Wookieepedia:Featured article nominations/Bakura Incident

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

Bakura Incident

  • Nomination by: - Andykatib 5:51, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: My first major project here and a significant Expanded Universe event. I managed to correct most of the errors so it is up to you now to decide. Andykatib 5:51, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

(0 Inqs/0 users/0 total)

Support

Object

  1. From the desk of Atarumaster88
    • The intro could do a better job of setting the stage for the Battle of Bakura. How did the Rebels get there? How did the battle start? Etc. By and large, this needs to be about doubled in length
    • Redlinks in infobox.
    • You'll need a link to the conquest of G'rho
    • Who is "The Admiral" mentioned in 3rd paragraph of Background? Please provide context.
    • You'll need to explain the advantages of enteching humans a little more clearly please for the sake of the reader, as well as Sibwarra's role therein.
    • Is Shreeftut or whatever a title or person? There should be consistent capitalization depending on which one it is.
    • Please limit the use of parentheses in articles.
    • Per Toprawa in that a lot of the article goes beyond the scope of its topic. Some topics I would recommend shortening:
      • The Imperial takeover of Bakura could easily be reduced to a single paragraph.
      • The interception of the message droid by the Rebels could also be shortened.
      • The Truce section could also be shortened some—it gets into a lot of play-by-play.
      • You don't need drastic cuts, IMHO, just some trimming and condensing here and there. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order (Talk page) 20:01, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
    • Correct these and I will continue my review. I would also caution you to beware of POV. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order (Talk page) 01:18, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  2. Toprawa:
    • I didn't think I'd ever say this, but this article is way too detailed. This isn't so much an article on the battle as it's a summary of the novel itself. I would strongly recommend going through and strictly condensing the narration into details about actual conflict. A good prelude summary is always essential for a battle article, but be careful of going off on extraneous tangents from the battle itself. As a way of keeping the article focused, try sectioning it into three major sections, "Prelude," "The battle," and "Aftermath," and subsection from there. Toprawa and Ralltiir 05:38, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
    • I just finished re-reading through TaB last night, and after perusing the TaB Sourcebook this morning, while it may be a bit radical, this article, as it is written right now, should really be under the title "Bakura Incident," to encompass the entire proceedings, and a separate, much shorter, less-comprehensive article should be devoted to the final battle taking place in the book. Really, that final battle should be under the title "Third Battle of Bakura" and the battle taking place at the beginning of the book should be under "Second Battle." Moreover, our article Bakura Truce, I believe, should simply be a redirect to a "Bakura Incident" article. If you're willing, Andy, I would recommend just reworking the introduction a little bit, and perhaps any other necessary parts of the article, to reflect the greater Incident, and try to nominate that. It would certainly take less work on your part. Toprawa and Ralltiir 18:00, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
      • Andy, I personally agree with Toprawa. The Bakura Incident includes so many angles, the Rebel Alliance, the Ssi-ruuvi Imperium and the Galactic Empire. All three have their own agenda and there is much chaos that ensues. Great work has been done in writing the article, but I think it could be moved and reworked a touch to encompass all three angles, as well. — Fiolli {Alpheridies University ComNet} 16:39, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
        • I am currently reworking this article to meet its new title: Bakura Incident. I'll be adding information from a number of sources over the next few days/weeks/whatever as I go, and will apprise you when expansions are complete. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order (Talk page) 00:05, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
  3. References needed in the infobox for:
    • Strength -> Orbital Repair Platform
    • Casualties -> 60+ TIE/ln starfighters
    • Casualties -> Half of the garrison defected to the Alliance, dead or missing —Xwing328(Talk) 02:31, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Comments

  • Not bad for a first shot, but this will need some work. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order (Talk page) 01:18, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
    • I managed to correct bullet points 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 to my best abilities though I will need help with points five and seven. I haven't be able to do that much work on Wookieepedia because I am preoccupied with other things in Malaysia though I found some really good, cheap Star Wars books and comics that I like. Andykatib 05:45, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
      • Attention all: Ataru has indicated that he is interested in taking over this nomination. Chack Jadson (Talk) 14:08, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Vote to remove nom (Inquisitorius only)

  1. Inqvote This article has not been touched by Andykatib in over a month, and he is editing other articles here, so it seems he's given up on this one. Chack Jadson (Talk) 13:47, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
  2. Inqvote Indeed. The oldest objections seem to be 2 months old today, and no effort has been made to address the other objections, which are quite hefty, in any way. The nominator's contribs would seem to indicate he has moved on. Toprawa and Ralltiir 16:21, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
  3. Inqvote Get ye gone. Graestan(Talk) 00:14, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
  4. Inqvote Couple weeks since adoption, but still no addressing of specific objections. Besides with the new title, the article really needs to be reworked/reworded. Cull Tremayne 00:52, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
    • I've been working on acquiring the sources for this. All the specific objections have more or less been addressed. Still working on re-wording the article, but I've been busy IRL. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order (Talk page) 22:33, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
      • I echo Cull's concern that fixing the article per the move is going to take more than a few tweaks here and there. I recognize that Ataru is trying to work on this thing, but I don't think it would be too much to move this off the page until it's ready. Toprawa and Ralltiir 23:01, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
  5. Inqvote Don't see any reason why this can't be brought back nice and fresh whenever it's finished. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 11:12, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Vote to NOT remove nom (Inquisitorius only)

  1. Inqvote I disagree with my colleagues. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order (Talk page) 00:48, 16 February 2009 (UTC)