- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a comprehensive article nomination that was unsuccessful. Please do not modify it.
Contents
Brother/Sister (Inquisitor)
- Nominated by: Dax (talk) 11:18, January 10, 2016 (UTC)
- Nomination comments: Meets all the requirements as far as I can tell.
(0 ECs/0 Users/0 Total)
Support
Object
Brandon
- Unfortunately, this fails one requirement that it's actually incapable of meeting right now. That requirement is: "following the review process, be stable, i.e., does not change significantly from day to day..." The reason that this can't meet the requirement is because the subject is part of an ongoing television storyline. That means that the article can have new information from day to day, week to week, etc. The article can't be stable as a result. I would recommend withdrawing this nomination. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 15:56, January 10, 2016 (UTC)
Comments
I don't consider the article to fail this requirement for two (albeit linked) reasons: Firstly, virtually all the information in the article was presented from OOU sources - mainly "Rebels Recon", not from "Star Wars Rebels" itself; Secondly, Pablo Hidalgo has said in the RR segment for "Always Two There Are" that season two will not go into detail about the inner-workings of the Inquisitorious. Therefore the information presented in the article at current is not going to change significantly (if at all) in the near future, and so the article doesn't (shouldn't) fail on that basis. Dax (talk) 16:09, January 10, 2016 (UTC)
- It also needs to reflect the history, which means that the events of the show should be reflected in the article. As a result, it can't be stable, so I'm afraid I won't be striking my objection. I still recommend withdrawing the nomination. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 16:12, January 10, 2016 (UTC)
- In what sense? It's an article about a title, and deals specifically with the title, it's meaning, history, and usage. As with every other article about a title on this wiki, it does not include the complete personal history of every person to have held it (Darth, and any other number of examples), as that's not what the article is about. Dax (talk) 16:27, January 10, 2016 (UTC)
- This will be my last comment on the matter. I never said anything about the complete personal history of everyone who used it, but some of the history is relevant, especially if it can illustrate information about the title. As it stands, this article actually has no relevant history examples. Moving forward there will surely be more information that can be added. As a result, it can't remain stable, and I won't be striking my objection. Sorry. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 16:57, January 10, 2016 (UTC)
- Cool. I realize what you mean now about "history examples" to illustrate the article, and am writing those up at the moment. However this will bring the article above the 250 word limit, so I'll withdraw the nomination (not quite sure how though...) and will look at GA status further down the line. Dax (talk) 18:23, January 10, 2016 (UTC)
- Glad you understand! I actually just rewrote the article, and in doing so illustrated what I mean when I say that the events of the show can and should be reflected in this article. The article is probably more or less as completed as it can be until more information comes out. Considering that Pablo Hidalgo said in Rebels Recon that we'll learn more about their origins (just not their bureaucracy), and the events of the show will continue to depict the operations of at least two of these Inquisitors, I think it's clear that this article will need more updates as the season moves forward and that it can't meet the stability requirements of status nominations. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 18:25, January 10, 2016 (UTC)
- Cool. I realize what you mean now about "history examples" to illustrate the article, and am writing those up at the moment. However this will bring the article above the 250 word limit, so I'll withdraw the nomination (not quite sure how though...) and will look at GA status further down the line. Dax (talk) 18:23, January 10, 2016 (UTC)
- This will be my last comment on the matter. I never said anything about the complete personal history of everyone who used it, but some of the history is relevant, especially if it can illustrate information about the title. As it stands, this article actually has no relevant history examples. Moving forward there will surely be more information that can be added. As a result, it can't remain stable, and I won't be striking my objection. Sorry. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 16:57, January 10, 2016 (UTC)
- In what sense? It's an article about a title, and deals specifically with the title, it's meaning, history, and usage. As with every other article about a title on this wiki, it does not include the complete personal history of every person to have held it (Darth, and any other number of examples), as that's not what the article is about. Dax (talk) 16:27, January 10, 2016 (UTC)