Wookieepedia:Comprehensive article nominations/Unidentified Wookiee (Sunchoo's village)

< 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.

Unidentified Wookiee (Sunchoo's village)

(2 ECs/3 Users/5 Total)

Support

  1. —Axinal Convocation Chamber 19:46, May 7, 2011 (UTC)
  2. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 17:25, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
  3. ECvote --Eyrezer 10:04, May 14, 2011 (UTC)
  4. --Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 13:52, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
  5. ECvoteMenkooroo 05:34, May 20, 2011 (UTC)

Object

  1. Axinal
    • You mention that the captured residents were kidnapped "at some point" and returned in 21 BBY. Do we not know what year they were kidnapped?
    • Does The Way of the Jedi identify itself as a novel? A novel is typically longer and is a cohesive storyline rather than multiple adventure strands. If it does, no problem, but if not, I think it might be better to say book or adventure book.
    • I think the introduction should be rewritten so that it does not begin with "This," and so that the bold word is Wookiee rather than individual. Wookiee can be linked the second time it is used.
    • Otherwise, a nice little article, and a fine addition to the barn burner.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 18:20, May 7, 2011 (UTC)
      • Nothing on the year, "novel" changed and "Wookiee" bolded, but are you sure about "this"? I mean, 99% of CAs use "this". Other options are "a" or "the", but "a" kinda implies that the article isn't about the guy being duscussed and "the" kinda implies that he's the only unidentified wookiee out there. Bonslywizard Naboo (Send a transmission) 19:19, May 7, 2011 (UTC)
        • To be honest, no, I'm not sure about "this." There's no specific rule against it, as far as I know, but I can tell you from experience that whenever I start an article with "This" it gets changed to "A/An" by other reviewers. I think the reasoning is that we don't want the readers to feel like they're reading an online article. But I don't mind letting it go, because it's fine with me. I only mention it because my articles always get changed when I do that. As for the other objections, nice work.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 19:46, May 7, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Hey, hey, here's Tanaka~!
    • The species of an unidentified character is never bolded as the character's title. Think of something to call him or say "individual" again, though that is frowned upon. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 17:48, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
      • Sorry, I didn't realize that. My mistake.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 15:42, May 9, 2011 (UTC)
      • Are you sure? Many CAs [[Unidentified H'nemthe patron|do]] so.
        • Yes I'm sure. That's not allowed because that denotes their species, not their defining feature (the reason they're notable enough to have an article). Basically, you say "this Human man/woman/individual" if nothing else, which is also discouraged because it preempts a link to sexes. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 02:45, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
    • You don't need the redundant sourcing on the era in the infobox. The book in which the character appears is sufficient.
    • Does the Annual specifically say that this book's events took place in 21 BBY? If not, then the article should read "around 21 BBY." NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 17:54, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
  3. Can you establish that s/he was part of a tribe early in the bio, before the RPG template? Seems like an important fact about him/her.Menkooroo 04:40, May 17, 2011 (UTC)

Comments