- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a featured article nomination that was successful. Please do not modify it.
Exar Kun's lightsaber
(3 Inqs/4 Users/7 Total)
Support
- SinisterSamurai 03:51, August 3, 2011 (UTC)
- 10 times better than my revision of the article. I whole-heartedly support this. Jensaarai 08:04, August 3, 2011 (UTC)
- Kilson(Let's have a chat) 02:38, August 4, 2011 (UTC)
Grand Moff Tranner 
(Comlink) 15:06, August 4, 2011 (UTC)- Cavalier One
(Squadron channel) 12:44, August 12, 2011 (UTC) - CC7567 (talk) 21:21, August 14, 2011 (UTC)
- Just one minor spelling mistake that I corrected, good work.--Exiled Jedi (Greetings) 21:46, August 14, 2011 (UTC)
- Well sorry, I guess Tommy got it, its funny that it didn't say that there was an edit conflict.--Exiled Jedi (Greetings) 21:49, August 14, 2011 (UTC)
- Well sorry, I guess Tommy got it, its funny that it didn't say that there was an edit conflict.--Exiled Jedi
Object
Kilson
I believe you should put Jedi Covenant under the Affiliation field of the Infobox since they owned the lightsaber at one point.Multiple times in the article, you refer to Exar Kun with his full name instead of just his surname, which is more common in other articles. I'm curious as to why?- When he is referred to by his full name, the subject (his lightsaber) usually follows.
In the History section, "The two Dark Jedi became Dark Lords of the Sith, and Exar Kun continued to use his single and blue-bladed lightsaber..." Perhaps you could insert a mention on how the new Sith declared war on the Republic, just to add a bit more context when you later begin to talk about different battles of the war.- Addressed.
Later on in the History section, "Exar Kun's lightsaber was acquired soon afterward by the Mandalorian scientist Antos Wyrick..." I believe you should give more context on how Wyrick got the lightsaber, if possible. I haven't read the short story, so I don't know exactly what should be said, or if anything else can be said.- It doesn't say how he got it, just that he took it from them. Addressed.
In 2006, the Champions of the Force set of Star Wars Miniatures featured a Exar Kun model wielding his signature double-bladed lightsaber. That should probably added to the Bts.- Also: Action figure! Menkooroo 13:18, August 2, 2011 (UTC)
- Addressed.
While you included an image of Kun's action figure, you forgot to mention it in the prose. That should be added.Kilson(Let's have a chat) 04:44, August 3, 2011 (UTC)- Nah, junior, it was there, end of second bts para.—Tommy 9281 Wednesday, August 3, 2011, 10:46 UTC
"Alongside Exar Kun, his double-bladed lightsaber is included in the Champions of the Force set of Star Wars Miniatures." Unless I'm really confused, you only mention the miniature here, not the Hasbro action figure.Kilson(Let's have a chat) 10:51, August 3, 2011 (UTC)- Are they not the same thing?—Tommy 9281 Wednesday, August 3, 2011, 11:02 UTC
Oh, sorry. I should have clarified this. The Kun miniature, which you originally mentioned, is a 6 cm mini-statue that was created by Wizards of the Coast. The Kun action figure is a 3 and 1/2 inch... action figure that was manufactured by Hasbro. Both include Kun's lightsaber, and thus should be mentioned within the article.Kilson(Let's have a chat) 23:27, August 3, 2011 (UTC)
- Nah, junior, it was there, end of second bts para.—Tommy 9281 Wednesday, August 3, 2011, 10:46 UTC
- Addressed.
- Also: Action figure! Menkooroo 13:18, August 2, 2011 (UTC)
- Otherwise, good job Tommy. Thank you for your large contribution to the barn-burner. Kilson(Let's have a chat) 12:55, August 2, 2011 (UTC)
Waponi Woo
Big Woo say you link to Time twice in intro. In History, ctrl+F indicates that your link to time is its third occurrence in the article body.SinisterSamurai 15:55, August 2, 2011 (UTC)Big Woo say you only ever link to Jedi Order in infobox, but refer specifically to "the Order" later in the article body.SinisterSamurai 15:55, August 2, 2011 (UTC)Big Woo say that several quotes refer to Demagol, but the body refers to Antos Wyrick without informing the reader of any connection between the two, at least without clickery or mouse hovertry.SinisterSamurai 15:55, August 2, 2011 (UTC)Big Woo say Bts isn't sourced at all.SinisterSamurai 15:55, August 2, 2011 (UTC)- You know what? The text itself is the sourcing, so forget this one. SinisterSamurai 16:00, August 2, 2011 (UTC)
- All of your objections fall well within {{Sofixit}}. Thank you for the review, Sinister Samurai, please advise if anything further is required.—Tommy 9281 Tuesday, August 2, 2011, 18:01 UTC
- I'll remember that next time I read a Tommy-nom. SinisterSamurai 03:49, August 3, 2011 (UTC)
- No worries SinSam :)—Tommy 9281 Thursday, August 4, 2011, 02:33 UTC
Cav
Some mention of Qel-Droma's fall to the Dark Side is needed; currently, Kun duels a Jedi, then they are both Sith. Needs a small bit of context/explanation.- Cavalier One(Squadron channel) 11:06, August 3, 2011 (UTC)
Moffship
Two minor things. First off, when mentioning Jedi vs. Sith: The Essential Guide to the Force under "Legacy," you should link to the in-universe version of the book (similar to The Essential Guide to Alien Species versus The Essential Guide to Alien Species). I thought we had an article for this, but my searches have turned up nothing, so you should at least create a redlink.- Addressed.
Second, regarding Kilson's last objection: The action figure of Exar Kun is not the same as the Champions of the Force miniature. The former is made by Hasbro; the latter, by Wizards of the Coast.- Wait, I didn't see the timestamp on Kilson's last message. I thought he had struck that particular objection without it being handled, so feel free to ignore this repeat objection.
- That's all. Good work, as always. Grand Moff Tranner (Comlink) 01:14, August 4, 2011 (UTC)
Attack of the Clone
In the intro, would it be better to bold the name as "The lightsaber of Jedi Knight Exar Kun was…" instead of later as it currently is?- Addressed.
Just to double-check: is the Jedi Council in the intro and article body ever stated to be the Jedi High Council, or is it left ambiguous? (And if it's left ambiguous, is there enough info to assume that it's the High Council?)Wherever relevant in both subsections of "Unique design," I think it needs to be made clearer that Kun became a Dark Lord of the Sith. I realize that this information would normally be better left to the History section, but the article doesn't explicitly clarify his turn to the dark side until much later, so it's left unclear early on. In particular, when you start talking about the "dark side energies of its creator," it's a little unclear, as the only description of Kun so far (in the article body) has been of him as a Jedi Padawan, not a Sith or even as a Dark Jedi.- Addressed.
"On Kun's later pursuit of forbidden Sith knowledge": can a little more context be provided here? I understand the need to be concise with the Kun biography part of the article, since this article isn't primarily about Kun himself, but this part about the Sith comes out of nowhere, with no explanation of why a Jedi Padawan began seeking Sith knowledge. Even if Kun just acted out of curiosity, saying so will help ease the abrupt transition.- Addressed.
Final one: in "Legacy," would it be prudent or relevant to tie Maul's own double-bladed lightsaber to Kun's somehow? Was Maul inspired by it, perhaps?CC7567 (talk) 21:47, August 13, 2011 (UTC)
Comments
Approved as a Featured article by Inquisitorius 07:49, August 15, 2011 (UTC)