Wookieepedia:Featured article nominations/Battle of Kattada

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

Battle of Kattada

• Nominated by: 501st dogma^(talk) 16:18, August 20, 2012 (UTC)
• Nomination comments:

(4 Inqs/3 Users/7 Total)

Support

1. ~Savage 14:30, October 15, 2012 (UTC)
2. Cavalier One^{(Squadron channel)} 11:48, October 18, 2012 (UTC)
3. Plagueis327 (talk) 21:22, October 18, 2012 (UTC)
4. CC7567 ^(talk) 21:05, October 27, 2012 (UTC)
5. Radio drama world-building! Menkooroo (talk) 03:09, November 1, 2012 (UTC)
6. Cade Calrayn 22:29, November 1, 2012 (UTC)
7. IFYLOFD ^{(Floyd's crib)} 23:51, November 1, 2012 (UTC)

Object

Savaged…

• Can we get context on Leia upon her first body mention?
  • Better?
• Also, it needs to be made explicit in the body that "Alliance to Restore the Republic" and "Rebels" refer to the same entity.
  • Better?
• "the Rebel-allied crew members of the corvette..." The way this is phrased, it makes it sound like there were other crew members who were not Rebel-allied. Is this the intent?
  • They were all Rebels. Better?
• Should "Hypno-imprinted" begin with the capital H? I'd guess not, but I haven't seen the OS.
  • Changed it to "h".
• The bits about putting the dude in the bacta tank and the Imperials threatening the search the ship are linked into one sentence, but they probably shouldn't be, as two very distinct events. In fact, I'd recommend splitting into two sentences and explaining that the Imperials arrived on the scene first, then that the Imperials threatened to search the ship. As it is now, the Imps just kind of come out of nowhere.
  • Is that any better?
• Ditto Lord Tion; he comes out of nowhere. Probably worth mentioning he was present when you first mention the Imps arriving on the scene.
  • Done. 501st dogma^(talk) 19:20, September 7, 2012 (UTC)
• Context on the Kattadan Guard.
  • As the'yre not actualy called that in the comic or any other source, I have changed the wording. Does it still need context?
• In the second paragraph of "Prelude," we follow only the Rebel/Alderaanian POV. Rather than having the Imps show up at the last minute and then revealing their motives, take a step back, and add this information before they show up. We need to present both sides in battle articles, although the fiction we work from almost always follows only one side.
  • Done.
• Rather than saying Ikova died, but before she died she did this, can you recast the whole thing in chronological order? Ditto for Karg.
  • Done. 501st dogma^(talk) 22:18, September 7, 2012 (UTC)
• Can you add authors to the other sources you mention in BTS? How about the illustrator of the comic as well? ~Savage 12:30, September 6, 2012 (UTC)
  • Done, but I didn't authorify TCWSE. That's just too many authors! Thanks for the review, 501st dogma^(talk) 22:15, September 7, 2012 (UTC)
• Everything looks good! One last question: Have we ever come to any decision regarding infoboxes on battle articles? There's currently a lot of infobox-exclusive information, but I remember this has been debated before. As someone who doesn't write many battle articles, though, I'm not sure what the decision was regarding battle articles. ~Savage 04:24, September 8, 2012 (UTC)
  • The only infobox exclusive stuff is Operation skyhook, the Raid of Corulag, and the Subjagation of Raltiir. The raid over Croulag has not been confirmed to be right before Kattada, so I will not put that in if that's fine with you. I've added the Subjagation of Raltiir since that's important. However, I'll add Skyhook only if you want it in, becasue then I'll have to add the Death star's mention earlier in the text. 501st dogma^(talk) 11:33, September 8, 2012 (UTC)
    • I don't mind whether that stuff is included or not; I just want to make sure we follow the site rule that there should never be infobox-exclusive information in articles. But I do know this has been discussed before, and some folks expressed reservations about having to figure out how to include random stuff from the "before" and "after" fields, etc. In other words, I'm happy to support once someone else can clarify this issue! ~Savage 12:07, September 8, 2012 (UTC)
      • I doubt if I can find the link, but we did have some unofficial consensus on the CAN page once that the before, after, and concurrent fields in event articles should be exempt from the rule. Jujiggum and CC were there... Naru too, I think... Menkooroo (talk) 04:27, September 9, 2012 (UTC)
        • Shoud I put Operation: Skyhook in? 501st dogma^(talk) 11:54, September 9, 2012 (UTC)
          • Yeah, if this battle is part of it, it should be mentioned in the article. Menkooroo (talk) 13:17, September 12, 2012 (UTC)
            • Added. 501st dogma^(talk) 20:16, September 12, 2012 (UTC)

Cav

• Can we get some location info for Kattada in the infobox? Sector, region, etc?
  • Is that better?
• Infobox: combatants includes Kattada. This signifies that the whole planet opposed the Empire in the battle. Please be more specific.
  • Check that out.
• I would like to know more about the miniatures battle in relation to the actual event. Was the game analogous to the battle, or did it introduce new elements that conflicted with the existing event? - Cavalier One^{(Squadron channel)} 21:20, October 9, 2012 (UTC)
  • How's that? Thanks for the review. 501st dogma^(talk) 20:32, October 11, 2012 (UTC)

Lord Tion

• File:Imperials arrive.jpg and File:BattleofKattada2.jpg will need re-uploads with the word bubbles intact, per the Image policy.
  • Aggh. I'll do it soon. They're not even my images, so I'll have to upload new images.
    • I can probably help out with this one. Gimme a couple days. Menkooroo (talk) 02:06, October 16, 2012 (UTC)
      • That would be great if you could get to them. If you can't, I'll scan and upload, but they'll be fuzzy and not as bright in color as other pictures. 501st dogma^(talk) 20:23, October 17, 2012 (UTC)
        • Got it. Menkooroo (talk) 14:03, October 18, 2012 (UTC)
          • Thanks! 501st dogma^(talk) 21:28, October 18, 2012 (UTC)
• Operation Skyhook is in the weeks leading up to Yavin and is in 0 BBY, not 1 BBY. The article should be changed to reflect that; I've also fixed up the Galactic Civil War templates, so {{GCW Skyhook}} should be added to this article.
  • Taken care of.
• Why the "eventually" before Toprawa in the infobox? Isn't it the next battle? Battle of Toprawa includes Kattada in the "previous" field without an eventually, FWIW. Menkooroo (talk) 14:22, October 15, 2012 (UTC)
  • Deleted. I originaly added it because there was some stuff between the two battles (Tion's death on Alderaan). Thanks for the review. 501st dogma^(talk) 20:53, October 15, 2012 (UTC)
• Do the comics confirm that it's Alliance Special Forces in the battle? From the infobox image, they look more like general Rebel troopers.
  • Changed.
    • I think you'd be better to link right to Rebel Trooper instead of Alliance Army. With that said, there might be somewhere else you can link to Alliance Army. Go on a hunt!
      • I couldn't seem to find anywhere to link to Alliance Army. I've switched it for Rebel Trooper.
• At the end of "Prelude" --- can you clarify what "bring out the blasters" means? I'm not sure which blasters the sentence is talking about.
  • Clarified.
• Check the image in "Lull in combat and ground assault" for correct punctuation.
  • That better?
• I think some important details could be added to the intro, which is currently a little slim. That the Rebels managed to keep the Imps from contacting fleet command and revealing that Leia was a Rebel is pretty major. I'm also wondering if you can add a few more details about the fighting itself --- since the battle and not the prelude is the subject of the article, a bit more on how the battle was fought wouldn't be amiss in the intro. Menkooroo (talk) 07:10, October 29, 2012 (UTC)
  • Is that better? 501st dogma^(talk) 20:43, October 29, 2012 (UTC)
    • Yes! But I think the fact that Leia's identity as a Rebel was kept secret is pretty important, especially since someone only familiar with ANH might otherwise be confused. Whaddya think? Also, the first sentence of the second paragraph is a little run-on now. Can you split it up? The bit about Ikova helping her reads oddly with no punctuation, but punctuating it would make the sentence even longer, so I recommend splitting it. Menkooroo (talk) 05:40, October 30, 2012 (UTC)
      • How's that? 501st dogma^(talk) 20:46, October 31, 2012 (UTC)

Attack of the Clone

• Is Operation: Skyhook supposed to be italicized or not? Most of the material that I've encountered does not italicize it, but I could be wrong. Please check source material and make sure that the article is consistent on italicization (or no italicization).
  • Our article for Skyhook seems to lean towards not italicization, so I've changed all Skyhooks to none italicized.
• Image caption punctuation needs to be corrected. Some of the captions also have other errors.
  • Corrected punctuation errors and a spelling error.
    • Still another error. Please look carefully. CC7567 ^(talk) 03:34, October 27, 2012 (UTC)
      • That it?
        • "Open fires" should be ringing some alarm bells. CC7567 ^(talk) 20:52, October 27, 2012 (UTC)
          • Aggh. Is that the error? 501st dogma^(talk) 21:03, October 27, 2012 (UTC)
            • That was it. CC7567 ^(talk) 21:05, October 27, 2012 (UTC)
• "if the Imperials contacted their fleet command": would it be relevant to link the Imperial Navy somewhere?
  • Added.
• "did not want to pursue such a course of action as too costly": something's not right here; please reword.
  • There.
• "the crew members and troopers from the corvette, as well as some Kattadan troopers": this wording is getting a bit overused in that paragraph, so please try to reword for variety.
  • That any better?
• If the battle has an officially confirmed name, which seems to be the case, and it came from a source other than its first appearance, then {{1stID}} needs to be used somewhere. The Bts should also detail where the name came from. CC7567 ^(talk) 20:27, October 22, 2012 (UTC)
  • There. Thanks for the review. 501st dogma^(talk) 20:26, October 24, 2012 (UTC)
    • I'm seeing a typo. I would highly recommend using Firefox's spell check, because it checks as you go and saves you the time of having to correct stuff later. CC7567 ^(talk) 03:34, October 27, 2012 (UTC)
      • Got it. 501st dogma^(talk) 13:43, October 27, 2012 (UTC)

Comments

• 
  • What's this supposed to be? 501st dogma^(talk) 00:14, November 2, 2012 (UTC)
    • Menkooroo (talk) 00:57, November 2, 2012 (UTC) --- I'm going to guess that it's supposed to be... Approved as a Featured article by Inquisitorius 00:57, November 2, 2012 (UTC)