Wookieepedia:Comprehensive article nominations/Mud-Jumpers

< 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 Mud-Jumpers
    • 1.1 (2 ECs/3 Users/5 Total)
      • 1.1.1 Support
      • 1.1.2 Object
        • 1.1.2.1 Tommy
        • 1.1.2.2 Ayrehead
      • 1.1.3 Comments

Mud-Jumpers

  • Nominated by: AV-6R7Crew Pit 20:13, February 7, 2018 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: Given that Mimban will finally be making its on-screen debut, I thought it appropriate to nom the seeming predecessors of the new mudtroopers.

(2 ECs/3 Users/5 Total)

Support

  1. --Vitus InfinitusTalk 20:36, February 9, 2018 (UTC)
  2. —Tommy-Macaroni Imperial Emblem (TAKE A SEAT) 09:46, February 14, 2018 (UTC)
  3. ECvote Ayrehead02 (talk) 21:34, February 19, 2018 (UTC)
  4. grunny@wookieepedia:~$ 04:33, February 22, 2018 (UTC)
  5. ECvote Imperators II(Talk) 13:28, February 22, 2018 (UTC)

Object

Tommy
  • Maybe say that the Grand Army of the Republic broadcast was a holotransmission?—Tommy-Macaroni Imperial Emblem (TAKE A SEAT) 19:12, February 12, 2018 (UTC)
    • How does that look? - AV-6R7Crew Pit 03:27, February 14, 2018 (UTC)
      • Great!—Tommy-Macaroni Imperial Emblem (TAKE A SEAT) 09:46, February 14, 2018 (UTC)
Ayrehead
  • The audio clip should really match the quote in length. I can cut the clip down for you, or you could add the first sentence to the quote. I'll leave it up to you. Ayrehead02 (talk) 08:17, February 18, 2018 (UTC)
    • Could you just upload a separate, shortened version of the quote? Another article uses the full quote. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 09:44, February 18, 2018 (UTC)
  • Per recent discussion on IRC, full dates aren't really necessary for the BTS. You should just include the year. Ayrehead02 (talk) 08:17, February 18, 2018 (UTC)
    • Unless this becomes codified in a CT, full dates are part of my personal manual of style, and I see no reason to remove valid information from an article. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 09:44, February 18, 2018 (UTC)
      • While the information is valid, it isn't really relevant to the topic of the article. Tope put's it far more eloquently than I can here in his last objection. Plus, per rule 6 of our sourcing page, we should use as few references as possible and having an additional reference exclusively for date and day goes against this. Ayrehead02 (talk) 22:58, February 18, 2018 (UTC)
        • How does that look? EDIT: Also, would using full dates be fine in a Bts that mentioned multiple items from the same year? - AV-6R7Crew Pit 20:28, February 19, 2018 (UTC)

Comments