Wookieepedia:Featured article nominations/ARC-77

< Wookieepedia:Featured article nominations
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a featured article nomination that was successful. Please do not modify it.

ARC-77

  • Nomination by: Thefourdotelipsis 06:52, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: "Well, you sir, are a cowardly [Redacted by administration]! You just shot an unarmed man!" "Well, he shoulda armed himself..."

(5 Inqs/1 users/6 total)

Support

  1. Inqvote This user knows that Fordo owns. Chack Jadson (Talk) 23:51, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
  2. Fordo doesnt just own, but he PWNS!!! --Clonehunter 19:31, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
  3. Inqvote I do not endorse the comment above me. Cull Tremayne 14:58, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
  4. Inqvote -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 21:35, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
  5. Inqvote --Eyrezer 19:22, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
  6. Inqvote Green Tentacle (Talk) 19:37, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Object

  1. A bit of context on the Muunilinst 10 in the intro would be helpful. Otherwise, great job. I love the "Biography" titles. Chack Jadson (Talk) 21:24, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
  2. Could we perhaps split the Muunilinst stuff into two (sub)sections? As is the sectioning is a tad unbalanced with one five-, one three- and one single-paragraph section. Any chance of expanding the P&T a little bit with stuff from the cartoon? Something about his bravery or something similar or mention that he had no qualms about retreating when necessary despite his bombastic approach to situations, or something to that effect, might make a good addition. Finally, any chance of an additional quote or two? (Not an objection proper). :-P -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 22:27, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
    • I prefer to let the content of a section dictate sectioning itself, rather than their size, if that makes sense. I just think it's more important for an article to be functional, rather than "pretty." That's probably highly arrogant of me, and I won't object to someone else changing it, but I don't really see the need. A teensy bit added to the P/T...let me know if you want more. :P As for the quotes...bah. Next time I have the DVD out I'll put a few in. Thefourdotelipsis 07:33, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
      • Well, I don't see why it can't be both functional and "pretty," and I don't think splitting really stops if from being functional, but I guess it's alright as is. "...and fought on no matter how dire the situation" - that's not entirely accurate, is it, if he ordered them to retreat in #21? I'd suggest saying that, though he fought on etc, he knew when the ultimately cut his losses and retreat. Or something like that. Otherwise, P&T looks fine. Quotes aren't too big a deal...they're really there to make the article look "pretty" :P. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 12:38, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Comments

Approved as a Featured article by Inquisitorius 19:37, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

  • Rescanned infobox image is incoming. Thefourdotelipsis 06:52, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
    • Actually, it's not, but if someone could oblige, it'd be much appreciated. :P Thefourdotelipsis 22:09, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
  • "The survivors, though in a critical condition, survived" made me laugh. :-P -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 22:27, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Oh yeah, any particular reason for the use of "Confederate" as opposed to "Separatist"? I'm not saying you shouldn't use it, it just reads oddly sometimes since Separatist is the more commonly used term in canon. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 01:04, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
    • I prefer "Confederate" and, for that matter, "Alliance," since it just sounds a bit more impartial. It's also a little more official. :P Thefourdotelipsis 07:34, 21 December 2008 (UTC)