Wookieepedia:Comprehensive article nominations/Ziugen

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

Ziugen

Nominated by: Imperators II^(Talk) 01:27, April 20, 2013 (UTC)
Nomination comments: Are we factory-workers? Are we farmers? No, we are slaves in the Hutt Space!

(3 ECs/1 Users/4 Total)

Support

501st dogma^(talk) 20:40, April 20, 2013 (UTC)
Ayrehead02 (talk) 20:46, April 20, 2013 (UTC)
For future reference, there's no need to add the "___ was located in the territory of ____" anymore; it's rather frowned upon as fluffing now. However, the stuff about the Hutts is fine here, I think. Cade Calrayn 15:38, April 21, 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you for the heads-up, Cade. I've removed the extraneous territory information from my nominated articles now. Imperators II^(Talk) 17:19, April 21, 2013 (UTC)
Winterz (talk) 15:53, April 23, 2013 (UTC)

Object

Say what, Cade?
- ~~Recover the territorial part, sir.~~ Winterz (talk) 02:30, April 23, 2013 (UTC)
  - No, Winterz, it's not necessary. I didn't do it on Amador, and it's really utter speculation to even mention the info. Yes, it's located in the territory, but we don't know whether the planet was part of the government, and saying that "___ was located in the territory of ___" is basically trying to hint at affiliation when there isn't a link. Regardless, it's a moot point here, as he didn't remove anything. Cade Calrayn 02:35, April 23, 2013 (UTC)
    - Actually, if the planet really appears (as in named) on the map within said organization/faction then this means it belongs to that faction. Winterz (talk) 02:54, April 23, 2013 (UTC)
      - Eh, I'm fairly certain that's wrong, but this isn't the place to discuss it. However, you should still strike your objection, since he didn't remove anything—Hutt Space is mentioned in the article. Cade Calrayn 03:10, April 23, 2013 (UTC)
        Yeah..nice try, Mr. We'll discuss this later on IRC. Winterz (talk) 04:00, April 23, 2013 (UTC)
        O_O I honestly totally missed that. I have no idea why that was removed; it's perfectly valid info, as it's Hutt Space. Cade Calrayn 04:02, April 23, 2013 (UTC)
        OK, let's get this straight, then. Cade, which part specifically were you against—the "territory around Ziugen was part of Hutt Space by the year..." or the "territory around Ziugen was explored by the year..."? I'm confused. Imperators II^(Talk) 08:57, April 23, 2013 (UTC)
        Since Cade has dismissed his charges, I've reverted your latest edit, Imperators. Please, do the same on all your noms ;)
        
        What I was referring to was the information from the Atlas about the region's political affiliations, such as "by 137 ABY the region around ____ was under the control of Darth Krayt's Empire." Not all planet articles have that info; it's article-length-fluffing at best and speculation-inspiring at its worst. Cade Calrayn 15:08, April 23, 2013 (UTC)
        Yeah, well, that's exactly what I originally had (and have now again) in the article. "By 12,000 BBY the region around ____ was under the control of the Hutts." How is that different? Imperators II^(Talk) 15:13, April 23, 2013 (UTC)
        
        Gah. I think Hutt Space is different, as the region is almost entirely under the control of the Hutts, but this is probably an issue that has to be settled with a CT after further discussion. I'll talk with Winterz about this. Cade Calrayn 15:19, April 23, 2013 (UTC)
- ~~Explanation for the infobox-exclusive coordinates in the Bts.~~ Winterz (talk) 13:15, April 23, 2013 (UTC)
  - Will that suffice? Imperators II^(Talk) 15:15, April 23, 2013 (UTC)
    - ~~Nah, that's not what I meant. You should explain why they're infobox-exclusive and also reveal their non-canonical status.~~ Winterz (talk) 15:31, April 23, 2013 (UTC)
      - Winterz, that's entirely overkill. I didn't have to do it on Uphrades, Berrun, or Nathema; they just have to be mentioned as gird squares. Cade Calrayn 15:34, April 23, 2013 (UTC)
        Okay then. Winterz (talk) 15:53, April 23, 2013 (UTC)

Comments

You should wait till May 1st to nom more Hutt articles. We're having a Hutt Barn Burner! 501st dogma^(talk) 12:18, April 20, 2013 (UTC)
- Great. :D Imperators II^(Talk) 15:13, April 20, 2013 (UTC)