- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a featured article nomination that was unsuccessful. Please do not modify it.
Battle of Endor
- Nominated by:--ID-21 Dolphin 01:37, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- Nomination comments: Well, it's here- possibly the greatest moment in the Star Wars saga. I've done some major modifications to this page since the previous nomination: making a longer intro, fixing souurces, and sourcing obscure people and ships. I expect this to be my last major project for a while.--ID-21 Dolphin 01:37, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
(0 Inqs/0 Users/0 Total)
Support
Object
Eyr
We don't do lists. Those will need to be written up. --Eyrezer 01:42, September 6, 2010 (UTC)- Which list do you mean?--ID-21 Dolphin 02:09, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- Done. The participants list is now turned into text, as with other battle FAs.--ID-21 Dolphin 01:20, September 7, 2010 (UTC)
- Which list do you mean?--ID-21 Dolphin 02:09, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
Ambitious! I like it.
The unsourced, speculative final paragraph of the bts is an absolute no-no and has gotta go-go.- Should I search for sources or just delete the whole thing?--ID-21 Dolphin 13:00, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- Hmmm... if you can find some legitimate sources for the statements " Fans known as "film purists" reject all Star Wars material outside the movies, and therefore view the Battle of Endor as the final plot point in the saga." and " George Lucas, who has constantly denied any possibility of any future movies, has affirmed his belief that the saga ends with the death of Anakin Skywalker, since he is the tragic hero." , it would probably be OK and relevant. Menkooroo 13:11, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- Deleted some of the unsourced info, and used two external articles and an entry from Leland Chee's blog as sources for the rest. Now the entire paragraph is sourced; you might try reading it again if you want.--ID-21 Dolphin 13:58, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- Keep in mind that you should never strike another's objections. Menkooroo 14:04, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry! I thought I should use the cross-out once I had finished sourcing what others suggested.--ID-21 Dolphin 14:30, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- No worries. I made the same mistake during my first FAN. :^D Menkooroo 14:55, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry! I thought I should use the cross-out once I had finished sourcing what others suggested.--ID-21 Dolphin 14:30, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- Keep in mind that you should never strike another's objections. Menkooroo 14:04, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- Deleted some of the unsourced info, and used two external articles and an entry from Leland Chee's blog as sources for the rest. Now the entire paragraph is sourced; you might try reading it again if you want.--ID-21 Dolphin 13:58, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- Hmmm... if you can find some legitimate sources for the statements " Fans known as "film purists" reject all Star Wars material outside the movies, and therefore view the Battle of Endor as the final plot point in the saga." and " George Lucas, who has constantly denied any possibility of any future movies, has affirmed his belief that the saga ends with the death of Anakin Skywalker, since he is the tragic hero." , it would probably be OK and relevant. Menkooroo 13:11, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- Should I search for sources or just delete the whole thing?--ID-21 Dolphin 13:00, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
A lot of the bts needs sourcing:"it was believed that the Star Wars story had ended with the death of Palpatine and the defeat of the Empire." Believed by who?- Removed and rephrased to adhere to the available sources.--ID-21 Dolphin 13:58, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
And... "it still remains a source of strong debate among fans." That kind of statement needs a source.- Removed, used only sourcable material.--ID-21 Dolphin 14:48, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
"this theory has been refuted by way of retcons and new explanations" --- Which retcons? Source it, baby!- Addressed.--ID-21 Dolphin 14:48, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- I'm pretty confused as to how mentioning The Glove of Darth Vader refutes the Endor Holocaust theory...
- It's an indirect retcon. The novel talks about the black hole near Endor, the Endor Gate, which sent debris from Endor to the other side of the galaxy (specifically, Darth vader's glove to Mon Calamari). One of the main points of evidence against the Endor Holocaust is that the black hole would have blown most to all of the Death Star's debris to other systems in the galaxy. I just thought that referencing that in the Battle of Endor BTS would be off-topic, since there's a whole explanation about that in the Endor Holocaust article. Hope that helps!--ID-21 Dolphin 21:28, September 9, 2010 (UTC)
- Well, simply saying "which stated the novel The Glove of Darth Vader in its explanation" isn't enough info. I think it should either be expanded or left out. Also... which article? Pipelink to it, baby! And also note the proper way to cite insider articles: *
"Who's Who in Echo Base" — Star Wars Insider 74
- Addressed, though it's not a specific article, just a question and answer column, so the source is the magazine as a whole.--ID-21 Dolphin 22:21, September 10, 2010 (UTC)
- Just to clarify: The sentence, as it is currently written, references an explanation but doesn't state what that explanation is. Just what is Pablo's explanation? The article should give a very brief summary. Menkooroo 04:05, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
- Explained, added two sentences and sourced.--ID-21 Dolphin 13:04, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
- Just to clarify: The sentence, as it is currently written, references an explanation but doesn't state what that explanation is. Just what is Pablo's explanation? The article should give a very brief summary. Menkooroo 04:05, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
- Addressed, though it's not a specific article, just a question and answer column, so the source is the magazine as a whole.--ID-21 Dolphin 22:21, September 10, 2010 (UTC)
- Well, simply saying "which stated the novel The Glove of Darth Vader in its explanation" isn't enough info. I think it should either be expanded or left out. Also... which article? Pipelink to it, baby! And also note the proper way to cite insider articles: *
- It's an indirect retcon. The novel talks about the black hole near Endor, the Endor Gate, which sent debris from Endor to the other side of the galaxy (specifically, Darth vader's glove to Mon Calamari). One of the main points of evidence against the Endor Holocaust is that the black hole would have blown most to all of the Death Star's debris to other systems in the galaxy. I just thought that referencing that in the Battle of Endor BTS would be off-topic, since there's a whole explanation about that in the Endor Holocaust article. Hope that helps!--ID-21 Dolphin 21:28, September 9, 2010 (UTC)
- I'm pretty confused as to how mentioning The Glove of Darth Vader refutes the Endor Holocaust theory...
- Addressed.--ID-21 Dolphin 14:48, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
"both games are considered non-canon." needs a source.- Used the Starwars.com forums.--ID-21 Dolphin 02:15, September 10, 2010 (UTC)
- You've source the first page of the thread, but you'll need to source the specific post. If you gimme the date and time it was posted, I can help you out with that.
- Just removed the fact that they were non-canon, and stated that the events' portrayal was different from that of the films, used the games themselves as sources.--ID-21 Dolphin 22:51, September 17, 2010 (UTC)
- I think it's actually important to note that they're non-canon, since you're discussing them in the same paragraph as canon sources that depict it differently.
- Just a reminder that this objection is still unstruck. It's only
a week old on starwars.wikia.com (backup link not verified!), so you have a bit of time. Menkooroo 04:47, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
- Addressed as you said on my talk page.
- Just a reminder that this objection is still unstruck. It's only
- I think it's actually important to note that they're non-canon, since you're discussing them in the same paragraph as canon sources that depict it differently.
- Just removed the fact that they were non-canon, and stated that the events' portrayal was different from that of the films, used the games themselves as sources.--ID-21 Dolphin 22:51, September 17, 2010 (UTC)
- You've source the first page of the thread, but you'll need to source the specific post. If you gimme the date and time it was posted, I can help you out with that.
- Used the Starwars.com forums.--ID-21 Dolphin 02:15, September 10, 2010 (UTC)
"Lucasfilm Ltd. has stated that the 2004 DVD versions are the canonical depiction of the events in the trilogy," --- where did they state it?- Sourced from the Starwars.com blogs.--ID-21 Dolphin 15:00, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
Some of the bts info seems a bit extraneous. The Ewoks' fan popularity might be relevant to the Ewok article, but probably not to the battle of endor article. "The story after Endor" could probably be trimmed down quite a bit, too.- Took care of the Ewok issue, and consolidated "the story after Endor".--ID-21 Dolphin 15:26, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- "The story after Endor" still seems way too long. Mentioning Dark Empire, the NJO, and Legacy is drifting too far off-topic. You've already hit home the point that the story continues, and all of these examples of "Here's how!" seem way too extraneous, ya know?
- Kept part of it, and cut several sentences to get the extraneous deatils out.--ID-21 Dolphin 23:31, September 8, 2010 (UTC)
- "The story after Endor" still seems way too long. Mentioning Dark Empire, the NJO, and Legacy is drifting too far off-topic. You've already hit home the point that the story continues, and all of these examples of "Here's how!" seem way too extraneous, ya know?
- Took care of the Ewok issue, and consolidated "the story after Endor".--ID-21 Dolphin 15:26, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
There are a whole bunch of other ccg cards that will need to be added to the source list. Comb through here on www.swccgpc.com (backup link not verified!) and 
here on www.swccgpc.com (backup link not verified!), and don't forget "picture only"!- Sourced the ones I used in the sourcebox.--ID-21 Dolphin 21:22, September 9, 2010 (UTC)
- Are there any more? I feel like nearly every single card from both of those links would qualify as a source, even if only "picture only".
- There are more, but none which have been used or referenced in th article, so would I still need to source them?--ID-21 Dolphin 22:00, September 10, 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah. The article's "Sources" section needs to include every source that the subject is mentioned in, even if it contains no new info. If a sourcebook, a ccg card, a databank entry, or what have you references the Battle of Endor, it needs to be included in the "sources" section. Ditto any books or comics or anything that mention it --- they still need to go in the "Appearances" section with a "mentioned only" tag.
- I've done it: I combed through every Databank entry and added every one that mentioned the battle, even if there was no new info. There are practically a hundred in the sourcebox now, though only two or three are actually used as references in the body of the article.--ID-21 Dolphin 13:32, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
- There have gotta be more "Endor limited" cards for the sources box.
- Just a reminder that it's been nearly a month on starwars.wikia.com (backup link not verified!) since I asked about this one. Have you checked through all the "Endor limited" cards? Are there any more that mention the battle? Menkooroo 04:47, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
- I'll check for picture only cards also.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 12:11, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
- Sourced a whole bunch of Endor Limited cards.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 01:56, October 13, 2010 (UTC)
- Sourced a whole bunch of Endor Limited cards.--ID-21 Dolphin
- I'll check for picture only cards also.--ID-21 Dolphin
- Just a reminder that it's been
- There have gotta be more "Endor limited" cards for the sources box.
- I've done it: I combed through every Databank entry and added every one that mentioned the battle, even if there was no new info. There are practically a hundred in the sourcebox now, though only two or three are actually used as references in the body of the article.--ID-21 Dolphin 13:32, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah. The article's "Sources" section needs to include every source that the subject is mentioned in, even if it contains no new info. If a sourcebook, a ccg card, a databank entry, or what have you references the Battle of Endor, it needs to be included in the "sources" section. Ditto any books or comics or anything that mention it --- they still need to go in the "Appearances" section with a "mentioned only" tag.
- There are more, but none which have been used or referenced in th article, so would I still need to source them?--ID-21 Dolphin 22:00, September 10, 2010 (UTC)
- Are there any more? I feel like nearly every single card from both of those links would qualify as a source, even if only "picture only".
- Sourced the ones I used in the sourcebox.--ID-21 Dolphin 21:22, September 9, 2010 (UTC)
Have you checked through every source in the source list? I notice some missing ones, too, such as The Movie Trilogy Sourcebook. You should check them all if you haven't.- Just a note on this one: I know it will be difficult, as the Battle of Endor is mentioned in countless sourcebooks, but always keep in mind that Wookieepedia is a community full of people willing to help each other out! You can always ask around to see who owns what. A few more specific notes to get you started:
- Checked. Since there are other objections regarding the source list, perpahs we can continue discussing this on the comments on the bottom.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 15:58, October 16, 2010 (UTC)
- Checked. Since there are other objections regarding the source list, perpahs we can continue discussing this on the comments on the bottom.--ID-21 Dolphin
- Just a note on this one: I know it will be difficult, as the Battle of Endor is mentioned in countless sourcebooks, but always keep in mind that Wookieepedia is a community full of people willing to help each other out! You can always ask around to see who owns what. A few more specific notes to get you started:
Databank entries should always go at the end of the sourcelist. And there have gotta be more than three DB entries that reference the battle.- There are countless others, but I haven't used information from any of them in the article. Should they still be sourced?--ID-21 Dolphin 22:00, September 10, 2010 (UTC)
- They need to go in the "Sources" section, yeah. If they contain no new or unique info, you don't need to reference them within the article's body, but they still need to be checked for new info and put in the "Sources" section.
- There are countless others, but I haven't used information from any of them in the article. Should they still be sourced?--ID-21 Dolphin 22:00, September 10, 2010 (UTC)
Life and Legend of Obi-Wan Kenobi should be an appearance, not a source.- Changed.--ID-21 Dolphin 16:48, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
- I feel like there are probably more fact files that reference it, too.
- Just a reminder to look into this one.
- One more reminder, and I'll date this one! It's actually been a month since I asked you to look and see if there are any more fact files that reference the battle (there are almost certainly more than just Shira Brie's), and I would hate to see the nomination get removed over this one. Menkooroo 15:30, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Only problem is, I'm unsure where to find whether a specific fact file mentions the battle or not.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 22:14, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- The best way is to find out who has fact files, and to ask them. Choose a few fact files at random, click on "what links here" (at the bottom of the page), and change the search parameters to only look in the "User" namespace. That should probably give you an idea of who has them. Remember that the "Sources" list needs to be complete, including all fact files. Menkooroo 03:51, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
- Added the Fact files that have "Battle of Endor" sections, as well as the ones which most likely talk about the battle, as done by good judgment. There are about 70 in all.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 18:35, October 16, 2010 (UTC)
- Yarrrr, see your talk page. Menkooroo 00:15, October 18, 2010 (UTC)
- Added the Fact files that have "Battle of Endor" sections, as well as the ones which most likely talk about the battle, as done by good judgment. There are about 70 in all.--ID-21 Dolphin
- The best way is to find out who has fact files, and to ask them. Choose a few fact files at random, click on "what links here" (at the bottom of the page), and change the search parameters to only look in the "User" namespace. That should probably give you an idea of who has them. Remember that the "Sources" list needs to be complete, including all fact files. Menkooroo 03:51, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
- Only problem is, I'm unsure where to find whether a specific fact file mentions the battle or not.--ID-21 Dolphin
- One more reminder, and I'll date this one! It's actually been a month since I asked you to look and see if there are any more fact files that reference the battle (there are almost certainly more than just Shira Brie's), and I would hate to see the nomination get removed over this one. Menkooroo 15:30, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Just a reminder to look into this one.
- Some more sourcebooks that almost definitely talk about the Battle of Endor: The Movie Trilogy Sourcebook, Heir to the Empire Sourcebook, Dark Force Rising Sourcebook, The Last Command Sourcebook, The Thrawn Trilogy Sourcebook, Galaxy Guide 5: Return of the Jedi (Second Edition), Star Wars Trilogy Sourcebook, Special Edition, probably The Star Wars Sourcebook and Star Wars Sourcebook (Second Edition), The Essential Guide to Characters, The New Essential Guide to Characters (which you source, but don't actually include in the source list), The Essential Chronology, The Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels, Star Wars: Behind the Magic and Star Wars Encyclopedia (other ones sourced but not in the source list)... and, truthfully, probably a lot more. Any one of them could have new and unique info about the battle. Don't just add them to the source list, though --- they'll need to be checked for info first. Menkooroo 05:11, September 10, 2010 (UTC)
- Added a lot of sourcebooks. Fortunately, I own a lot of sourcebooks, which I can check for mentions and info regarding the battle, and I've also briefly browsed many of them online to see whether or not they mentioned the battle, or had any relevant info.--ID-21 Dolphin 23:03, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
- Now would be a good time to start organizing the sources box by release date, too. Right now it's not even close.
- Will do. I'll get to it ASAP.--ID-21 Dolphin 01:59, September 14, 2010 (UTC)
- I've gotten a lot of guides and reference books down, including many dictionaries, encyclopedias, RPG guides, etc., as well as updated editions of those. I still have more to put in, but look.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 22:03, September 19, 2010 (UTC)
- How is this one going? Have you been searching through more sourcebooks? Just a friendly reminder that there's a lot of work to do in terms of collecting a complete source list for this battle, and as this nomination is still live, it's not something that can be put off. Menkooroo 04:47, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
- Added more WEG sourcebooks.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 22:41, October 11, 2010 (UTC)
- I think all sourcebooks have been added. The sources that are still missing are probably not sourcebooks but artcil;es or stuff like that.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 18:37, October 16, 2010 (UTC)
- Articles are just as important, though, and are still missing sources. Sorry. :( Menkooroo 00:15, October 18, 2010 (UTC)
- I think all sourcebooks have been added. The sources that are still missing are probably not sourcebooks but artcil;es or stuff like that.--ID-21 Dolphin
- I've gotten a lot of guides and reference books down, including many dictionaries, encyclopedias, RPG guides, etc., as well as updated editions of those. I still have more to put in, but look.--ID-21 Dolphin
- Will do. I'll get to it ASAP.--ID-21 Dolphin 01:59, September 14, 2010 (UTC)
- Now would be a good time to start organizing the sources box by release date, too. Right now it's not even close.
- Added a lot of sourcebooks. Fortunately, I own a lot of sourcebooks, which I can check for mentions and info regarding the battle, and I've also briefly browsed many of them online to see whether or not they mentioned the battle, or had any relevant info.--ID-21 Dolphin 23:03, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
There are 36 sources to Death Star II Limited... but you'll have to source the individual cards.- Put all of the ones referenced in the sourcebox.--ID-21 Dolphin 21:22, September 9, 2010 (UTC)
- Still 16 sources to "Death Star II Limited". Also, here's a tip for ya: ccg cards should be cited like this: Star Wars Customizable Card Game — Endor Limited Card: Firefight (backup link)
- There are only fifteen references; the number shrinked by more than half when I deleted the participants list.--ID-21 Dolphin 22:00, September 10, 2010 (UTC)
- But... there should be zero sources to "Death Star II Limited". The individual cards themselves need to be sourced.
- Aaah. Do you mean in the reference box, or only in the sourcebox?--ID-21 Dolphin 12:30, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
- Reference box --- you've referenced fifteen things to "Death Star II" limited, but you'll need to be more specific and reference the actual cards.
- Will do. So I reference the specific cards in the reference/footnote box, and name all the cards in the source list?--ID-21 Dolphin 01:59, September 14, 2010 (UTC)
- Bingo. Be sure to check each card first to ensure that it either mentions or depicts the battle. If an image from the battle appears on the card, but the info doesn't directly or indirectly mention the battle, be sure to include (Picture only) . Menkooroo 16:58, September 14, 2010 (UTC)
- Finsihed with the refrences. The cards are individually sourced in the reflist. Now I have to add the others to the sourcebox.--ID-21 Dolphin 22:47, September 17, 2010 (UTC)
- A-ha! Source #77! Although this is a general statement, I recommend picking a few of the cards at random and sourcing them here. More specific if someone wants to check it out, ya know?
- The other cards have been individually sourced; Source #77 just cites the general existence of this card pack.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 01:35, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, I guess that's OK. Menkooroo 04:47, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
- The other cards have been individually sourced; Source #77 just cites the general existence of this card pack.--ID-21 Dolphin
- A-ha! Source #77! Although this is a general statement, I recommend picking a few of the cards at random and sourcing them here. More specific if someone wants to check it out, ya know?
- Finsihed with the refrences. The cards are individually sourced in the reflist. Now I have to add the others to the sourcebox.--ID-21 Dolphin 22:47, September 17, 2010 (UTC)
- Bingo. Be sure to check each card first to ensure that it either mentions or depicts the battle. If an image from the battle appears on the card, but the info doesn't directly or indirectly mention the battle, be sure to include (Picture only) . Menkooroo 16:58, September 14, 2010 (UTC)
- Will do. So I reference the specific cards in the reference/footnote box, and name all the cards in the source list?--ID-21 Dolphin 01:59, September 14, 2010 (UTC)
- Reference box --- you've referenced fifteen things to "Death Star II" limited, but you'll need to be more specific and reference the actual cards.
- Aaah. Do you mean in the reference box, or only in the sourcebox?--ID-21 Dolphin 12:30, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
- But... there should be zero sources to "Death Star II Limited". The individual cards themselves need to be sourced.
- There are only fifteen references; the number shrinked by more than half when I deleted the participants list.--ID-21 Dolphin 22:00, September 10, 2010 (UTC)
- Still 16 sources to "Death Star II Limited". Also, here's a tip for ya: ccg cards should be cited like this:
- Put all of the ones referenced in the sourcebox.--ID-21 Dolphin 21:22, September 9, 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure about the value of the "Participants" section. I don't think any other Battle FA's have it.Menkooroo 01:51, September 6, 2010 (UTC)- Some have it. However, as Eyr said, the list needs to be turned into text, with emphasis on each person's individual contribution to the battle. QuiGonJinn (Talk) 07:30, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- The problem isn't the commanders- the guys like Han Solo, Luke Skywalker, Palpatine, etc. It's just that since there are so many soldiers who have been named in card games, novels, or the like, they have to be referenced somewhere, and this seems like the best place. Abd trust me, I've thought it over many times, and I haven't found a better solution.--ID-21 Dolphin 13:00, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- If you really want to have a list of participants, please do a list like this. -- 1358 (Talk) 13:07, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, a battle article doesn't need to list every known participant. If their role in it warrants a mention in the narrative, that's OK, but if not, their involvement can be left out. Menkooroo 13:11, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- I'll see. I won't work on that until I'm done addressing the unsourced info and unreferenced sources. Then, I'll probably follow your advice and write about nine or ten main particpants total.--ID-21 Dolphin 14:04, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- Currently working on the section, about ten particpants total.--ID-21 Dolphin 15:31, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- I'm done. I've copied the one on Battle of Khorm, with four Imperial characters and six Rebel ones. The section does look a lot better now.--You can't disguise yourself from me...Jedi. 18:35, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- Currently working on the section, about ten particpants total.--ID-21 Dolphin 15:31, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- I'll see. I won't work on that until I'm done addressing the unsourced info and unreferenced sources. Then, I'll probably follow your advice and write about nine or ten main particpants total.--ID-21 Dolphin 14:04, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- The problem isn't the commanders- the guys like Han Solo, Luke Skywalker, Palpatine, etc. It's just that since there are so many soldiers who have been named in card games, novels, or the like, they have to be referenced somewhere, and this seems like the best place. Abd trust me, I've thought it over many times, and I haven't found a better solution.--ID-21 Dolphin 13:00, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- Some have it. However, as Eyr said, the list needs to be turned into text, with emphasis on each person's individual contribution to the battle. QuiGonJinn
An account of the ROTJ Infinities Battle of Endor is in order for the bts.:^) Menkooroo 13:11, September 6, 2010 (UTC)- I'll do it soon.--ID-21 Dolphin 14:04, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- Written and sourced.--ID-21 Dolphin 15:19, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- Mention that Han is aboard the Falcon instead of on the ground, baby! And doesn't Wedge, not Lando, destroy the reactor core? Menkooroo 04:44, September 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Done.--ID-21 Dolphin 20:18, September 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Mention that Han is aboard the Falcon instead of on the ground, baby! And doesn't Wedge, not Lando, destroy the reactor core? Menkooroo 04:44, September 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Written and sourced.--ID-21 Dolphin 15:19, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- I'll do it soon.--ID-21 Dolphin 14:04, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
Xd1358
Great idea for an FA. You have some broken references; please fix them.-- 1358 (Talk) 13:19, September 6, 2010 (UTC)- Examples please??--ID-21 Dolphin 13:51, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- Ref number 73 and 75; Battle of Endor/Legends#Notes and references. -- 1358 (Talk) 14:05, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- Fixed.--ID-21 Dolphin 14:35, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- Examples please??--ID-21 Dolphin 13:51, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
You need to do something with your image alignment. The participants section is fine, but everything beneath the infobox needs to be aligned left-right...-- 1358 (Talk) 10:34, September 8, 2010 (UTC)- I can't because of the infobox. Because it's so large for this article, there's no space for images on the right for most of tha page.--ID-21 Dolphin 11:17, September 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Hence why I said "beneath" the infobox. Please do the alignment thing for those images. -- 1358 (Talk) 11:33, September 8, 2010 (UTC)
- I made the left-right for the Aftermath and BTS sections, which are the only ones under the infobox.--ID-21 Dolphin 20:14, September 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry to butt in... but Dolphin, based on your comments in a few FA nominations, I think that you must have a very unique resolution. On the computer I'm on right now, the infobox doesn't even reach the "The space battle" section. Menkooroo 05:14, September 10, 2010 (UTC)
- My resolution is 1280x1024, and the infobox ends after the second paragraph of "space battle". -- 1358 (Talk) 12:12, September 10, 2010 (UTC)
- THat's the problem. 1920*1200, though my computer screen looks sort of hideous whenever I change the resolution. So unofrtunately, I doubt that I can change it. Sorry.--ID-21 Dolphin 21:54, September 10, 2010 (UTC)
- You can align images right even when there's an infobox, as demonstrated in Twilight. -- 1358 (Talk) 12:15, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
- Aha! That solves my biggest issue. Did it for every section, starting with the ground battle. Check it out to see if you like it.--ID-21 Dolphin 22:58, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
- You can align images right even when there's an infobox, as demonstrated in Twilight. -- 1358 (Talk) 12:15, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
- THat's the problem. 1920*1200, though my computer screen looks sort of hideous whenever I change the resolution. So unofrtunately, I doubt that I can change it. Sorry.--ID-21 Dolphin 21:54, September 10, 2010 (UTC)
- My resolution is 1280x1024, and the infobox ends after the second paragraph of "space battle". -- 1358 (Talk) 12:12, September 10, 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry to butt in... but Dolphin, based on your comments in a few FA nominations, I think that you must have a very unique resolution. On the computer I'm on right now, the infobox doesn't even reach the "The space battle" section. Menkooroo 05:14, September 10, 2010 (UTC)
- I made the left-right for the Aftermath and BTS sections, which are the only ones under the infobox.--ID-21 Dolphin 20:14, September 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Hence why I said "beneath" the infobox. Please do the alignment thing for those images. -- 1358 (Talk) 11:33, September 8, 2010 (UTC)
- I can't because of the infobox. Because it's so large for this article, there's no space for images on the right for most of tha page.--ID-21 Dolphin 11:17, September 8, 2010 (UTC)
Lee attacks
Source the unsourced casualties in the infobox or remove them.Clone Commander Lee Talk 18:14, September 6, 2010 (UTC)- Oops. I'll get to it.--You can't disguise yourself from me...Jedi. 18:34, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- All sourced to the best of my ability.--ID-21 Dolphin 19:02, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- There are still several unsourced. If you can't find a source, remove it. But check all sources. Clone Commander Lee Talk 10:41, September 8, 2010 (UTC)
- I've done all of them in the infobox. Are there any missing in the body of the article?--ID-21 Dolphin 23:37, September 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Could you please tell me where you see new unsourced info, or strike your objection? That would be nice, thanks.--ID-21 Dolphin 12:52, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
- I've done all of them in the infobox. Are there any missing in the body of the article?--ID-21 Dolphin 23:37, September 8, 2010 (UTC)
- There are still several unsourced. If you can't find a source, remove it. But check all sources. Clone Commander Lee Talk 10:41, September 8, 2010 (UTC)
- All sourced to the best of my ability.--ID-21 Dolphin 19:02, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
- Oops. I'll get to it.--You can't disguise yourself from me...Jedi. 18:34, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
Green Tentacle
Per WP:LG, the sources list should be sorted by date of publication. Green Tentacle (Talk) 19:44, September 12, 2010 (UTC)- Will do. But I think Databank entries always go at the end, don't they?--ID-21 Dolphin 20:35, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah. Green Tentacle (Talk) 20:45, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
- So let's make this clear: all sources except for DB entries in order of publication, then all DB entries in alphabetical order? Or are there other types of sources that always go at the beginning or end of a list?--ID-21 Dolphin 22:50, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
- Just the DB since they get updated. Green Tentacle (Talk) 17:56, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
- I'll get to it soon. Thanks for claifying.--ID-21 Dolphin 22:59, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
- Classified by date, except for the DB. Take a look.--ID-21 Dolphin 13:48, September 19, 2010 (UTC)
- I'll get to it soon. Thanks for claifying.--ID-21 Dolphin 22:59, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
- Just the DB since they get updated. Green Tentacle (Talk) 17:56, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
- So let's make this clear: all sources except for DB entries in order of publication, then all DB entries in alphabetical order? Or are there other types of sources that always go at the beginning or end of a list?--ID-21 Dolphin 22:50, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah. Green Tentacle (Talk) 20:45, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
- Will do. But I think Databank entries always go at the end, don't they?--ID-21 Dolphin 20:35, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
The Wizard did it
There's no way I would miss something like this... Intro:
You say that the Empire declines, well, alot. And you say it twice in the final sentences. A little much?The last sentence is just a rewording of the second-last sentence. Remove one of them or add something else to one.
Very ambitious of you to do this, dolphin-man, good luck. :)--Bonslywizard
(Send a transmission) 22:47, September 19, 2010 (UTC)
- Took out some of the redundancy, though it does need to be reiterated at times, because it's so important. Thanks, wizard-man...--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 23:36, September 19, 2010 (UTC)
- I understand. --Bonslywizard(Send a transmission) 00:24, September 21, 2010 (UTC)
- I understand. --Bonslywizard
--ID-21 Dolphin 
(Talk) 22:35, September 24, 2010 (UTC)
Jujiggum's first glance at the intro
Major linking issues- Please elaborate. What kind and where?--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 22:10, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Extremely severe underlinking. Please link each subject on its first mention. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 22:30, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Linked all names of people and places.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 23:54, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Much better. Still a few linking mistakes: at least one in the case of not being the first time linked, and several redirects. I'd normally fix things this minor myself, but since this is your first major article I think it is better for you to learn how to do them yourself, so that you know how to link appropriately in the future. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 01:19, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
- Can you please show me exactly where said problems are? Thanks.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 14:59, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
- One example is the linking of "space." I don't want to give you too many examples because you need to learn how to correctly link things yourself so that you don't have to deal with the same objections over and over. If you learn how to do it properly, then the next article that you decide to nominate will not have the same issue and will be able to forego this objection. There is only one other redirect now, although there are still a couple missing links. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 15:14, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
- In the intro, I now fixed all links that I found to be wrong. Are there any that I missed?--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 15:57, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
- In the intro, I now fixed all links that I found to be wrong. Are there any that I missed?--ID-21 Dolphin
- One example is the linking of "space." I don't want to give you too many examples because you need to learn how to correctly link things yourself so that you don't have to deal with the same objections over and over. If you learn how to do it properly, then the next article that you decide to nominate will not have the same issue and will be able to forego this objection. There is only one other redirect now, although there are still a couple missing links. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 15:14, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
- Can you please show me exactly where said problems are? Thanks.--ID-21 Dolphin
- Much better. Still a few linking mistakes: at least one in the case of not being the first time linked, and several redirects. I'd normally fix things this minor myself, but since this is your first major article I think it is better for you to learn how to do them yourself, so that you know how to link appropriately in the future. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 01:19, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
- Linked all names of people and places.--ID-21 Dolphin
- Extremely severe underlinking. Please link each subject on its first mention. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 22:30, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Please elaborate. What kind and where?--ID-21 Dolphin
Chronology issues—you say the battle began when the Rebels found out the Empire was building the second Death Star, which isn't true. And then, after saying the battle had begun, you go back and say the Rebels planned an attack. Please clean up the order of events here.- Changed to "began after".--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 22:10, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Grammar issue here. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 22:30, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- I think it's fixed, look.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 15:02, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
- I think it's fixed, look.--ID-21 Dolphin
- Grammar issue here. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 22:30, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Changed to "began after".--ID-21 Dolphin
Several various tense problems- Which ones?--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 22:10, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- You don't stay in past tense the whole time; looks like there's only one left, though. Second sentence. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 22:30, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Aha...fixed it.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 15:01, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
- Aha...fixed it.--ID-21 Dolphin
- You don't stay in past tense the whole time; looks like there's only one left, though. Second sentence. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 22:30, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Which ones?--ID-21 Dolphin
"Unbeknownst to the Rebels, however, Palpatine was leading them into a trap." What trap? Remember that everything has to be told from an equal POV, not leaning toward the Rebel POV or the Imp's, so you need to elaborate on the trap a bit here, and what Palps was hoping to accomplish.- Fixed.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 22:10, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Wording here is just…wierd. And you still don't say how it was a trap. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 22:30, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- This remains. Wording is better, but you still fail to say how it was going to be a trap. Please comment beneath an objection if you think you have fixed it. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 23:36, October 15, 2010 (UTC)
- Made it as clear as I could.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 01:11, October 16, 2010 (UTC)
- Otherwise, any suggestions on how I could rewrite this sentence?--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 01:14, October 16, 2010 (UTC)
- Otherwise, any suggestions on how I could rewrite this sentence?--ID-21 Dolphin
- Made it as clear as I could.--ID-21 Dolphin
- This remains. Wording is better, but you still fail to say how it was going to be a trap. Please comment beneath an objection if you think you have fixed it. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 23:36, October 15, 2010 (UTC)
- Wording here is just…wierd. And you still don't say how it was a trap. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 22:30, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Fixed.--ID-21 Dolphin
- The second paragraph doesn't mention the Star Destroyer part of the "trap" at all. Sounds like it wasn't a big deal, but as I recall it was a huge deal. Why no mention of the time it took to bring down the shield and how Ackbar/Calrissian weren't sure whether to flee?
- Mentioned.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 22:10, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Grammar issues here. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 22:30, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Grammar issues remain in this area. Please comment beneath an objection if you think you have fixed it. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 23:36, October 15, 2010 (UTC)
- Fixed.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 01:11, October 16, 2010 (UTC)
- Looking at the history of the article, the only change in this section is your fix of a typo that I made while fixing your links for you. This remains. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 15:41, October 16, 2010 (UTC)
- It looks grammatically correct now.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 15:57, October 16, 2010 (UTC)
- You fixed just one error; this remains. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 01:05, October 18, 2010 (UTC)
- I just fixed the grammar here, but is there anyhting else you mean? Thanks.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 20:04, October 18, 2010 (UTC)
- That bit was fine grammatically before, and it is still fine with the way you have changed it, except that now you have added a redundant redirect: please remove that. Also note that my objection refers to grammar issues in this area. This still remains. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 22:15, October 18, 2010 (UTC)
- I just fixed the grammar here, but is there anyhting else you mean? Thanks.--ID-21 Dolphin
- You fixed just one error; this remains. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 01:05, October 18, 2010 (UTC)
- It looks grammatically correct now.--ID-21 Dolphin
- Looking at the history of the article, the only change in this section is your fix of a typo that I made while fixing your links for you. This remains. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 15:41, October 16, 2010 (UTC)
- Fixed.--ID-21 Dolphin
- Grammar issues remain in this area. Please comment beneath an objection if you think you have fixed it. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 23:36, October 15, 2010 (UTC)
- Grammar issues here. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 22:30, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Mentioned.--ID-21 Dolphin
"Soon enough, though, the Rebels realized that they had been tricked, as the Death Star's weapon systems were already operational, and the battle became a desperate fight for survival for them." You never specified that they thought the Death Star was not operational, so this doesn't make sense.- Mentioned.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 22:10, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Grammar. More specifically, it's a double-negative, so you're saying that the Rebels learned that the superlaser was complete. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 22:30, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Oops. Corrected the double-negative.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 23:54, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Oops. Corrected the double-negative.--ID-21 Dolphin
- Grammar. More specifically, it's a double-negative, so you're saying that the Rebels learned that the superlaser was complete. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 22:30, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Mentioned.--ID-21 Dolphin
Why no mention of the Vader/Skywalker duel?- Also mentioned.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 22:10, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Also mentioned.--ID-21 Dolphin
Also, how did Vader die in the act of redeeming himself? This doesn't make sense.- Fixed to be more clear.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 22:10, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Wording problem—you mention the damage inflicted by the Force lightning as if the reader should know what all happened; this is still confusing. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 22:30, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Fixed, look.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 15:02, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
- Fixed, look.--ID-21 Dolphin
- Wording problem—you mention the damage inflicted by the Force lightning as if the reader should know what all happened; this is still confusing. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 22:30, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Fixed to be more clear.--ID-21 Dolphin
What happened to Luke after the duel? Last I hear he's on the Death Star being killed by a Sith Lord, and Vader kills that Sith Lord, and then Vader dies, and then the Death Star is blown up. And now all of a sudden Luke's on Endor?- Addressed.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 22:10, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- This remains. There was no change here. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 22:30, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Right. Now I think it's more clear.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 15:02, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
- Right. Now I think it's more clear.--ID-21 Dolphin
- This remains. There was no change here. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 22:30, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Addressed.--ID-21 Dolphin
"Soon after, the Rebels were able to destroy the Death Star and escape its destruction." How were they able to destroy the Death Star? And why don't you mention in particular who did it?- In the future, please make sure to note beneath each objection after you think you've corrected it; I happened to notice this one, but if I'm not looking for a particular correction since you haven't noted that you believe you've corrected it, I may not notice it right away. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 19:15, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
Why is there no mention of IG-88 and his droid revolution? Those were pretty major events of the battle, I believe.- Made a short mention, though this is pretty minor compared to the Rebel/Imperial battle and doesn't really fit in the intro.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 22:10, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- But it was still an integral part of the battle, and IG-88's taking control of the superlaser is very important, at least from the Imperial standpoint. This could still be elaborated some. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 22:30, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Added some stuff about his revolution.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 15:02, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
- Could you mention how IG-88 was destroyed and his revolution ended? This is pretty important info and the reader is kinda left hanging on it right now. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 19:15, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
- Added something saying that IG-88 was obliterated. More details would be irrelevant in the intro; they are discussed in the article's body.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 14:59, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
- Added something saying that IG-88 was obliterated. More details would be irrelevant in the intro; they are discussed in the article's body.--ID-21 Dolphin
- Could you mention how IG-88 was destroyed and his revolution ended? This is pretty important info and the reader is kinda left hanging on it right now. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 19:15, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
- Added some stuff about his revolution.--ID-21 Dolphin
- But it was still an integral part of the battle, and IG-88's taking control of the superlaser is very important, at least from the Imperial standpoint. This could still be elaborated some. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 22:30, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Made a short mention, though this is pretty minor compared to the Rebel/Imperial battle and doesn't really fit in the intro.--ID-21 Dolphin
Also why no mention of Palpy's battle meditation that was at one point in time pretty much single-handedly winning the battle?- Made a short mention.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 22:12, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Why not also mention that after he was killed, it was the lack of battle meditation that helped the Rebels clean up the Imp fleet? Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 22:30, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Again, the intro is just a summary of the events. This is explained in th later parts of the articles' body.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 23:57, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- This is getting ridiculous. Yes, the intro is a summary, so it should outline the major events of and relating to the battle. This is certainly one of them. IIRC (I'm pretty sure it was in the Thrawn Trilogy) it was stated that the Empire should still have been able to win the battle, since they far outnumbered the Rebels, but since Palps was no longer providing them with battle meditation, their forces fell apart, causing Gil to order the retreat and giving the Rebels victory. That is a major, significant development in the battle. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 01:19, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
- All right, mentioned.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 15:02, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
- All right, mentioned.--ID-21 Dolphin
- This is getting ridiculous. Yes, the intro is a summary, so it should outline the major events of and relating to the battle. This is certainly one of them. IIRC (I'm pretty sure it was in the Thrawn Trilogy) it was stated that the Empire should still have been able to win the battle, since they far outnumbered the Rebels, but since Palps was no longer providing them with battle meditation, their forces fell apart, causing Gil to order the retreat and giving the Rebels victory. That is a major, significant development in the battle. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 01:19, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
- Again, the intro is just a summary of the events. This is explained in th later parts of the articles' body.--ID-21 Dolphin
- Why not also mention that after he was killed, it was the lack of battle meditation that helped the Rebels clean up the Imp fleet? Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 22:30, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Made a short mention.--ID-21 Dolphin
There are plenty of other major after-effects of the battle that you could mention briefly in the intro: possibly how certain Rebels were hailed as heroes (for years/decades afterward), how the Empire collapsed due to various people attempting to grab power, but how it still lived over a hundred years later, the end of the Droid Revolution, etc.- Made a short mention, though the intro is more about the actual background, and there is an elaborate, detailed "Aftermath" section.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 22:12, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- The formation of the NJO is a much more indirect after-affect of the battle than things like what happened to the Empire, how certain Rebels, particularly Wedge and Lando, were hailed as heroes, the destruction of IG-88 and the end of his droid revolution. These are all very important after-effects of the battle and deserve a mention in the intro. Remember that the intro should encompass a summary of the article's body, not just the battle section. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 22:30, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Mentioned that the Rebels were hailed as heroes, and that Imperial warlords fought for power in the crubling Empire.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 15:02, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
- Every single Rebel was hailed a hero? Also, grammar. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 19:15, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
- Talked about the Rebel commanders, though I don't see a grammar issue.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 14:59, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
- The grammar is fine now with the changes you made. Also, you still have failed to address this objection. Why not specify who was hailed as a hero? Just saying the "Rebel commanders" in general is very unspecific and even possibly factually incorrect; there were tons of ranked Rebel officers who likely weren't hailed as heroes—at least, not to any great degree. This is a very simple objection; one that can be met simply by looking up a few sources, such as the X-wing or Thrawn novels, in order to specify a just a couple names of Rebel leaders whose lives were changed by the recognition they received due to their actions in the battle. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 15:14, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
- Talked about the obvious: Luke Skywalker and Han SOlo. Again, this is general, not a list of all major poeple.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 15:57, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
- And what sources out there say anything about Luke and Han being called heroes specifically for the Battle of Endor? It was stated in Shadows of Mindor that very few people knew the true story of what happened aboard the second Death Star—in fact, in that novel Cronal tries to use Luke to make him the new Emperor by forging and spreading around a holovid wherein Luke kills Vader in revenge for Vader killing Palpatine; but that info about Luke's legend belongs more in the duel article than the battle article. As for Han—I don't recall anything anywhere saying that he was made particularly famous for his actions on the ground with the strike team; although if you could point out a source that does say so, I'll be happy to let that one stay. But since you have failed to figure it out for yourself, all I really was requesting here was something like: "Some Rebel leaders, such as Wedge Antilles, achieved great fame for their part in the battle." The one I was particularly looking for was Antilles—in the very first X-Wing novel a note is made about how legendary he's become for destroying the second Death Star, and I bet you could find other such notes in further sources. Yes, normally stuff like this would just go in the aftermath section, but since the legend Wedge became due to his part in the battles of Yavin and Endor had a big impact on later galactic events, too, this deserves a brief mention in the intro. As the nominator, it is your job to search through all of the sources to see what detailed information you can find on this. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 17:33, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
- Mentioned Wedge instead, then.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 18:25, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
- Grammar issues. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 23:36, October 15, 2010 (UTC)
- Fixed the "formed/form" issue.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 01:11, October 16, 2010 (UTC)
- Fixed the "formed/form" issue.--ID-21 Dolphin
- Grammar issues. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 23:36, October 15, 2010 (UTC)
- Mentioned Wedge instead, then.--ID-21 Dolphin
- And what sources out there say anything about Luke and Han being called heroes specifically for the Battle of Endor? It was stated in Shadows of Mindor that very few people knew the true story of what happened aboard the second Death Star—in fact, in that novel Cronal tries to use Luke to make him the new Emperor by forging and spreading around a holovid wherein Luke kills Vader in revenge for Vader killing Palpatine; but that info about Luke's legend belongs more in the duel article than the battle article. As for Han—I don't recall anything anywhere saying that he was made particularly famous for his actions on the ground with the strike team; although if you could point out a source that does say so, I'll be happy to let that one stay. But since you have failed to figure it out for yourself, all I really was requesting here was something like: "Some Rebel leaders, such as Wedge Antilles, achieved great fame for their part in the battle." The one I was particularly looking for was Antilles—in the very first X-Wing novel a note is made about how legendary he's become for destroying the second Death Star, and I bet you could find other such notes in further sources. Yes, normally stuff like this would just go in the aftermath section, but since the legend Wedge became due to his part in the battles of Yavin and Endor had a big impact on later galactic events, too, this deserves a brief mention in the intro. As the nominator, it is your job to search through all of the sources to see what detailed information you can find on this. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 17:33, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
- Talked about the obvious: Luke Skywalker and Han SOlo. Again, this is general, not a list of all major poeple.--ID-21 Dolphin
- The grammar is fine now with the changes you made. Also, you still have failed to address this objection. Why not specify who was hailed as a hero? Just saying the "Rebel commanders" in general is very unspecific and even possibly factually incorrect; there were tons of ranked Rebel officers who likely weren't hailed as heroes—at least, not to any great degree. This is a very simple objection; one that can be met simply by looking up a few sources, such as the X-wing or Thrawn novels, in order to specify a just a couple names of Rebel leaders whose lives were changed by the recognition they received due to their actions in the battle. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 15:14, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
- Talked about the Rebel commanders, though I don't see a grammar issue.--ID-21 Dolphin
- Every single Rebel was hailed a hero? Also, grammar. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 19:15, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
- Mentioned that the Rebels were hailed as heroes, and that Imperial warlords fought for power in the crubling Empire.--ID-21 Dolphin
- The formation of the NJO is a much more indirect after-affect of the battle than things like what happened to the Empire, how certain Rebels, particularly Wedge and Lando, were hailed as heroes, the destruction of IG-88 and the end of his droid revolution. These are all very important after-effects of the battle and deserve a mention in the intro. Remember that the intro should encompass a summary of the article's body, not just the battle section. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 22:30, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Made a short mention, though the intro is more about the actual background, and there is an elaborate, detailed "Aftermath" section.--ID-21 Dolphin
All in all, for an article this size, the intro could be longer and a bit more detailed on the events of the battle.- With the addition of the other changes you mentioned, the intro is longer now.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 22:10, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- With the addition of the other changes you mentioned, the intro is longer now.--ID-21 Dolphin
I know I said this was an intro review, but I happened to notice the images down in the participants section, and they are small to the point of being pointless. Please enlarge them to a reasonable size.- Problem is, this completely slides down the whole participants section on high-resolution and wide screens. Plus, the image are almost the same size as other battle FAs, such as Battle of Khorm.
- Hmm, seems you're right. I still think they're needlessly small, but whatever. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 22:30, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Problem is, this completely slides down the whole participants section on high-resolution and wide screens. Plus, the image are almost the same size as other battle FAs, such as Battle of Khorm.
- Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 14:20, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
Jinzler
Some information from the comic Marooned could be added, to say about how a Rebel trooper and scout trooper were stranded on Endor in the aftermath of the battle. --Jinzler 23:03, October 8, 2010 (UTC)- Mentioned, and added to the list of appearances as {Mo}.
- It was actually already in the appearances list, so you just made it so that it was there twice... I have removed one of them so this fine now :) --Jinzler 19:33, October 11, 2010 (UTC)
- Mentioned, and added to the list of appearances as {Mo}.
Yet when Palpatine ordered him to kill Vader, thus cementing his place as a Sith, he refused. When the Emperor asked Luke to join him and rule the galaxy side-by-side with him, Luke vehemently denied Palpatine's proposal, affirming his identity as a Jedi. Furious that he had failed to turn Luke, just as Galen Marek, - all of this is sourced to Star Wars: The Force Unleashed. Firstly, just linking to SW:TFU takes you to the article for the TFU multimedia project, so this needs to be changed to link to either the game, novel or comic. However, are you really sure that TFU says all that? I think you might be missing a reference here. To be honest, mentioning Galen Marek, isn't really necessary here at all, because he isn't related to the Battle of Endor in any way. However, if you are going to mention him here, you should probably add some context about him to make the mention more relevant to the article. --Jinzler 23:03, October 8, 2010 (UTC)- Made a short mention of the earlier duel, referenced only the video game, and sourced the rest of the above text from ROTJ.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 18:51, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
- Made a short mention of the earlier duel, referenced only the video game, and sourced the rest of the above text from ROTJ.--ID-21 Dolphin
Comments
- There is no way that Appearances/Sources list is complete. You need to check every source that has mentioned the Battle of Endor since 1983. Also, there are sources in your references that are not in the Sources list, which is quite unorganized at the moment. Xicer9(Combadge) 21:31, September 9, 2010 (UTC)
- I know; it's been mentioned above. There are some missing sourcebooks, reference books, video games, etc. I plan to work on it ASAP, now that I'm done with the rest.--ID-21 Dolphin 01:14, September 10, 2010 (UTC)
- While what I have to say is somewhat the same as Xicer's comments, I feel that this will reinforce the significance of the issue. As a FAN, this article needs to adhere to FAN Rule 3, which means that it must "be sourced with all available sources and appearances." This, like all of the other source- and sourcing-related objections that have already been made, should have been fixed before the article was even nominated—every single source that has ever mentioned the Battle of Endor needs to be included in the article. Without even being close to familiar with all of the original trilogy source material, I can definitely state for fact that it's going to take a very long time and a copious amount of effort to track down all of the relevant sources (and presumably double-check them for new info), and even then some sources and info might be missing. I understand that this is one of your first nominations, and I admire your willingness to tackle such a challenging topic, but in all honesty, the FAN process should not have to wait for you (or in general, any nominator, for that matter) to track down sources and verify that their relevant information is included in the article. If you are absolutely committed to FAing this major battle, then I wish you luck. I would personally recommend that you take down this nomination so that you can work on the source hunt without the pressure of the nomination process, but if you do decide to continue on with this nomination, you should be aware just how much work it's going to take. I don't say this to hamper your efforts, but to make sure that you are fully aware of the severity of this problem. CC7567 (talk) 04:24, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
- I'm working on it. Just a question, though: does a source refer to any book or piece of information that mentions the battle, or only ones that have been specifically sourced and referenced in the body of the article? As for source hunting, though, I'm not sure it will take that much time, there's only a finite number of books, games, etc. For appearances, of course, this is an easier task, as I don't have to mention sourcebooks and articles there, do I. I think I'll keep the nom here, just because it makes me more aware of the issues with the article so that I can correct them. As you can see, there are already many objections that I fixed, and I will do the same for this one, even if it takes a while. Thanks for making me aware, though, this is not an easy task, but I don't plan to make any other FAnoms in the future, so I plan to make this one a success. Any help is appreciated, CC.--ID-21 Dolphin 12:42, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
- I'll do most of this by combing the List of Star Wars media and checking each source, that will get me closer to my objective.--ID-21 Dolphin 12:45, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
- A source is anything that mentions the battle, not just the ones that are used as cited sources in the article. Trust me—there's probably more than you think, and I even doubt that that List of Star Wars media is complete. I would recommend asking some of the more OT-experienced users to help you, but you should still have ready access to all or most sources in order to be able to scrutinize them for info. CC7567 (talk) 17:04, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
- I'll begin with the databank, then I'll look at sourcebooks and cards. Plus I have a big Star Wars library, so I can look for mentions there. It may be an arduous task, but it'll eventually pay off. Just for clarification, can appearances like ROTJ count as sources as well?--ID-21 Dolphin 20:28, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
- ROTJ is not a source, it's an appearance. Appearances are IU works while sources include sourcebooks, cards, and everything else. Yes, sources can be IU, but it shouldn't be hard to see what's an appearance and what's a source. -- 1358 (Talk) 20:35, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
- I'm going somewhere. I've sourced every single Databank entry that mentioned the battle, practically 100. All are at the end of the source list. Then I'll have cards and books.--ID-21 Dolphin 13:30, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
- I want to through caution out there, however, about one thing: It is easy to simply just add things to the source list without adding new information that comes from the source if there is any. Make sure that any source added to the list has been checked for any new detail. Don't be afraid to think outside the box a little, as well. Some places, such as the novels, may have an indirect mention to the battle. There are ways of combing through those with ease, (as many people have for other projects). IRC is a good place to ask for help with that. — Fiolli {Alpheridies University ComNet} 00:06, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
- Sometimes, I just do it the hard way and go through entire lists. For example, for the DB entries, I combed through the entire list of DB entries to find ones that mentioned the battle. Many of them were not obvious, just mentioning something that had occurred "X years after the Battle of Endor". And yes, I've also added some new and non-obvious deatil, such as referencing certain Star Wars: Legacy of the Force novels which briefly mentioned the battle or were set on Endor. But yes, sourcing obscure sources is definitely the most difficult task of this FAnom, and I will add new relevant info whenver I find any. Cheers.--ID-21 Dolphin 01:24, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
- Added a lot of sources; sorted by publication date.
- Pretty good so far. Your earliest source is first WEG rulebook; there were definitely references to the battle before that. Be sure to check out the early Paradise Press RotJ poster magazines as well as the collector's edition magazine. I'm sure nearly all of them mention the battle. Other minor sources you're missing are toys (everything from the 1983 RotJ line) and the various Topps cards, including the Star Wars Galaxy series. There are also likely countless WotC articles that mention the battle as well. Xicer9(Combadge) 22:46, September 24, 2010 (UTC)
- I've actually checked the Topps cards and didn't find any explicit mentions to the battle.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 13:03, September 25, 2010 (UTC)
- I've actually checked the Topps cards and didn't find any explicit mentions to the battle.--ID-21 Dolphin
- Pretty good so far. Your earliest source is first WEG rulebook; there were definitely references to the battle before that. Be sure to check out the early Paradise Press RotJ poster magazines as well as the collector's edition magazine. I'm sure nearly all of them mention the battle. Other minor sources you're missing are toys (everything from the 1983 RotJ line) and the various Topps cards, including the Star Wars Galaxy series. There are also likely countless WotC articles that mention the battle as well. Xicer9
- Added a lot of sources; sorted by publication date.
- Sometimes, I just do it the hard way and go through entire lists. For example, for the DB entries, I combed through the entire list of DB entries to find ones that mentioned the battle. Many of them were not obvious, just mentioning something that had occurred "X years after the Battle of Endor". And yes, I've also added some new and non-obvious deatil, such as referencing certain Star Wars: Legacy of the Force novels which briefly mentioned the battle or were set on Endor. But yes, sourcing obscure sources is definitely the most difficult task of this FAnom, and I will add new relevant info whenver I find any. Cheers.--ID-21 Dolphin 01:24, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
- I want to through caution out there, however, about one thing: It is easy to simply just add things to the source list without adding new information that comes from the source if there is any. Make sure that any source added to the list has been checked for any new detail. Don't be afraid to think outside the box a little, as well. Some places, such as the novels, may have an indirect mention to the battle. There are ways of combing through those with ease, (as many people have for other projects). IRC is a good place to ask for help with that. — Fiolli {Alpheridies University ComNet} 00:06, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
- I'm going somewhere. I've sourced every single Databank entry that mentioned the battle, practically 100. All are at the end of the source list. Then I'll have cards and books.--ID-21 Dolphin 13:30, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
- ROTJ is not a source, it's an appearance. Appearances are IU works while sources include sourcebooks, cards, and everything else. Yes, sources can be IU, but it shouldn't be hard to see what's an appearance and what's a source. -- 1358 (Talk) 20:35, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
- I'll begin with the databank, then I'll look at sourcebooks and cards. Plus I have a big Star Wars library, so I can look for mentions there. It may be an arduous task, but it'll eventually pay off. Just for clarification, can appearances like ROTJ count as sources as well?--ID-21 Dolphin 20:28, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
- A source is anything that mentions the battle, not just the ones that are used as cited sources in the article. Trust me—there's probably more than you think, and I even doubt that that List of Star Wars media is complete. I would recommend asking some of the more OT-experienced users to help you, but you should still have ready access to all or most sources in order to be able to scrutinize them for info. CC7567 (talk) 17:04, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
- I'll do most of this by combing the List of Star Wars media and checking each source, that will get me closer to my objective.--ID-21 Dolphin 12:45, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
- I'm working on it. Just a question, though: does a source refer to any book or piece of information that mentions the battle, or only ones that have been specifically sourced and referenced in the body of the article? As for source hunting, though, I'm not sure it will take that much time, there's only a finite number of books, games, etc. For appearances, of course, this is an easier task, as I don't have to mention sourcebooks and articles there, do I. I think I'll keep the nom here, just because it makes me more aware of the issues with the article so that I can correct them. As you can see, there are already many objections that I fixed, and I will do the same for this one, even if it takes a while. Thanks for making me aware, though, this is not an easy task, but I don't plan to make any other FAnoms in the future, so I plan to make this one a success. Any help is appreciated, CC.--ID-21 Dolphin 12:42, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
- While what I have to say is somewhat the same as Xicer's comments, I feel that this will reinforce the significance of the issue. As a FAN, this article needs to adhere to FAN Rule 3, which means that it must "be sourced with all available sources and appearances." This, like all of the other source- and sourcing-related objections that have already been made, should have been fixed before the article was even nominated—every single source that has ever mentioned the Battle of Endor needs to be included in the article. Without even being close to familiar with all of the original trilogy source material, I can definitely state for fact that it's going to take a very long time and a copious amount of effort to track down all of the relevant sources (and presumably double-check them for new info), and even then some sources and info might be missing. I understand that this is one of your first nominations, and I admire your willingness to tackle such a challenging topic, but in all honesty, the FAN process should not have to wait for you (or in general, any nominator, for that matter) to track down sources and verify that their relevant information is included in the article. If you are absolutely committed to FAing this major battle, then I wish you luck. I would personally recommend that you take down this nomination so that you can work on the source hunt without the pressure of the nomination process, but if you do decide to continue on with this nomination, you should be aware just how much work it's going to take. I don't say this to hamper your efforts, but to make sure that you are fully aware of the severity of this problem. CC7567 (talk) 04:24, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
- I know; it's been mentioned above. There are some missing sourcebooks, reference books, video games, etc. I plan to work on it ASAP, now that I'm done with the rest.--ID-21 Dolphin 01:14, September 10, 2010 (UTC)
- Started here to prevent excessive sliding.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 20:49, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
- Random thought --- when you started working on the article, you cut the source list down to only what was referenced, right? If you take a look at the article's source list from before you began your work on it, it'd give you an idea of some of the other sources the battle was mentioned in. It might not be completely comprehensive, but you should transfer its contents over, ya know? Menkooroo 12:47, September 26, 2010 (UTC)
- Sort of confused, could you please clarify?--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 02:03, September 28, 2010 (UTC)
- What I mean is... check out the source list from August on starwars.wikia.com (backup link not verified!) and see if you're missing anything from it. It's actually a lot less complete than I thought it would be, but it might have one or two new ones for ya. Menkooroo 05:41, September 28, 2010 (UTC)
- Don't see anything new. Everything from the old source list was kept in the current version of the article.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 19:54, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
- Any progress on the poster mags, WotC articles, toys, etc.? It's been over two weeks. Xicer9(Combadge) 17:40, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
- Added two monthly poster issues that had images of the battle. However, I don't see how I could add any new information from the toy line.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 18:30, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
- The backs of the toy boxes in most sets usually contain a little summary about the character. Sometimes there's new information there. Check through all of them. Also, Star Wars: Return of the Jedi - Official Collectors Edition should have some nice Bts stuff for you, as should Star Wars: Behind the Magic. I'm also still seeing stuff in the refs (like BtM) that arent in the Sources list. Xicer9(Combadge) 18:57, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
- Added Behind the Magic and the collector magazine. You're right; I should look in my reflist for sources that I missed.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 20:49, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
- Added the Marvel comics that mentioned the battle.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 22:33, October 13, 2010 (UTC)
- Added all mentions in later novels, comics, and the like, including several NJO novels.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 22:49, October 15, 2010 (UTC)
- Added all mentions in later novels, comics, and the like, including several NJO novels.--ID-21 Dolphin
- Added the Marvel comics that mentioned the battle.--ID-21 Dolphin
- Added Behind the Magic and the collector magazine. You're right; I should look in my reflist for sources that I missed.--ID-21 Dolphin
- The backs of the toy boxes in most sets usually contain a little summary about the character. Sometimes there's new information there. Check through all of them. Also, Star Wars: Return of the Jedi - Official Collectors Edition should have some nice Bts stuff for you, as should Star Wars: Behind the Magic. I'm also still seeing stuff in the refs (like BtM) that arent in the Sources list. Xicer9
- Added two monthly poster issues that had images of the battle. However, I don't see how I could add any new information from the toy line.--ID-21 Dolphin
- Any progress on the poster mags, WotC articles, toys, etc.? It's been over two weeks. Xicer9
- Don't see anything new. Everything from the old source list was kept in the current version of the article.--ID-21 Dolphin
- What I mean is... check out the source list
- Sort of confused, could you please clarify?--ID-21 Dolphin
- Random thought --- when you started working on the article, you cut the source list down to only what was referenced, right? If you take a look at the article's source list from before you began your work on it, it'd give you an idea of some of the other sources the battle was mentioned in. It might not be completely comprehensive, but you should transfer its contents over, ya know? Menkooroo 12:47, September 26, 2010 (UTC)
- I would just like to state that as Inquisitors we have the full authority to remove noms that do not adhere to the clear and concise rules at the top of the FAN page. The effort is to be admired, but the lack of completion is not to be tolerated. While several of my colleagues have bestowed a measure of mercy upon you, I am not and do not feel that we should be so lenient.
This is therefore the vote to remove this nomination based on this article's considerable failure to comply with What is a featured article's third requirement.I again commend you ID-21, but I have to stress the fact that the FAN is not a testing ground; things that are submitted for review here are expected to be complete. This was and still is not at this point, and your dedication to the project does not excuse nor negate the failure to follow instructions. You can continue to address the objections even after this has been archived, during which time you will hopefully satisfy any and all concerns that have been brought to your attention thus far.—Tommy 9281 21:45, October 11, 2010 (UTC)- Dolphin has been granted a deadline of 10-15-10 to bring this article up to par with regard to the sources/appearances. He has agreed to accept an Inquisitorius vote to remove should his task remain incomplete by then. He also understands that if it does end up being removed, he is more than welcome to resubmit the nomination upon its completion.—Tommy 9281 22:42, October 11, 2010 (UTC)
- So by then, should I have all source-related objections crossed off?--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 11:19, October 12, 2010 (UTC)
- By then you should have found every available source and appearance and updated the article with them as well as any pertinent and unique information included therein.—Tommy 9281 11:58, October 12, 2010 (UTC)
- Already added some.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 01:56, October 13, 2010 (UTC)
- Already added some.--ID-21 Dolphin
- By then you should have found every available source and appearance and updated the article with them as well as any pertinent and unique information included therein.—Tommy 9281 11:58, October 12, 2010 (UTC)
- So by then, should I have all source-related objections crossed off?--ID-21 Dolphin
- Dolphin has been granted a deadline of 10-15-10 to bring this article up to par with regard to the sources/appearances. He has agreed to accept an Inquisitorius vote to remove should his task remain incomplete by then. He also understands that if it does end up being removed, he is more than welcome to resubmit the nomination upon its completion.—Tommy 9281 22:42, October 11, 2010 (UTC)
- ID-21 Dolphin, have you completed the task set before you?—Tommy 9281 21:06, October 15, 2010 (UTC)
- I'm working on it. I'll probably have it finished before the end of today.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 21:24, October 15, 2010 (UTC)
- I'm working on it. I'll probably have it finished before the end of today.--ID-21 Dolphin
- Very well then. The nom will remain, you and I have already discussed the terms.—Tommy 9281 22:32, October 15, 2010 (UTC)
Vote to remove nomination (Inq only)
- I'm starting this removal vote based on a number of things I have observed over the course of this nomination. Nominators are expected to have their nominated article in a state approaching finality, which includes, above all, comprehensiveness. While further required work on an article will always be an anticipated consequence of the review process, the FAN page is not an ongoing workbench for users to nominate a half-completed article and allow it to sit for an indefinite period while we wait for them to complete source research. The nominator has done an excellent job of advancing the article to its current state and should be commended for his work, but as the majority of preceding comments on this nomination attest to, this article is quite a way's away from approaching a satisfactory level of comprehensiveness. At this point, the issue isn't waiting for the nominator to complete writing the article from source material he has or knows is missing; instead, we're waiting on him to uncover and comb through source material he doesn't even necessarily know exists. In the meantime, the majority of the nominator's contributions aren't even focused on this nomination, suggesting, to me at least, that his attention is unduly divided while this nomination festers. If you need time to research and write your article and collect sources, which you most certainly will on an article of this magnitude, that is something that needs to be done on a personal workbench subpage. Not the FAN page. It's not the Inq's responsibility to wait for you to complete your work. Toprawa and Ralltiir 22:44, October 18, 2010 (UTC)
- I would like to add that help can be requested in the Senate Hall and on IRC at any point to facilitate in the advancement of this article. The work thus far is more than commendable. Still, Toprawa is correct. The FAN page is not the place to be adding a myriad of sources. Had it been one or two, this would not have been an issue considering the magnitude of this project. Copy the work to a subpage and create an area that lists every source known to man-kind, if necessary; then start crossing things out. This article could (and really should) be something, if the nominator is willing to fight through it and keep working on it. — Fiolli 22:52, October 18, 2010 (UTC)
- Per Tope. Cavalier One(Squadron channel) 22:54, October 18, 2010 (UTC)
- —Tommy 9281 22:58, October 18, 2010 (UTC)
- Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 23:03, October 18, 2010 (UTC)
