit

(0 ECs/1 Users/1 Total)

Support

  1. Nice job. After you removed the references in the intro, I consider this ready for CA.—TK-999 Era-imp(Rise of the Empire) 16:27, May 16, 2011 (UTC)

Object

  1. "TK Tri-Nine"
    • Needs referencing, as there are multiple sources and appearances.—TK-999 Era-imp(Rise of the Empire) 16:54, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
      • References supplied. GethralkinHyperwave 14:09, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
        • Looks better. I gave it a copy-edit, and will decide whether there are any more issues later.—TK-999 Era-imp(Rise of the Empire) 15:03, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
    • Lacks Star Wars Annual 2011 info: the date for Mission to Rugosa has been supplied.—TK-999 Era-imp(Rise of the Empire) 16:54, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
    • Some links are missing.—TK-999 Era-imp(Rise of the Empire) 16:54, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
      • This should be a quick "do-it-yourself" fix. (Or at least you could tell the nominator which links exactly you've noticed to be missing.) Imperators II(Talk) 19:16, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
    • Since the article has only 108 words (period), I don't think it is necessary to make it have an intro and headings. If the need for sub-sectioning arises, then it should have __NOTOC__ for better legibility.—TK-999 Era-imp(Rise of the Empire) 16:54, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
      • Just to interject, a CA may be subsectioned according to the LG if the nominator so chooses. This isn't against the CA rules. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 17:37, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
  2. GTQ
    • Correct me if I am wrong but I don not believe that you should have sources in the introduction GTQ(Problems?) 21:56, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
      • It is permissible. See Xizor as a reference. GethralkinHyperwave 16:41, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
        • It is not permissible. Xizor is not an article of status and the reference is marking the pronunciation of his name, not information in the paragraph. Remove them. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 17:23, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
  3. Axinal
    • Please source EVERYTHING in the infobox.
    • Could we get context on Asajj Ventress, 224, and Jek, Rys, and Thire?
      • I see context on Ventress and the clones, but 224 could still use some.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 16:37, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
    • Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe SWA 2011 places most of TCW around 21 BBY, so "Circa 21 BBY" might be better than "In 21 BBY"—Axinal Convocation Chamber 22:04, May 15, 2011 (UTC)
    • Also, the article is missing a BTS.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 22:05, May 15, 2011 (UTC)
      • The BTS could still use some expansion; you should mention "Ambush", because it's its first appearance, and mention that it received its name in the TCG.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 16:37, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
        • Does the BTS imply that the TCG came before "Ambush"? If so, why is "Ambush" listed as its first appearance? Even if the TCG only has a picture, it could still be listed as its first appearance, with a (Picture only) template after it.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 01:58, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
          • I was told by several members (including an admin) that TCGs did not count as appearances. Only as sources. GethralkinHyperwave 08:52, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
            • That's true in the sense that they go under the Sources section rather than the Appearances section, but it still deserves a (First pictured) template at the very least.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 22:48, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
  4. Rubedo
    • Mention that they appeared in TCW in the BTS.
    • Why the double refs on everything? One would suffice.
    • Context on 224.
    • Asajj should be mentioned in the intro.
    • Where is the article on B1 battle droid 2?
      • droid 2 is a different article. Not sure what naming conventions got them sorted that way. GethralkinHyperwave 08:52, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
    • The Notable Members section should be axed unless you're willing to turn it into a semi-Main Characters section.
      • Generally, unidentified members that don't do much aren't consided "notable" anyway. Just don't include them in the infobox and mention them in the body.
      • Removed. Except for the B2-HA commander. GethralkinHyperwave 08:52, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
    • Each member from the infobox needs to be mentioned in the prose.
    • Is this an armored division or a battalion? Pick on descriptor, use it for both intro and body.
      • A droid battalion is a subdivision of a droid Division. Different organizational structure than the Republic uses. GethralkinHyperwave 08:52, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
    • Context on the bid to secure a treaty with Katuunko.
    • Are they part of the CIS or the Trade Federation? The infobox says the Droid army belongs to the CIS, not the TF.
    • It seems liike Asajj should be listed as a founder.
      • Nope. There is no evidence that she founded the Division. Only that she had it assigned to her. GethralkinHyperwave 08:52, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
    • That's it for now. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 17:24, May 16, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Alain (Human)

  • Nominated by: Hanzo Hasashi 20:49, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: Unit Scrounge

(0 ECs/1 Users/1 Total)

Support

  1. —Axinal Convocation Chamber 15:40, May 16, 2011 (UTC)

Object

Comments

  1. Hanzo Hasashi
    • I believe there is no evidence that he necessarily fought the 501st during the events of ANH, as the card never explicitly states it, nor does his CSWE entry. Does anybody else believe otherwise? Hanzo Hasashi 20:49, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
    • Text from his Quick Draw card: fighting against oppression can be dangerous business. Oppressors carry blasters, and so does Alain. I do not believe any of this is necessarily from his POV, and chose not to include it as any new info in his bio. As with above, if somebody else believes otherwise, please respond. Hanzo Hasashi 21:07, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Axinal
    • In the Personality and Traits, you mention a Hakin. Who is Hakin? I figure this is supposed to be Alian and would therefore qualify as a Sofixit, but I want to be sure Hakin's name isn't there for some other purpose.
      • Right, that was just a careless mistake on my part, Hakin was another Rebel trooper I brought to comprehensive status. Hanzo Hasashi 14:28, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
    • Could you tell us what a scrounge is?—Axinal Convocation Chamber 22:09, May 15, 2011 (UTC)

Precht

  • Nominated by: Hanzo Hasashi 20:49, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: Green Recruit

(0 ECs/1 Users/1 Total)

Support

  1. —Axinal Convocation Chamber 22:14, May 15, 2011 (UTC)

Object

Comments

  • Same as above with Private Alain. Hanzo Hasashi 20:49, May 8, 2011 (UTC)

Chasdemonus Route

  • Nominated by: —TK-999 Era-imp(Rise of the Empire) 17:02, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: Obscure Unknown Regions hyperlane. Comes complete with infobox and reflist.

(1 ECs/3 Users/4 Total)

Support

  1. —Axinal Convocation Chamber 22:17, May 15, 2011 (UTC)
  2. GethralkinHyperwave 15:55, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
  3. ECvote More hyperlanes, please! :) ~SavageBOB sig 17:52, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
  4. Chiss back-door. Imperators II(Talk) 22:02, May 17, 2011 (UTC)

Object

  1. gethralkin
    • Not sure if this is just my personal preference or if it is really how the sourcing guidelines dictate, but your citations would look better if listed immediately after the end punctuation of each sentence they appear in. GethralkinHyperwave 15:28, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
      • This is preferable when possible, but if a sentence contains two pieces of information that cannot be referenced to the same source, the references should be separate.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 15:31, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
        • I was thinking that (for instance) "The Chasdemonus Route was a hyperspace lane in the Unknown Regions.[1][2]" would be more appropriate than, "The Chasdemonus Route was a hyperspace lane[2] in the Unknown Regions.[1]" I know we aren't MLA format here, but sentences still looks better when not broken up in the middle with a citation. GethralkinHyperwave 15:43, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
          • It does look better, but the problem is that it implies that both sources contain all the info in that sentence, which isn't necessarily true.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 15:46, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
  2. SavageBob
    • Can you add some galactic coordinates? Like, it started off at [blah blah blah], at galactic coordinates X-#. It then headed west through galactic coordinates [X-1]-#." Something like that. :)
      • Aren't Atlas grid coords infobox-exclusive?—TK-999 Era-imp(Rise of the Empire) 16:30, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
        • Actually, a recent community decision was that there shouldn't be any infobox-exclusive info for any articles. I'd say coordinates for a hyperspace route should be in the infobox and in the body, if possible. ~SavageBOB sig 16:40, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
    • Finally, I don't think the page number it's on is necessary within the body of the article. It's cool in the notes, but probably not necessary in the article proper. Nice work! ~SavageBOB sig 16:28, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
      • Done. Thanks for the review!—TK-999 Era-imp(Rise of the Empire) 16:30, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
        • I noticed one more thing: the map in the Atlas shows more of the route than is currently featured in the infobox image. Would it be possible to get an infobox pic that shows the full length of the route that we know of? ~SavageBOB sig 16:40, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
          • Unfortunately, the legend and headings in the source image are in the way, and my limited GIMP abilities are not enough to remove them.—TK-999 Era-imp(Rise of the Empire) 17:23, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
            • I see what you mean. This happens with comic books all the time, though, where we can't remove word balloons, so I'd say just go ahead and crop the image so that it shows the whole route (or all we know of) and forget the legend. It may be ugly, but it'll at least be comprehensive! :) ~SavageBOB sig 17:25, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
              • I just found a way to remove them, so I uploaded an expanded version.—TK-999 Era-imp(Rise of the Empire) 17:36, May 16, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

  1. Changed "this" to "that" since "this" is indicating present. Imperators II(Talk) 18:03, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
    • Thanks for the copy-edit. I never notice such tiny inconsistencies.—TK-999 Era-imp(Rise of the Empire) 18:05, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Is this your first CAN? If so, welcome!—Axinal Convocation Chamber 22:17, May 15, 2011 (UTC)

72nd Flight

(0 ECs/0 Users/0 Total)

Support

Object

  1. Axinal
    • If you're going to source the article, every bullet in the infobox must be sourced. However, since it only has one appearance, I would argue that sourcing is unnecessary, but the decision is yours.
    • The article needs a Behind the scenes section.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 22:22, May 15, 2011 (UTC)
    • I think Trade Federation ought to be listed in the affiliation field in the infobox in addition to the Confederacy of Independent Systems and the Confederate Navy; I'd say probably with one bullet under CIS. Again, this applies to all these articles, unless there's a specific reason you didn't include it. Otherwise, nice work.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 19:14, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
      • That would probably work pre-CIS, but the TF and the Techno Union Droid Army and the IGBC all merged their droid militaries into the Separatist Droid Army, and it is difficult to determine which Flights are being represented from TPM to RotS by noting their markings—unless someone has the time to spend going frame-by-frame to do so. Much like the Retail Caucus-affiliated droid army that Whorm Loathsom commanded, droids are no longer really affiliated with the TF after they are shipped unless they are specifically a TF detachment. GethralkinHyperwave 23:44, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
    • One more, applying to all these related articles; intro-exclusive information, such as the fighers' affiliation within the Trade Federation, needs to be added somewhere in the main body.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 19:21, May 17, 2011 (UTC)


Comments

128th Flight

(0 ECs/0 Users/0 Total)

Support

Object

Comments

28th Flight

(0 ECs/0 Users/0 Total)

Support

Object

Comments

31st Flight

(0 ECs/0 Users/0 Total)

Support

Object

Comments

Nala Hetsime

  • Nominated by: Hanzo Hasashi 22:18, May 13, 2011 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: Same first name as The Lion King's main female character

(0 ECs/1 Users/1 Total)

Support

  1. —Axinal Convocation Chamber 22:42, May 15, 2011 (UTC)

Object

  • I think the fact that the full card image features an AT-AT in the top corner is a prime indicator that he fought at Hoth. Also, being in Rogue Squadron and flying a T-47 while stationed at Echo Base implies this as well. Reference to the Battle of Hoth should be included. - Cavalier OneFarStar Logo(Squadron channel) 14:43, May 16, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Ururur

  • Nominated by: Hanzo Hasashi 22:18, May 13, 2011 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: "The Sandpeople are easily startled but they will soon be back and in greater numbers."

(0 ECs/1 Users/1 Total)

Support

  1. —Axinal Convocation Chamber 22:28, May 15, 2011 (UTC)

Object

Comments

Merumeru's Battle staff

  • Nominated by: GTQ(Problems?) 03:24, May 15, 2011 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments:

(0 ECs/1 Users/1 Total)

Support

  1. —Axinal Convocation Chamber 01:26, May 16, 2011 (UTC)

Object

  1. Bonzlywizard
    • Context on Mermeru.
    • If the staff's only mention is in the DB, what info did you get from the Campaign Guide?
    • Could you maybe try to get a picture of it, assuming it's what Mermeru's holding in the DB pic?
      • Okay, better, but the pic's waaay too small. Could you see if you can get a bigger version? If you can't I could give it a try. Bonslywizard Naboo (Send a transmission) 21:57, May 15, 2011 (UTC)
    • This your first nom? If so, welcome! If not, er...welcome back. Bonslywizard Naboo (Send a transmission) 18:12, May 15, 2011 (UTC)
      • Context added on Merumeru picture added too. The campaign guide mentions nothing that is not there but I have made mention of it in behind the scenes GTQ(Problems?) 21:43, May 15, 2011 (UTC)
        • I'll give the pick another shot GTQ(Problems?) 22:03, May 15, 2011 (UTC)
          • Quality of the pic is bad but when aiming for such a small area of an already small pic It is hard to get good quality GTQ(Problems?) 22:13, May 15, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Axinal
    • Because the article has multiple sources, it needs referencing.
    • I'd argue that the article could be expanded. Does TCWCG mention when specifically Merumeru used the staff? Even if it doesn't, the pic is from Episode III, so it's probably safe to say he wielded it during the Battle of Kashyyyk.
    • I removed the 250px designation from the picture, as it became too blurry.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 22:37, May 15, 2011 (UTC)
      • TCWGC only mentions what is in the databank according to Jinzler as I do not have TCWGC but I referenced it. I added ROTS to the appearances and mentioned he used during the battle GTQ(Problems?) 23:35, May 15, 2011 (UTC)
        • Good work, the picture is much better, as well. I'd just rearrange the BTS to make it a little more chronological, as RotS came before TCWCG and the Databank entry.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 00:31, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
          • Done GTQ(Problems?) 01:05, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
            • Better; I gave the article a copy-edit, removed the {{Ref}} template from the text, since it's only needed in the infobox, and also moved some of the refs around in the BTS so the entire paragraph isn't sourced three times. I also rewrote the BTS a little to make it more accurate.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 01:26, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
              • Thanks for all the help GTQ(Problems?) 01:31, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
  3. Is there any reason to believe this is a unique item and not, simply, a staff used in battle? In other words, why is "battle staff" worth giving its own article when we wouldn't do the same for "tall Human" or "open door"? If there is no evidence it's a unique item, I suggest moving the article to Merumeru's battle staff or, potentially, Wookiee battle staff if any source explicitly calls it such. ~SavageBOB sig 16:23, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
    • Merumeru's Databank entry puts "battle staff" under his "Weapons" list, but it's safe to assume it wouldn't put "Tall Wookiee" under his Species category. I personally don't see a problem with this having its own article.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 16:28, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
      • OK, but what distinguishes "battle staff" from "staff", an article we already have on long poles used to hit people with? ~SavageBOB sig 16:51, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
        • Hmm, fair question, but again, I would point to the fact that the DB's infobox specifically identifies it as a battle staff, whereas it would not identify Merumeru as a tall Wookiee or Luke's lightsaber as a green lightsaber.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 17:05, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
          • I see what you mean, and I guess on that basis I can live with an article called "battle staff," but it needs to be generic and cover every battle staff used in Star Wars, not focus only on Merumeru's weapon. Otherwise, the article should be renamed "Merumeru's battle staff." I mean, Kenner and Hasbro alone have introduced tons of "battle staffs" into canon, and these all would need to be included in a generic "battle staff" article. ~SavageBOB sig
            • Yes, I see what you mean. Perhaps GTQ could move it to "Merumeru's battle staff"; would that then need a Conjecture tag?—Axinal Convocation Chamber 18:27, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
              • Probably would need a conjecture tag, yes. There's also an issue of folks in the past not liking articles on specific weapons used by specific characters; the SH is here. I don't think there was ever any consensus, but just beware that "Merumeru's battle staff" will likely meet with grumbles from some. ;) ~SavageBOB sig 01:31, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
                • I think I should keep it here because as Axinal has said it is specifically calls it a battle staff in the DB so I think it is good as it is unless it is met with a general consensus that I should move it then I will move it GTQ(Problems?) 01:52, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
                  • I agree; I, too, would like to hear another opinion on this, but I say keep the article as is for now until we can reach an agreement on whether the subject is worthy of an article, and if so, what it should be named.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 02:01, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
                    • Upon going to the staff article I found it listed multiple kinds of staff so maybe a battle staff is just a different kind of staff GTQ(Problems?) 02:04, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
                      • You're welcome to keep the article at "battle staff," but, again, it will need to cover all battle staffs, not just Merumeru's. You'll have to incorporate the Massassi battle staff and the Gungan battle staff from here at the very least; I suspect there may be other weapons out there called "battle staffs." ~SavageBOB sig 02:28, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
                        • Ya know what I'll move it but I need some help doing that as last time I tried i duplicated not moved the article GTQ(Problems?) 15:43, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
                          • Check that moved it GTQ(Problems?) 23:11, May 17, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Offices of the Imperial Head of State

(0 ECs/1 Users/1 Total)

Support

  1. —Axinal Convocation Chamber 17:58, May 16, 2011 (UTC)

Object

  1. Axinal
    • The article is currently missing a BTS section.
    • Also, try to add some context on the information. What was Coruscant? Who was Jaina Solo? What were their careers, and why did they take them on separate paths?—Axinal Convocation Chamber 15:35, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
      • OK, I added a BTS section and I added some more context. I also expanded it a little more.Cal Jedi (Personal Comm Channel) 16:49, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
        • Better, but now you have intro-exclusive information; specifically, you mention in the intro that Fel was the Imperial Head of State, and that Coruscant was the GA capital. This info must be in the main body as well. Also, take a look at the formatting in the BTS; you italicize FotJ once and leave it normal another time. Also, the wording in the first sentence, "Fate of the Jedi Allies" is a little awkward. Could you perhaps rearrange the sentence?—Axinal Convocation Chamber 16:58, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
    • Please fix links so they don't point to redirects; specifically, Imperial, Galactic Alliance, and vidscreen.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 16:58, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
      • Imperators got GA and vidscreen, so just Imperial.
    • I apologize if I wasn't specific enough when I said "context." I'm afraid I think you went a bit overboard with detail, as much of the article as it is currently written is not relevant to the office. We really just need to know the gist of what was said during the conversation in the office, not a history of their relationship.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 17:37, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
    • I downsized on some of their relationship details to concentrate more on the office. Does it need more downsizing or not?Cal Jedi (Personal Comm Channel) 17:46, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Imperators II
    • I believe that the Imperial state that existed in 44 ABY was the Imperial Remnant, not the Galactic Empire.
      • I disagree; Jag consistently says Galactic Empire, and corrects those who refer to it as the Imperial Remnant.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 17:33, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
    • All the infobox info must be referenced. Imperators II(Talk) 17:13, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
      • Per CA rules, not if the subject in question only has one appearance.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 17:33, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
        • It's encouraged, though. (OK, not really an objection, then.) Imperators II(Talk) 17:41, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
          • True, it is encouraged, so I'd be okay if Cal wanted to do that. Doesn't matter to me.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 17:58, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
    • The "History" section should begin with mentioning the era during which the offices were on Coruscant. Imperators II(Talk) 17:18, May 16, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Wurokkk

  • Nominated by: MasterFredCommerce Guild(Whatever) 18:23, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: Second barn-burner nom. First CAN ever!

(0 ECs/1 Users/1 Total)

Support

  1. —Axinal Convocation Chamber 19:10, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
  2. --Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 21:45, May 17, 2011 (UTC)

Object

  1. Heh, cool article—and music-related, too. Just one question: "...it was thought he may have had a sonic 'surprise' waiting for his escorts." Do we know who, exactly thought this?—Axinal Convocation Chamber 18:31, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
    • Heh, yeah, I figured this would get brought up. The excerpt from Geonosis and the Outer Rim Worlds says, "Wurokkk might have had other sonic-based surprises in store for his escorts." I couldn't think of a way to put this. This is a roleplaying guide, and the whole escort scene only takes place if one chooses to investigate and confront Wurokkk. How should I treat this? MasterFredCommerce Guild(Whatever) 18:37, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
      • Hmm, good question, and I can't say I'm sure how I would treat this. If that GATORW is written from an in-universe perspective, do we know who "wrote" it? If not, it might be good to just say "it was possible" rather than "it was thought." I'm sure an EC member will have a more advanced opinion on this.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 19:07, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
        • OK, I'll see if it's written IU and ask an EU. Thanks for the help. :) MasterFredCommerce Guild(Whatever) 13:09, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Exiled Jedi
    • Shouldn't Geonosis and the Outer Rim Worlds be a source?
      • I believe I can either use it as a source or a reference. I've chosen to use it as the latter. MasterFredCommerce Guild(Whatever) 13:09, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
        • I think that references are in addition to sources, because the book is a source and the references are like quoting the source.--Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 13:22, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
    • I also think that you should mention the book's authors and the company that published the books.
    • That's all from me. Keep up the good work.--Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 19:29, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
  3. Bonslywizard
    • "He eventually assembled a piece specifically designed to provoke an aggressive reaction in Biths by subliminally affecting their biorhythms and brainwaves." What do you mean by "piece"? A song, or something else?
      • I figure he means "song", but that word is usually frowned upon when referring to music without lyrics.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 02:04, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
    • "After investigation discovered that the aggressive Biths had attended numerous Shluur concerts, the Wookiee was escorted off-planet" If investigation found that the Biths were at the band's concert, why was only this Wookiee kicked out?
      • That's all the book says, but I assume it's because he was the band's composer. MasterFredCommerce Guild(Whatever) 13:09, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
    • All from me. A Wookiee composer? Awesome. Bonslywizard Naboo (Send a transmission) 23:55, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
      • I know, right?! I saw this in the barn-burner list and was in love. :P Not with the Wookiee of course. MasterFredCommerce Guild(Whatever) 13:09, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
  4. Bob
    • You'll need to add a "Sources" section that lists Geonosis and the Outer Rim Worlds with the {{1stm}} tag. Keep in mind that "Notes and references" doesn't take the place of a complete list of Sources and/or Appearances in which the subject is mentioned.
      • Well, this settles the above discussion with ExileJedi. Fixed. MasterFredCommerce Guild(Whatever) 17:02, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
    • "eccentric" comes off a bit POV for a neutral article. Is it possible to weasel a bit on this and say he "was considered eccentric by [group X] or something?
      • That's what the book says. It doesn't say who considered him to be that. MasterFredCommerce Guild(Whatever) 17:02, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
    • Be careful with "comprise" -- I think "compose" would work better here. (SOFIXIT, I know, but I'm in a rush and may not get to it until later).
    • "it was thought that..." By whom? Can you recast this sentence to include someone doing the action? All for now. ~SavageBOB sig 16:42, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
    • Oh, one more thing: In BTS, can you say in what capacity he is introduced in GATORW? Is he a gamemaster character? Part of some adventure? Merely referenced in source text on Clak'dorr? ~SavageBOB sig 16:44, May 17, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Gaxxan brain-slug

  • Nominated by: Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 13:40, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: Should stay on this page.

(0 ECs/0 Users/0 Total)

Support

Object

  1. Axinal
    • The second sentence of the BTS should probably be sourced to the strategy guide rather than the game.
    • One question: The Gaxxa article says that the planet was "believed to be the home of the Gaxxan brain-slug." Does strategy guide make any mention of the planet Gaxxa, specifically a possible connection to the slugs? If so, this should be added to the article; if not, I don't think any change would be necessary.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 19:09, May 17, 2011 (UTC)

Comments The next article in my series of Jurgan Kalta nominations.--Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 13:40, May 17, 2011 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.
More Fandoms
Advertisement