Wookieepedia:Featured article nominations/Dooku's lightsaber

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

Dooku's lightsaber

  • Nominated by: Squishy Vic | message 17:08, June 11, 2015 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: I have been working on completely revamping the Count Dooku article for a tiny bit, and it is sad that Sir Christopher Lee passed just recently. I thought this was a nice memorandum article to write and to feature (if found worthy) in the meanwhile. Squishy Vic | message 17:08, June 11, 2015 (UTC)

(0 Inqs/0 Users/0 Total)

Support

Object

Brandon
  1. Couple of initial points before I go deeper into this. First, you say that Dooku created his lightsaber after he became a Sith Lord, and you source that to Ultimate Star Wars. The "Dooku's lightsaber" entry in Ultimate Star Wars doesn't say that. Is there a source that does? If not, you'll need to keep the timeline of its creation vague.
  2. You say that the lightsaber was destroyed when the Invisible Hand was destroyed. Was it? Do we know that for sure? We can assume within reason that it was, but we could also assume that Cassio Tagge was killed when the Death Star blew up—yet we now know he's alive. I wouldn't make this assumption about his lightsaber unless it's clearly stated somewhere. In which case, it should be sourced to wherever that's stated, rather than Episode III.
    • The lightsaber/Dooku's body were both left in that room and not much time passed between his death and the ship's rear half burning up in the atmosphere, least not nearly between Tagge's introduction and the Death Star blowing up. Still, of course, the lightsaber may not be destroyed (per some major spoilers on another lightsaber), but we haven't seen it again in canon yet; would it be acceptable to write "last seen" some date? I can write its fate in vague terms. I just don't want to omit the fact that it was last used by anyone at that point, far as we know in established canon. Squishy Vic | message 22:04, June 11, 2015 (UTC)
      • "Last seen" is an out-of-universe statement, so that wouldn't work in an in-universe article. The best thing to do is to not address its fate at all, not even in vague or speculative terms. You're not omitting anything by doing that, you're just naturally ending the article where the facts end. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 22:07, June 11, 2015 (UTC)
    • I removed all direct references to its destruction, but I did leave the following in the history, as it states only the facts that the body/weapon were left on board while the ship was destroyed: Squishy Vic | message 04:52, June 12, 2015 (UTC)
      • "Once Skywalker escaped with both Kenobi and Sidious in tow, Dooku's lightsaber – as well as his lifeless body – were left aboard the Invisible Hand as it was destroyed in the final moments of the battle.
        • That states it in a way that still suggests, based on the sentence structure, that the lightsaber was still there when the ship was destroyed. We don't know that. Say this instead: "Once Skywalker escaped with both Kenobi and Palpatine in tow, Dooku's lightsaber was left behind in the [whatever that room is called] of the Invisible Hand, which was destroyed shortly thereafter." You'll note I also changed Sidious to Palpatine. In this context, he was operating as Palpatine so it's clearer to the reader to say Palpatine. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 05:22, June 12, 2015 (UTC)
          • Is there any right way/template to source [1] non-databank info from StarWars.com? That RotS gallery refers to that chamber as Grievous's chambers, I just need to figure how to source it. Squishy Vic | message 05:34, June 12, 2015 (UTC)
            • {{SW|url=films/star-wars-episode-3-revenge-of-the-sith-story-gallery|text=''Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith'' Story Gallery|archivedate=20191225031914}} - Brandon Rhea(talk) 05:41, June 12, 2015 (UTC)
              • Changes have been applied, link added to Sources. Squishy Vic | message 05:48, June 12, 2015 (UTC)
  3. Are there any quotes from "Dooku Captured" specific to the lightsaber? It'd be great to open the History section with something more relevant to the lightsaber, since the current quote is more about General Grievous than it is about Dooku's weapon.
  4. I would imagine that there are many more StarWars.com sources showing Dooku's lightsaber. That will include the Episode II and Episode III film pages, TCW Episode Guides for episodes in which the weapon appeared (but make sure you actually check the Episode Guides - don't make the assumption that it's in the Guide just because the weapon was in the corresponding episode), and Databank entries for characters who may have had contact with the lightsaber in some way.
  5. Similarly, you'll need to include more than just StarWars.com sources as well. This includes, but is not limited to, Star Wars Insider editions released after April 25, 2014 in which the lightsaber may have been show. Please be sure to consult Wookieepedia:Layout Guide#Sources for more information this, including canon-specific rules.
    • This has been addressed. All Insider (canon) issues have been checked and added if they referenced Dooku's saber or images of it. Squishy Vic | message 02:32, June 17, 2015 (UTC)
    (This is, undoubtedly, a pain in the ass, but that tends to happen with subjects that are fairly ubiquitous).
  6. This part isn't an objection, but just something important to note. There are people on Wookieepedia who don't like lightsaber articles and who think they're pointless (I'm not one of them). There may be a push at some point to eliminate as many as possible. Odds are this will be ones that aren't unique or that aren't notable in the franchise, meaning this lightsaber is probably safe, but I say this just to point out that there are no guarantees that this page will be kept if such a push happens, even it's promoted to FA. Just something to keep in mind!
    • I'm sure the lightsaber fetishists will fight me to the death on this one. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 21:21, December 1, 2015 (UTC)
  7. More later. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 19:53, June 11, 2015 (UTC)
NuCanon sucks but Culator reviews the articles anyway
  • An apparently valid data point was added with an invalid ref tag, and while I have corrected this per the comic series, if Hondo Ohnaka's brief possession of the saber is mentioned in the body, Maul's should be as well. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 21:21, December 1, 2015 (UTC)

Comments

  • Can I support my own nom? (aka vote in Support) Squishy Vic | message 17:08, June 11, 2015 (UTC)

Vote to remove nomination (Inq only)

The Inquisitorius decided via IRC vote to remove this nomination for idle objection(s). Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 03:52, January 6, 2016 (UTC)