Wookieepedia:Comprehensive article nominations/Archaic Arsenal of Ordo

< Wookieepedia:Comprehensive article nominations
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a Comprehensive article nomination that was successful. Please do not modify it.

Contents

  • 1 Archaic Arsenal of Ordo
    • 1.1 (2 ECs/3 Users/5 Total)
      • 1.1.1 Support
      • 1.1.2 Object
        • 1.1.2.1 Justice for Davan
        • 1.1.2.2 Winterz
        • 1.1.2.3 Vergence
      • 1.1.3 Comments

Archaic Arsenal of Ordo

  • Nominated by: DwartiiDelver (talk) 16:21, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: Mandalore the Preserver's place of preservation

(2 ECs/3 Users/5 Total)

(Votes required: No additional votes required to pass, please consider reviewing another article.)

Support

  1. Objections handled via Discord. - - -OOM 224 ༼༽{talk}༼༽ 18:13, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
  2. VergenceScatter (talk) 18:35, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
  3. Winterz (talk) 19:23, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
  4. ECvote Fan26 (Talk) 16:21, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
  5. ECvote UberSoldat93 ClanMudhornSignet-Redemption (talk) 07:38, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Object

Justice for Davan
  • "an ancient munit'kad halberd was stolen from the Scabbard Monument on the Mandalorian world of Krownest, causing the latter and Ordo to suspect each other for the loss of their own weapons." this is worded as if both Krownest and the Ordo have the ability to suspect each other, even though they're meant to be locations not individuals. Are you trying to say that people at these locations suspected each other? Braha'tok enthusiast (Hello there) 10:04, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
    • That's pretty much how the source phrases it. Here's what the book says: "For a time, both worlds suspected each other for the theft." DwartiiDelver (talk) 14:58, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
      • Then you can specify the residents at both worlds suspected each other just to not personify the worlds themselves. Braha'tok enthusiast (Hello there) 17:13, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
        • I'm not sure that's possible, as we don't exactly know who on each world suspected the other—the original source itself just uses "both worlds" without getting any more specific than that, so personally I think it would be fine to do the same here. DwartiiDelver (talk) 17:45, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
          • Objection has been resolved via discord. Braha'tok enthusiast (Hello there) 18:23, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Winterz
  • 7966 CRC needs to be linked to respective BBY link. (not mandatory to this review, but a redirect can be created too)
    • Does it? For Gargon's nomination, UberSoldat93 said to remove a BBY date from being linked to C.R.C.
      • Sorry, just to clarify, Shay said not to date something to 11 BBY that had only been given a C.R.C. date. I imagine the same principle applies here as well. DwartiiDelver (talk) 16:07, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
        • You're right. I wasn't aware the speculative nature of the CRC calendar. Winterz (talk) 18:24, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
  • I'm confused. There was a theft, and both objects are displayed by Dryden Voss, a known crime lord and artifact collector. How can this be alleged? Is that the wording the source uses? Winterz (talk) 15:17, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
    • The book is written from an in-universe perspective—I just removed the mention of Vos supposedly stealing them, however, as after checking the source again it doesn't necessarily imply that Vos may been the one to actually steal them. What the book actually alleges is that Vos had them in his possession, however there's not much point in stating that here as we can see from Solo he truly did. DwartiiDelver (talk) 15:32, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Vergence
  • I realize that you and Ben have already discussed this to some extent, but is there any way you could change the latter and Ordo to suspect each other to "the worlds to suspect each other"? Otherwise, it sounds too much like it is referring to individuals, at least to me. VergenceScatter (talk) 05:23, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
    • How does that look? DwartiiDelver (talk) 18:30, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
      • Good, thanks. VergenceScatter (talk) 18:34, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Comments

  • I would change "although" to "which" in the sentence about the theft; it flows better IMO. SilverSunbird (talk) 00:25, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
    • The main reason I went with "although" is simply because I feel it makes it clearer that the lance used to be at the Archaic Arsenal, but isn't any longer. If others feel the same way, though, I can see about changing it (or even working to find some way to reword that sentence entirely). DwartiiDelver (talk) 02:59, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Approved as a Comprehensive article by EduCorps 07:38, 11 January 2021 (UTC)