Wookieepedia:Featured article nominations/Burl Ives

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

Burl Ives

Support

  1. Yay! Burl Ives! .... 23:52, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
    If only to encourage a consistent policy with regard to barely-SW-relevant RL people, I vote yes. Yes! Excelsior to Burl! —Gonk (Gonk!) 00:13, 28 March 2007 (UTC) Changed my mind too. Gonk (Gonk!) 17:21, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
    I vote yay! If only to please the ewok-spirits. — Jinko 01:42, 28 March 2007 (UTC) Changed my mind, sorry. - Jinko 13:48, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  2. Despite probably being the FA with the least canonical significance (aside from Suttle, who was and is a joke), this is worthy of the title. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order (Audience Chamber) 01:54, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  3. I was going to say something about the "Ives of March", but that would be totally lame. :-P Cull Tremayne 21:48, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  4. --Shaelas(Ahto City)CzerkaCorporationLogo-KOTOR 22:11, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  5. Lord Hydronium 00:15, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  6. Adamwankenobi 21:55, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  7. Darth Culator (Talk)(Kills) 14:28, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  8. Ozzel 02:57, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  9. Curse you Burl Ives! Curse you and all you stand for! Enochf 08:55, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
  10. supergeeky1 BobaFett The Cantina 04:09, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  11. Burl Ives so deserves it. --Darthchristian (Hey!) 18:32, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  12. BambookidX 23:09, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

Objection 1 and 4 through 9 are not valid under the FA nomination rules. Objections that do not fall under rules 1 through 15 will be disregarded. -- Darth Culator (Talk)(Kills) 14:28, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

To spite 4dot Because it contains too much information that's not relevant to a Star Wars encyclopedia. —Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 23:55, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Pfft. The article deals with Burl Ives. Ives participated in Star Wars. The article is legit. Why can't the expansion be so? .... 23:59, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
I have no problem with non-SW content. The problem is that aside from one line, it doesn't address the Star Wars content at all. His voice work for SW needs to be a bigger focus. Havac 00:12, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
    • His...few lines in a telemovie which has absolutely no documentation whatsoever? .... 00:19, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
      • Yes. Havac 00:40, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Second objection...too many redlinks...while they don't appear red, they link to non-existant Wikipedia articles. —Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 00:36, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Fixed. .... 01:33, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Includes a lot of information irrelevant to Star Wars, which is the subject of Wookieepedia. Our articles on real-world stuff only mention Star Wars-relevant facts while delegating everything else to Wikipedia. - Sikon 04:25, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

    • Agreed. Darth Maddolis 04:27, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
      • So, basically, the article should read "Burl Ives narrated Caravan of Courage". That's BS in the highest. .... 01:10, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
        • [1]. -LtNOWIS 02:01, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
          • Exactly. .... 23:16, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Curse you Burl Ives! Curse you and all you stand for! Enochf 11:08, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
I agree with Sikon. I'm not saying the article should only have SW stuff in it, but since Ives has such little to do with SW, the article is limited in it's SW referrences, and since this is a SW wiki, an article with such a small percentage of SW in it should not be an article Featured on a SW wiki. If you read above, in the 16 requirements, it doesn't actually mention that the article requires anything Star Wars about it- of course, that means that the article passes the requirements, but it also means that any random Featured Article from wikipedia could be imported in the sense that it'd pass requirements (although I realise that we do not copy articles 100% from wikipedia). It is fine for a good article, but to be featured on a Star Wars encyclopedia is a bit much. Darth Maddolis 07:04, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
No way. This article is unwookieepedic as argued by Sikon and others. KEJ 08:16, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
As per Sikon, Maddolis, KEJ. --Eyrezer 09:00, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Per everybody else. Green Tentacle (Talk) 13:57, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  1. I know, Fourdot'll just cross me out, but I feel I have to protest. If I'm irrelevant in saying that this is all completely irrelevant to SW, then clearly we need to change the rules. For Heaven's sake, people, this is supposed to be a Star Wars encyclopedia! Evir Daal 08:07, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Look, bub, I didn't strike any of these objections, and obviously you missed the point at which Burl Ives narrated Caravan of Courage. .... 08:16, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
      • Oh. Then I'm real sorry I accused you. I just made an assumption, since you seemed to be the article's greatest proponent, and didn't bother checking the history, though I realise now I should have. Please accept my heartfelt apologies. I won't change my opinion, though. My protest might be deemed irrelevant, but I don't think this warrants FA status. That should be reserved for Star Wars articles. No, I didn't miss the Ewoks reference, but I might well have, dwarfed as it is by all the rest... which IMO is completely irrelevant to SW. Evir Daal 08:35, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
        • Apology accepted, but tell me this: Why do we even have a Burl Ives article, then? .... 08:38, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
          • If it's policy, we'd better abide by it, as OOU articles are apparently accepted. Personally I'd rather see only things mentioned IU having articles, actors etc could fit into the BTS sections of IU articles, but I'll accept the majority view. But I don't think something with this little importance to SW should be featured. Evir Daal 08:55, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
            • But you can't object to an FA on the basis of it's subject. You can only object on qualitative grounds. .... 09:02, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
              • Well, then someone will cross me out sooner or later for being irrelevant. Till then, I'm exercising civil disobedience. ;) Evir Daal 09:17, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Spelling and grammar errors throughout. British spelling. Does not follow MOS. Rules 1 and 4. Has a wookify tag on it.Atarumaster88 Jedi Order (Audience Chamber) 21:48, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

  1. Does not follow WP:LG, which states "official and canonical information only." The Burl Ives article is full of non-official information, though I admit that it doesn't fall under the canon ruling. Also, I find it funny that the Inq is able to veto the votes of the majority based on a minority group which contains the articles primary supporters. —Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 08:31, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Burl Ives doesn't have any continuity retainers, I'm afraid. And let's pitch out all the unlicenced magazine articles while we're at it. .... 10:27, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
      • No, I'd have to remove a whole paragraph from one of my pet articles. And it's the paragraph with pirates in it. —Silly Dan (talk) 01:28, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
    • All the information is official. It's just not released by LFL. It's all verifiable (per the citations), however, which is the point of that requirement. - Lord Hydronium 03:48, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  2. Has a wookify tag on it... indeed. §6. KEJ 09:02, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Jedipilot94 19:51, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
  2. Xwing328's comments below convince me to object based on the only interpretation of rule 9 possible for a real-world article, and the several CT threads this has inspired lead me to object under a broad interpretation of rule 5 (though those threads are leading towards a consensus which would allow articles like this to be featured, and this objection in particular to be struck.) It needs more expansion on the Star Wars role he played rather than everything else he did in his life. —Silly Dan (talk) 23:55, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
    • I understand this sentiment, but what else can really be said? .... 01:20, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
      • Is there any BTS information about the making of the movie he narrated? Why did he only narrate the one? What did he do as narrator? —Silly Dan (talk) 01:28, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
      • Not a well documented film, so I don't know, and he narrated as a narrator. .... 04:48, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
        • Anyway, objection adressed. .... 04:01, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  3. He has barely any ties wahtsoever to starwars. One thing. thats it. the articles good, but not relevant enough to be supported by the sane. RC 2413 02:22, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  4. I just gotta say, even if im struck out, which I know I will be, this seems like incredible fan-wankery (and he is not even a character!). I know that people like Burl and all, but all he did was narrate a series! His page is longer than Lucas, who people seem to ignore! He is a man worthy of hard work on an article, not a narrator. This whole page belongs on wikipedia. I think it would be misleading to put this on the main page and call it a Featured Article. All I have to say now is wow. Just wow...irrlevant to the max.(I know irrelevance isn't a rule, but really guys??)Darth Trayus(Trayus Academy) Sith Emblem15:54, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Comments

  • Burl Ives is, like, teh mohtst imhportant pserson in Schtar Whores. He must be ohn teh main paeg! .... 23:52, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Just wondering, but did you misspell 'Star Whores' intentionally, or is there not some hidden meaning behind it? -Solus (Bird of Prey) 12:22, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
      • Eh? No, I was just in a mood. .... 21:56, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
        • Oh, I could tell by the rest of the sentance—which was funny—I just mean that a 'whore' is a harlot/prostitute. I was wondering if you meant it to be taken that way. -Solus (Bird of Prey) 22:11, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
This objection struck because it doesn't fall under any rules
  • Puh-lease, this is Wookieepedia, not IMDb. KEJ 08:19, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
    • BTW, who struck those votes? KEJ 08:27, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  • This could really use some expansion on his narrator role. What did he narrate? How much of the episode was narrated, the entire thing, or just one line? Any quotes to give an example of his narration? etc... If anybody has this episode, please expand it. —Xwing328(Talk) 20:23, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Tis done. .... 02:25, 12 April 2007 (UTC)