Wookieepedia:Comprehensive article nominations/Asteroid Dreadnought

< 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.

Asteroid Dreadnought

  • Nominated by: Vitus InfinitusTalk 05:28, February 10, 2018 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: "Oh look, an asteroid...wait a minute."

(2 ECs/3 Users/5 Total)

Support

  1. Good job with this. Sorry about the barrage of objections!—Tommuskq Imperial Emblem (TAKE A SEAT) 19:56, February 10, 2018 (UTC)
  2. Great work --Lewisr (talk) 20:02, February 10, 2018 (UTC)
  3. JangFett (Talk) 18:38, February 11, 2018 (UTC)
  4. ECvote Imperators II(Talk) 19:51, February 11, 2018 (UTC)
  5. ECvote Do Automated battlemoon asteroid next. 1358 (Talk) 22:09, February 16, 2018 (UTC)

Object

Tommy
  • If you're going to use Haxen Delto and Airen Cracken's full names, you need to source them, as the full names aren't in TRF.—Tommuskq Imperial Emblem (TAKE A SEAT) 08:46, February 10, 2018 (UTC)
    • Delto's full name is on page 46 I believe and Cracken's is on page 13. Should I still reference the source where their full name first appeared or just leave it sourced to Rebel Files?--Vitus InfinitusTalk 15:53, February 10, 2018 (UTC)
  • I'd suggest removing their ranks too, as they can change over time, and they aren't mentioned in that passage of TRF.—Tommuskq Imperial Emblem (TAKE A SEAT) 08:46, February 10, 2018 (UTC)
  • I think I'd use the clone wars as a reference point for the second paragraph rather than Naboo (shortly before TCW; in 22 BBY, in the first year of TCW(I've forgotten when it actually occurred)), as that's more relivent and specific, even if you can't derive the specific date.—Tommuskq Imperial Emblem (TAKE A SEAT) 08:46, February 10, 2018 (UTC)
    • Since I don't have Catalyst I based it off what the article for Automated battlemoon asteroid says, which states that it was in the aftermath of the Invasion of Naboo, should I go ahead and change it to before Clone Wars?--Vitus InfinitusTalk 15:53, February 10, 2018 (UTC)
      • I have the book so I'll look into it a bit later to see if it's before or during the clone wars, as that seems more logical to reference as it's closer.—Tommuskq Imperial Emblem (TAKE A SEAT) 16:15, February 10, 2018 (UTC)
        • The book says 'That said, following the Naboo Crisis of just eleven years ago, Republic Special Weapons Group developed plans for an automated battlemoon asteroid.' --Lewisr (talk) 16:23, February 10, 2018 (UTC)
          • Thanks for that Lewis. In that case, Vitus, you should keep it saying following the Naboo crisis.—Tommuskq Imperial Emblem (TAKE A SEAT) 16:56, February 10, 2018 (UTC)
  • Perhaps add Imperial Navy to the infobox. You could add it under Imperial Military if you wanted, but you'd have to work that link into the body.—Tommuskq Imperial Emblem (TAKE A SEAT) 08:46, February 10, 2018 (UTC)
  • "a rumored Imperial Navy warship that served as a dreadnought" suggests the ship's role is a dreadnought, when in actuality that is its classification. I suggest rewording this.—Tommuskq Imperial Emblem (TAKE A SEAT) 08:46, February 10, 2018 (UTC)
  • Perhaps put camouflage under the countermeasures field of the infobox?—Tommuskq Imperial Emblem (TAKE A SEAT) 08:46, February 10, 2018 (UTC)
  • "The asteroid supership was made canon by…" suggests Legends wasn't canon at first. I'd suggest using the term "new canon".—Tommuskq Imperial Emblem (TAKE A SEAT) 08:53, February 10, 2018 (UTC)
  • Could you please add a screenshot for the tweet if you're going to use it.—Tommuskq Imperial Emblem (TAKE A SEAT) 16:31, February 10, 2018 (UTC)
Lewisr
  • You can't source the release date of Children of the Jedi to the book itself, you'll need to source something else
    • Looking over some successful GA and FA nominations, I was under the impression that you could. Either way, the two dates in BTS should use the same system.—Tommuskq Imperial Emblem (TAKE A SEAT) 16:49, February 10, 2018 (UTC)
    • How would I go about sourcing the date then? The novel page doesn't have any sources on information and information on Amazon only states the date of the paperback--Vitus InfinitusTalk 18:34, February 10, 2018 (UTC)
      • Amazon also states the date of the hardcover --Lewisr (talk) 18:41, February 10, 2018 (UTC)
      • If I were you I'd just reference the wookieepedia product page for both of them. That's how it's done on other successful FAs and GAs.—Tommuskq Imperial Emblem (TAKE A SEAT) 18:38, February 10, 2018 (UTC)
      • So do I cite amazon or just the pages on the wook?--Vitus InfinitusTalk 18:52, February 10, 2018 (UTC)
  • The second paragraph needs rewording a bit --Lewisr (talk) 16:35, February 10, 2018 (UTC)
    • How's it look now?--Vitus InfinitusTalk 18:36, February 10, 2018 (UTC)
      • Removed the part about the Empire because it isn't too relevant to what is said in Catalyst. Maybe you could add the date of the Naboo Crisis to give some sort of time frame? --Lewisr (talk) 18:41, February 10, 2018 (UTC)
        • Remedied, although I feel like inexperience readers can mistake that the second paragraph takes place after the first timeline-wise. Let me know--Vitus InfinitusTalk 18:57, February 10, 2018 (UTC)
          • Agreed not sure what to do about that. The book doesn't say why just that it never made it past the design stage, so I removed some information, how's that? --Lewisr (talk) 19:07, February 10, 2018 (UTC)
            • Maybe add something like "after the formation of the Empire in 19 BBY" in the first paragraph?--Vitus InfinitusTalk 19:08, February 10, 2018 (UTC)
              • I did some changing around. I'm happy with it if you are, feel free to make any changes though --Lewisr (talk) 19:21, February 10, 2018 (UTC)
  • One last thing, should have said this earlier so apologies, but I think you should add some context as to what the Republic Special Weapons Group is, some readers may not know what it is --Lewisr (talk) 19:39, February 10, 2018 (UTC)
Imperators
  • Since the automated battlemoon asteroid isn't directly linked to the Asteroid Dreadnought, I believe it should be relegated to a See also mention.
  • Is there any timeframe information for when the Dreadnought was around or when Delto's report was made?
  • You should link fully to "Imperial Navy" upon its first mention and link to the Empire when it's first explicitly mentioned, and, since some context is required, use the full "Galactic Empire" there, with appropriate referencing for the name if necessary.
  • Context for Delto.
  • Rank for Cracken? (I'm assuming Cracken is Delto's superior in the Intelligence.)
  • "that he was not going to dismiss the information, although his source inside Patriim was unreliable" — it would be good if you could specify what "he" and "the information" refer to.
    • Restructured sentence a bit, how's it look?--Vitus InfinitusTalk 00:59, February 11, 2018 (UTC)
  • Please rearrange the BTS so that information about the subject's first canon appearance is presented first, followed by any information concerning the Legends continuity.
  • Also in the BTS, you should reference the novel's date to the Amazon link and ref everything else in the sentence to the novel itself.
    • Fixed!--Vitus InfinitusTalk 00:59, February 11, 2018 (UTC)
      • You had left two consecutive references to Children of the Jedi, which I fixed for you. Imperators II(Talk) 10:18, February 11, 2018 (UTC)
  • You should include some context, ideally the original query, in the Twitter ref. Imperators II(Talk) 21:40, February 10, 2018 (UTC)
    • Done--Vitus InfinitusTalk 00:59, February 11, 2018 (UTC)
      • Changed to what I meant by that. I've also removed the BTS information about the date change, since it's ultimately irrelevant to the subject. Imperators II(Talk) 10:18, February 11, 2018 (UTC)
  • Context for Durkteel. Can its status as a planet be sourced to the Rebel Files? Imperators II(Talk) 10:18, February 11, 2018 (UTC)
    • Yes, it's identified as a Mid Rim world in the book and provided context. How is it now?--Vitus InfinitusTalk 18:03, February 11, 2018 (UTC)
  • Oh, and could you reupload the Twitter screenshot to accomodate the original query? Imperators II(Talk) 10:24, February 11, 2018 (UTC)
    • A screenshot with the original question asked to the author? I won't be able to get both the question and author's answer in the same image due to the length of the thread.--Vitus InfinitusTalk 18:03, February 11, 2018 (UTC)
      • If there's no way you can do a scrolling screenshot of the entire thread, can you at least do separate screenshots and combine them into a single image? Imperators II(Talk) 19:19, February 11, 2018 (UTC)
ASTROID.JPG Dreadnought
  • "Haxen Delto, a colonel in the Alliance High Command, stated in a report to Airen Cracken of Alliance Intelligence that he was not going to dismiss the information, although his source inside Patriim was unreliable." This sentence doesn't properly connect with the previous introductory sentence. It reads as if you've mentioned certain "information" prior to this sentence. I think clarifying what this "information" is (I assume the rumor?) would remove this issue. Give it a try.
    • How is it now?--Vitus InfinitusTalk 00:59, February 11, 2018 (UTC)
      • "In the years between 14 and 19 AFE, Haxen Delto, a colonel in the communications section of Alliance Intelligence, stated in a report to Chief of Rebel Intelligence General Airen Cracken that he was not going to dismiss rumors of the starship despite noting that his source for the information, located inside Patriim, was unreliable." Yes, you're on the right track, but this now reads rather clunky. JangFett (Talk) 13:43, February 11, 2018 (UTC)
      • Rewrote it a bit, is it better?--Vitus InfinitusTalk 18:03, February 11, 2018 (UTC)
  • "Prior to the Galactic Republic's transformation into the Empire[2] in 19 BBY,[3] the Republic Special Weapons Group, an agency charged with the development of advanced weapon technologies, developed designs for an automated battlemoon asteroid in the aftermath of the Naboo Crisis. The project, however, never passed the design stage." Is this in anyway, shape or form, related to the Dreadnought? I get the feeling that it has nothing to do with it and there's only a passing coincidence/connection because this Weapons Group created a battlemoon asteroid.
    • It has relevancy to the article as Catalyst states that the Republic had designs for an Automated battlemoon asteroid and a Torpedo siege platform. The Rebel Files states that there were rumors of an Imperial Asteroid Dreadnought and states the activation of Torpedo Spheres which classified them as Siege platforms. I believe that including the information from Catalyst of the battlemoon asteroid would provide some more depth to the article given the little information. Although I'm not basing anything off of Legends in this article, the Eye of Palpatine was described as a battlemoon. Imperators II stated above that it would be better to add the second paragraph to a see also section, which I have gone ahead and done. Do you think I should remove it all together?--Vitus InfinitusTalk 00:59, February 11, 2018 (UTC)
      • Just realized what Imperators II meant. Remedied.--Vitus InfinitusTalk 05:00, February 11, 2018 (UTC)
  • I'm not sure I understand the Amazon sourcing when the novel itself has publication dating information. You could simply source the first part of the BTS to the novel. JangFett (Talk) 23:29, February 10, 2018 (UTC)
    • It was stated above that that sourcing it to the book itself may not be reliable it seems to me by above objections. I may have misunderstood.--Vitus InfinitusTalk 00:59, February 11, 2018 (UTC)
      • I wasn't aware that the book had that information so you can disregard my objection and go with what Jang is saying here --Lewisr (talk) 01:01, February 11, 2018 (UTC)
        • Like so?--Vitus InfinitusTalk 01:54, February 11, 2018 (UTC)
          • It has no relevancy to the article itself. I've been noticing this trend as of late on the CAN and, honestly, it's borderline trivia. Stick with what's relevant to the asteroid dreadnought itself rather than going off and finding things that look like or resemble it. Does this make sense? JangFett (Talk) 13:43, February 11, 2018 (UTC)
            • Corrected! I added when I saw others doing it so I thought it was a norm.--Vitus InfinitusTalk 18:03, February 11, 2018 (UTC)
  • Try not to use "quick maths" to "deduce" anything anymore in reference notes. See the second reference note here as an example. JangFett (Talk) 18:20, February 11, 2018 (UTC)
    • Actually, if the BBY dates are not explicitly used in the article, the date ref is unnecessary. Imperators II(Talk) 18:28, February 11, 2018 (UTC)

Comments