Wookieepedia:Comprehensive article nominations/Onager-class Testbed

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a Comprehensive article nomination that was successful. Please do not modify it.

Onager-class Testbed

• Nominated by: Loqiical (talk) 00:00, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
• Nomination comments: Happy new year
• WookieeProject (optional): Wookieepedia:WookieeProject Ambition and Wookieepedia:WookieeProject Fantasy Flight Games

(2 ECs/3 Users/5 Total)

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

Support

1. Fan26 (Talk) 03:03, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
2. JediMasterMacaroni^(Talk) 02:20, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
3. Braha'tok enthusiast ^{Hello there} 19:46, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
4. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 00:20, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
5. BloodOfIrizi ^(Syndicure) 20:59, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Object

Fan

• A page is linked to twice in yonder BtS section Fan26 (Talk) 00:20, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
  • Whoops fixed Loqiical (talk) 01:46, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

UberSoldat

• Engines should be documented (see Rakehell). UberSoldat93 (talk) 16:25, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
  • I don't agree with assuming that a ship has engines because it is "flying" through space, but the nominator can choose. Loqiical (talk) 01:32, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
    • It's the standard practice and a longstanding precedent whenever a vessel is shown or described to be in flight. UberSoldat93 (talk) 12:52, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
      • I think it's an unnecessary precedent. The testbed could potentially be an immobile ship just floating around in orbit Loqiical (talk) 00:08, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
        • Then you can't refer to it as a "starship" :P UberSoldat93 (talk) 11:24, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
          • All starship articles have to mention engines? Loqiical (talk) 23:24, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
            • If shown to be in flight, yes. UberSoldat93 (talk) 07:22, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
              • What is flight? Loqiical (talk) 09:27, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
                • In space. UberSoldat93 (talk) 12:16, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
                  • Striking for now until I can reach a conclusion with the EC. UberSoldat93 (talk) 19:09, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Braha

• Can the general appearance of the ship briefly be touched upon? Braha'tok enthusiast ^{Hello there} 22:45, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
  • I imitated the Onager-class Star Destroyer article if that's ok Loqiical (talk) 01:53, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
• The history content is currently wedged between descriptive stuff. Can you switch it to be after them? I think the description of the appearance would serve better near the start as well. Braha'tok enthusiast ^{Hello there} 15:09, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
  • Imo it's better to have characteristics last since the Onager-class Star Destroyer page already has a detailed section on the design. But if they gave more information on the design process I would put the testbed's design at the front (as it would also be historical info). Happy to hear your thoughts Loqiical (talk) 09:27, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
    • I see your sentiment, but it would be more in-line with WP:LG/IU to have the history after the characteristics. I also don't think that the Onager-class having a detailed description should mean this one's should be bumped down. I think the level of detail is fine here, but it's still a normal ship-class article, and so should follow the same sort of layout in my opinion. Braha'tok enthusiast ^{Hello there} 22:30, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
      • Sure Loqiical (talk) 10:47, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Macaroni

• It seems to me that the subject was created for its card in the Onager expansion, which should be mentioned in the bts. JediMasterMacaroni^(Talk) 21:43, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
  • Done Loqiical (talk) 00:14, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Comments

• They don't specify if the name refers to a single ship or a class of ships, so I've chosen the latter. Loqiical (talk) 00:00, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Approved as a Comprehensive article by EduCorps 00:26, 28 January 2023 (UTC)