- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a comprehensive article nomination that was successful. Please do not modify it.
Sossen-7 sublight engine
- Nominated by: NaruHina Talk
19:42, February 6, 2011 (UTC) - Nomination comments: VROOOOOMMMM VEEEERRRRRR-YUUUUMMMMM VUUURRRR!
(2 ECs/4 Users/6 Total)
Support
- Menkooroo 05:05, February 9, 2011 (UTC)
- Holocron
(Complain) 07:18, February 10, 2011 (UTC) 
She'll make .2 past lightspeed. ~ SavageBob 06:32, February 11, 2011 (UTC)- OLIOSTER (talk) 16:50, February 11, 2011 (UTC)
Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 18:52, February 12, 2011 (UTC)- Darth Morrt 07:45, February 13, 2011 (UTC)
Object
Seems like there are a few more indirect appearances, as well as some (Picture only) (Indirect appearance only) to be added to the "Sources" section.Menkooroo 03:46, February 8, 2011 (UTC)- I put just the appearances confirmed by the Databank. It seemed logical to me that it would still be there in the others, but I wasn't sure that would be appropriate. As for the sources, the engine is not referenced and is not pictured, so those would be inappropriate. That is, unless we can infer that those two jets jutting from each wing are the Sossens. The Databank confirms there is more than one on the skiff. NaruHina Talk 04:05, February 8, 2011 (UTC)
- If an appearance of the J-type star skiff in a film or TV episode is an indirect appearance for the engine, then why wouldn't a picture of the craft in something like Star Wars: Complete Cross-Sections be an indirect (Picture only) appearance as well? Menkooroo 04:25, February 9, 2011 (UTC)
- I reason that it appearing in a source, such as TCW, is it in action, so that would constitute an indirect appearance. If we cannot say that those two jets are the Sossens, then a picture would be just a picture of the skiff itself. That would be like taking a picture of a ship and saying the landing gear indirectly appeared. Meanwhile, if the action were live, as it is in a books, and we know that the engine was installed on the ship at that time, that is an indirect appearance because it is obviously operating, IMO. NaruHina Talk 04:51, February 9, 2011 (UTC)
- Also, according to our page on the RB, a J-type skiff does not appear in the Complete Cross-Sections. It says a J-type 327 Nubian royal starship appeared in Ep. 1, but no skiffs in Ep.3 (When this would be sourceable) NaruHina Talk 05:03, February 9, 2011 (UTC)
- That's a good point. Well-reasoned! Menkooroo 05:05, February 9, 2011 (UTC)
- Also, according to our page on the RB, a J-type skiff does not appear in the Complete Cross-Sections. It says a J-type 327 Nubian royal starship appeared in Ep. 1, but no skiffs in Ep.3 (When this would be sourceable) NaruHina Talk
- I reason that it appearing in a source, such as TCW, is it in action, so that would constitute an indirect appearance. If we cannot say that those two jets are the Sossens, then a picture would be just a picture of the skiff itself. That would be like taking a picture of a ship and saying the landing gear indirectly appeared. Meanwhile, if the action were live, as it is in a books, and we know that the engine was installed on the ship at that time, that is an indirect appearance because it is obviously operating, IMO. NaruHina Talk
- If an appearance of the J-type star skiff in a film or TV episode is an indirect appearance for the engine, then why wouldn't a picture of the craft in something like Star Wars: Complete Cross-Sections be an indirect (Picture only) appearance as well? Menkooroo 04:25, February 9, 2011 (UTC)
- I put just the appearances confirmed by the Databank. It seemed logical to me that it would still be there in the others, but I wasn't sure that would be appropriate. As for the sources, the engine is not referenced and is not pictured, so those would be inappropriate. That is, unless we can infer that those two jets jutting from each wing are the Sossens. The Databank confirms there is more than one on the skiff. NaruHina Talk
"…during the Clone Wars of 22 BBY." This implies that the Clone Wars took place only in 22 BBY and that the skiff was only used in 22 BBY; neither of which are true.Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 16:47, February 12, 2011 (UTC)- Actually, it does not. It refers to the year when the war began and its an official way of dating wars. While that also means it does not indicate she only used them in 22 BBY, I'll add a note saying she continued to use them until the end of the war. NaruHina Talk 17:49, February 12, 2011 (UTC)
Saying that they were "the Clone Wars of 22 BBY" does in fact indicate they happened just in 22 BBY, but since you've modified the sentence anyway, that's no longer an issue. However, "utile" means useful, so I don't think that's what you mean there, and there is also a tense/mood issue in the new sentence. Also, you indicate that Amidala was using her Sossens directly; perhaps if you stated that she continued to use the craft that housed the Sossens, it would be less awkward-sounding.Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 18:06, February 12, 2011 (UTC)- Ah, seems you fixed the "utile" while I was writing this. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 18:07, February 12, 2011 (UTC)
- Indeed, though I disagree about the year issue. I hear wars referenced that way all the time. The American Civil Wars of 1861, the Revolutionary War of 1775, the Gunpei War of 1180, etc. While I do admit it is primarily used for things like the Crusades where there were more than one conflict, but with each called "The Crusade" (nevermind the numeric nomenclature), it is still appropriate. I've fixed the direct usage issue. —Unsigned comment by NaruHina (talk • contribs)
- Ah, seems you fixed the "utile" while I was writing this. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 18:07, February 12, 2011 (UTC)
- Actually, it does not. It refers to the year when the war began and its an official way of dating wars. While that also means it does not indicate she only used them in 22 BBY, I'll add a note saying she continued to use them until the end of the war. NaruHina Talk
Comments