Wookieepedia:Featured article nominations/Battle of Boz Pity (Galactic Civil War)/Legends

< 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.

Battle of Boz Pity (Galactic Civil War)

  • Nominated by: Kilson 02:16, March 19, 2011 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments:Firing for effect.

(3 Inqs/4 Users/7 Total)

Support

  1. QuiGonJinn Senate seal(Talk) 19:44, March 30, 2011 (UTC)
  2. GTQ 00:39, April 4, 2011 (UTC)
  3. Inqvote IFYLOFD (Floyd's crib) 00:44, April 12, 2011 (UTC)
  4. Inqvote -- Darth Culator (Talk) 00:50, April 15, 2011 (UTC)
  5. I didn't find anything to object to. Trak Nar Ramble on 04:53, April 18, 2011 (UTC)
  6. Boom! AT-AT headshot! Corellian PremierRobotechAll along the watchtower 15:48, April 18, 2011 (UTC)
  7. Inqvote Toprawa and Ralltiir 01:49, April 19, 2011 (UTC)

Object

QGJ
  • Please give Boba his due credit and spell his name out in the intro instead of pipelinking him ;)
    • If I must. lol
  • I wouldn't really call Renegade Squadron an "elite" unit, seeing as it was assembled from pirates, bounty hunters, and other scum. As far as I can remember, the game never uses this term in relation to the squadron.
    • Well, I'm not sure if it ever called the Renegades an "elite" unit, but the squadron was created specifically out of soldiers who didn't need to be trained, had experience in military fighting, and could carry out some of the most dangerous and suicidal missions the Alliance had. I believe elite fits.
      • Alright, then. I understand your reasoning, so, yeah, it kinda applies. I still wouldn't call them elite myself, though.
  • There, the Rebels were able to hold out against the Empire's superior numbers until they were able to evacuate Boz Pity via LAAT/i gunships. Two "were able"s in succession. Please reword.
    • Fixed
  • a giant Imperial fleet I feel "giant" is too extreme a word to be used here.
    • Fixed
  • You call Solo both a Commander and a General at different parts of the article. Please stick with one. I believe Commander is the correct rank.
    • Switched all I could find to Commander.
  • In addition to the above objection, I feel that addressing Solo and Serra by their ranks every time you mention them is kinda redundant.
    • Done
  • I feel it would be better to establish Acky's involvement in the evacuation earlier in the article. Right now, he just appears out of nowhere in the article despite playing a substantial role in the battle.
    • Put Acky into the first sentance of the History.
  • There appears to be a tense shift in the first sentence of the Bts. The appearance "was," but the game "tells" the history.
    • Switched was to is
      • Actually, scratch that. If you think about it, the battle first appeared when Renegade Squadron was released, stometime in 2008, so in the past. However, since the game is an OOU, it tells the story of Renegade Squadron, it didn't tell the story once and then stopped for some reason. I hope that makes sense. Kilson 18:17, March 28, 2011 (UTC)
        • Maybe. I'm not a grammarian, so I may be wrong. It just read awkwardly to me for some reason.
  • Good job otherwise; I was actually planning to do this and some other Renegade Squadron battles myself. QuiGonJinn Senate seal(Talk) 19:55, March 27, 2011 (UTC)
    • Yeah, I guess we're just the Battlefront nerds. :) I have the Battle of Kessel on the GA page if you want to take a look at it. Thanks for the review Jinn. Kilson 20:15, March 27, 2011 (UTC)
      • I'll try to take a look at it soon. QuiGonJinn Senate seal(Talk) 19:44, March 30, 2011 (UTC)
Minor stuff
  • Just a few little things, most of which I've already fixed per the {{sofixit}} principle, so this first part is not an objection:
    • For various technical reasons, it's best to use the full code of an infobox.
    • It's best to avoid using slang terms like "detpack" if the proper term is identified as detonation pack. We seem to consider things like "AT-AT" excusable, but weapons that exist mostly in games are a bit more esoteric.
      • In the game, Solo refers to the explosive as a "detpack" so I changed it back.
    • Two of your image captions are complete sentences and required punctuation.
    • The quote attributions feel a bit odd, but I'll let someone else decide whether they need changing.
      • I see what you mean. Shortened them up.
  • This does require clarification, so it is an objection: You had particle cannon turret pipelinked to laser cannon, but they're two different things. Was it one or the other, or did they have both? Only particle cannons are identified in the infobox so I narrowed it to that in the body pending clarification.
    • They had both type of turrets. I clarified this in the article.
  • That's all I see at the moment. I like short articles. :) -- Darth Culator (Talk) 00:35, April 15, 2011 (UTC)
CP
  • I gave the article a copy-edit. I noticed you have infobox-exclusive information. I know its gamemechanics, but if the Rebels or Imps used Carrion spats, it needs to be linked in the main article. Good work otherwise. Corellian PremierRobotechAll along the watchtower 20:39, April 16, 2011 (UTC)
    • I put in a small mention of the carrion spats, thanks for the review. :) Kilson(Let's have a chat) 04:05, April 18, 2011 (UTC)
Toprawa
  • Per many of our other status battle articles, I think it would be best for the infobox to list each individual side's strength in descending order of importance/strength. Meaning for the Empire, for example, the AT-ATs would come before AT-STs, which would come before speeder bikes, and then stormtroopers, etc.
    • Although it's slightly POVish, I reorganized the fields, tell me what you think.
      • Well, that's not really POV. It's just a fact, militarily speaking, even in SW canon, that armor is a notch up from infantry, etc. This is just a standardized way to organize the strength list. Though in this case, I think you can probably go ahead and list Renegade Squadron first, if you feel this is better, since I think it's safe to say they play a more significant role in the battle than any of the other Rebel elements.
  • The article refers to the Boz Pity base as the "main base," suggesting this is the new main Rebel headquarters. Does the article actually make this exact assertion? Because if so, kind of contradicts other established canon regarding where the new base is moved to following Yavin. This might be a better objection to discuss on IRC when you have some time.
    • Yeah, I'll bring this up the next time I come online. The game clearly states that the Boz Pity base was supposed to be the Rebels new "main base".
  • What are these "tank walkers" referring to? They're not mentioned in the infobox at all: "As the Imperial ground troops, speeder bikes, and tank walkers"
    • I was referring to the AT-ATs and AT-STs. I changed it to walkers.
  • "It soon became obvious" to whom? The Rebels? Please specify: "It soon became obvious that the Boz Pity base was lost"
    • Clarified
  • If this battle occurred circa 0.5 ABY, then the Rebels' time spent at Hoth following this would be more like three years, not two. Two years would only bring us to 2.5 ABY; the Battle of Hoth occurs in 3 ABY: "which would later become the Rebels' new base for the next two years" Toprawa and Ralltiir 21:16, April 18, 2011 (UTC)
    • I should amend this objection by clarifying that, IIRC, the base took about a year to build, and High Command didn't even move in officially until like 2 ABY, so they were there less than a year. I think this is established in GG3 and/or Illustrated Star Wars Universe, possibly even the Databank. I would be satisfied if the wording was just revised to say something like "...Rebels' new base until 3 ABY." Toprawa and Ralltiir 21:45, April 18, 2011 (UTC)
      • I added 3 ABY, do you think I should ref the date? Also, thanks for the review. :)Kilson(Let's have a chat) 00:03, April 19, 2011 (UTC)
        • Unless the reference note that's there can be used, yeah, you should reference 3 ABY. Either ESB or New Essential Chronology would work fine. Toprawa and Ralltiir 01:34, April 19, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Approved as a Featured article by Inquisitorius 01:49, April 19, 2011 (UTC)