- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a comprehensive article nomination that was successful. Please do not modify it.
Unidentified Ithorian male (Upper City)
(2 ECs/2 Users/4 Total)
Support
- NaruHina Talk
15:53, October 4, 2011 (UTC) - --Cal Jedi
(Personal Comm Channel) 01:17, October 5, 2011 (UTC) 
Exiled Jedi 
(Greetings) 02:10, October 13, 2011 (UTC)- Cavalier One(Squadron channel) 21:57, October 28, 2011 (UTC)
Object
As much as I personally dislike it, because I still see it as impractical, we aren't allowed to carbon copy articles for status anymore. You have to change up the wording in this one so it's not so similar to the Twi'lek. The BTS is exempt from this.NaruHina Talk 02:55, October 3, 2011 (UTC)
- Are those superficial wording changes I made good enough? :P OLIOSTER (talk) 02:03, October 4, 2011 (UTC)
- Honestly... no. Make more than a superficial effort. You can get the same info across by using completely different sentences. Menkooroo 05:34, October 4, 2011 (UTC)
- Is that better? OLIOSTER (talk) 05:48, October 4, 2011 (UTC)
- The article looks good to me, but I don't see why the BTS section should be exempt. IMO, like Menk said, you can get the same idea across by using different words and sentences. Thoughts?--Cal Jedi (Personal Comm Channel) 15:08, October 4, 2011 (UTC)
- The BTS generally comes down to one sentence of limited breadth and wracking your mind trying to reword this when most articles on this page follow a structure anyway ("It appeared in this book written by this person") would be unnecessarily tedious, eventually culminating in wordiness we don't need. For the courtesy of rewording whole articles that could otherwise be the same, it's a small exchange to allow the BTS to remain constant. NaruHina Talk 15:50, October 4, 2011 (UTC)
- That's fine by me, then. It makes it easier for me. ;) --Cal Jedi (Personal Comm Channel) 20:59, October 4, 2011 (UTC)
- That's fine by me, then. It makes it easier for me. ;) --Cal Jedi
- The BTS generally comes down to one sentence of limited breadth and wracking your mind trying to reword this when most articles on this page follow a structure anyway ("It appeared in this book written by this person") would be unnecessarily tedious, eventually culminating in wordiness we don't need. For the courtesy of rewording whole articles that could otherwise be the same, it's a small exchange to allow the BTS to remain constant. NaruHina Talk
- The article looks good to me, but I don't see why the BTS section should be exempt. IMO, like Menk said, you can get the same idea across by using different words and sentences. Thoughts?--Cal Jedi
- Is that better? OLIOSTER (talk) 05:48, October 4, 2011 (UTC)
- Honestly... no. Make more than a superficial effort. You can get the same info across by using completely different sentences. Menkooroo 05:34, October 4, 2011 (UTC)
- Are those superficial wording changes I made good enough? :P OLIOSTER (talk) 02:03, October 4, 2011 (UTC)
More of a question I suppose: does this edit make the year the subject of the sentence? I mean, making the first sentence be POV of the year, not the Ithorian.–Tm_T (Talk) 06:45, October 4, 2011 (UTC)For this article and your Twi'lek nom, please mention their lack of hair in the infobox and the body.--Exiled Jedi (Greetings) 16:51, October 11, 2011 (UTC)
- Why? OLIOSTER (talk) 18:10, October 11, 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, I guess it really isn't necessary, sorry about that.--Exiled Jedi (Greetings) 02:10, October 13, 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, I guess it really isn't necessary, sorry about that.--Exiled Jedi
- Why? OLIOSTER (talk) 18:10, October 11, 2011 (UTC)
- Cav
No applicable quotes?- Cavalier One(Squadron channel) 10:07, October 26, 2011 (UTC)
Comments