Wookieepedia:Comprehensive article nominations/K26 explosive antivehicle rocket

< 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.

K26 explosive antivehicle rocket

  • Nominated by: Riffsyphon1024 06:12, August 5, 2011 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: For the barn-burner, and what a nice thing to burn a barn with.

(2 ECs/1 Users/3 Total)

Support

  1. Good work.--Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 11:13, August 7, 2011 (UTC)
  2. ECvote Menkooroo 14:38, August 9, 2011 (UTC)
  3. ECvote ~SavageBOB sig 14:46, August 9, 2011 (UTC)

Object

  1. Exiled Jedi
    • I would mention that it was a book in Wizards of the Coast's Star Wars Roleplaying Game.
    • You need to mention the time it was in use outside of the infobox.
    • From the game statistics you can glean some more information than what is already in the article:
      • The blast radius of the rocket is two meters. (Its the number in parenthesis next to the range increment.)
      • And the maximum range of the rocket is one hundred meters. This is determined by taking the range increment of ten meters, and since the item description doesn't say to do otherwise, multply the range increment by ten, which is the standard number of range increments in the Star Wars Roleplaying Game. There are other nominations that have used the ranges from the roleplaying game, so I do not think that it is game mechanics.
        • Check. -- Riffsyphon1024 06:28, August 6, 2011 (UTC)
        • At any rate, game mechanics are canon unless contradicted by a later source. ~SavageBOB sig 14:17, August 5, 2011 (UTC)
    • This was one of the first articles I ever created. Its nice to see someone nominate it.--Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 12:36, August 5, 2011 (UTC)
      • Glad you're proud of how far it has come. :) -- Riffsyphon1024 06:28, August 6, 2011 (UTC)
    • You should also probably mention that its sale was legally restricted to military organizations, but there were a lot of them available (you can tell this from the availability of military and common).
    • The weapon should also be mentioned to deal shrapnel damage. (You can tell this from the damage type of slashing, which is the same type of damage that a frag grenade uses. The in-game description says that it is like a frag grenade.)--Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 12:49, August 5, 2011 (UTC)
    • This part: "as gleaned by the production period of the MM9 system" seems like it should be in a reference, not in the body of the article.
      • Pushed below to the notes. -- Riffsyphon1024 07:44, August 7, 2011 (UTC)
    • I don't think you should use Rise of the Empire era to identify when it was in use, please think of another way to say that it was in use during this time. (I think that Rise of the Empire era and the names of other eras are restricted in use to the infobox, due to them being out-of-universe terms.)--Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 12:30, August 6, 2011 (UTC)
      • Corrected to "towards the end of the Galactic Republic" -- Riffsyphon1024 07:44, August 7, 2011 (UTC)
  2. I think the sourcing could benefit from a slight cleanup --- right now, the note "Per "slashing damage" as described in the stats." applies to the entirety of the first two sentences. It might be better to stick a [1] right before the beginning of the info that needs [1][3], giving something like "Frank was a Human[1] who gave slashing damage to his foes.[1][3]" Make sense? Menkooroo 00:33, August 8, 2011 (UTC)
    • I did one better, by adding a ref to both meter measurements in front of the slashing phrase. -- Riffsyphon1024 07:40, August 8, 2011 (UTC)
      • Ref [1] now appears twice in a row at the beginning, which is unnecessary repetition. Only the second one should be there. Menkooroo 14:04, August 8, 2011 (UTC)
        • Yay for redundancy... I guess not. I got it down to the second one. -- Riffsyphon1024 02:27, August 9, 2011 (UTC)
  3. Bob
    • Can you explain Refs 2-5 better? It gives me pause to not see a book name cited therein. ~SavageBOB sig 15:47, August 8, 2011 (UTC)
      • The book has been added to the remaining refs. -- Riffsyphon1024 02:27, August 9, 2011 (UTC)

Comments