Wookieepedia:Comprehensive article nominations/DRN-592 (third nomination)

< 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 DRN-592
    • 1.1 (3 ECs/4 Users/7 Total)
      • 1.1.1 Support
      • 1.1.2 Object
        • 1.1.2.1 OOM is confused about OOM designations
        • 1.1.2.2 UberSoldat
        • 1.1.2.3 Imp
      • 1.1.3 Comments

DRN-592

  • Nominated by: Commander Code-8 Hello There! 14:04, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: Third time's the charm. Prepare for a lot more of these

(3 ECs/4 Users/7 Total)

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

Support

  1. ECvote All OOMs are B1s, but not all OOMs are OOMs. OOM 224 ༼༽talk༼༽ 15:52, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
  2. ECvote Stop thinking about it, your brain will thank you :P. UberSoldat93 ClanMudhornSignet-Redemption (talk) 08:09, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
  3. DwartiiDelver (talk) 14:52, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
  4. That's a tiny-ass infobox photo. Braha'tok enthusiast Hello there 21:37, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
  5. Erebus Chronus (Talk) 18:06, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
  6. Reviewied at the same time as Erebus, no point in not supporting. :P JediMasterMacaroniAdmiral Ackbar RH(Talk) 18:07, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
  7. ECvote Imperators II(Talk) 08:54, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Object

OOM is confused about OOM designations
  • First sentence: context for the B1-series is unnecessary.
    • Done. Commander Code-8 Hello There! 15:36, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Last sentence: you could just say the droid had white plating with brown markings. In fact, I think the "white" there is just very light tan. OOM 224 ༼༽talk༼༽ 14:10, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
    • So I think simply "tan" will do as a substitute for white there. OOM 224 ༼༽talk༼༽ 14:10, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
      • I've specified light tan because one has to zoom in a ton to see it, and I think that makes it clearer for the readers. Commander Code-8 Hello There! 15:36, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
        • Sure, that makes sense OOM 224 ༼༽talk༼༽ 15:52, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
UberSoldat
  • Refs 1 and 2 need to be converted into a combined note identifying the characteristics that apply to this character. This falls in line with precedent on our vehicle and clone status articles.
    • Like that?
  • Does the in-game model depict the character with a weapon of some sort? UberSoldat93 ClanMudhornSignet-Redemption (talk) 14:56, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
    • Yes that's the E-5. Commander Code-8 Hello There! 14:12, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
      • Then it needs a note akin to this. UberSoldat93 ClanMudhornSignet-Redemption (talk) 14:32, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
        • Done. Commander Code-8 Hello There! 08:05, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
Imp
  • Do both sources in ref 1 contain all of the info that the article references to them? If so, why do you need both of them? If not, please make it clear which piece of information comes from which source. Imperators II(Talk) 18:19, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
    • The only info the CW campaign guide is there for is the B-series, so I've specified that. Commander Code-8 Hello There! 21:56, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Comments

  • Previously the article stated that this droid was an OOM-Command Battle droid because it has the same model as OOM-14, however, there's nothing in GB to directly say that OOM-14 was an OOM droid, and the in-game model is much more like a regular old battle droid so that part's been removed. Commander Code-8 Hello There! 14:04, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Approved as a Comprehensive article by EduCorps 08:54, 8 July 2021 (UTC)