Wookieepedia:Featured article nominations/Fuzzum

< 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.

Fuzzum

  • Nominated by: ~ SavageBob 06:47, October 22, 2009 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: Sorry about the poor images, but until this episode gets some sort of official release, this is all we're gonna get. ~ SavageBob 06:47, October 22, 2009 (UTC)

(5 Inqs/1 Users/6 Total)

Support

  1. Furries of activities. --Skippy Farlstendoiro 14:46, October 22, 2009 (UTC)
  2. Inqvote --Eyrezer 07:48, October 27, 2009 (UTC)
  3. Inqvote IFYLOFD (You will pay the price for your lack of vision!) 03:21, November 1, 2009 (UTC)
  4. Inqvote Green Tentacle (Talk) 01:10, December 24, 2009 (UTC)
  5. Inqvote Very clean. Quick read. Toprawa and Ralltiir 04:10, January 7, 2010 (UTC)
  6. Inqvote That didn't take long. — Fiolli {Alpheridies University ComNet} 14:30, January 7, 2010 (UTC)

Object

  1. Farlstendoiro and the F-aliens.
    • Excessive footnotes: Several times, you refer to the same source twice in a row, while you only need to make a footnote if the previous one was different. Example: History, penultimate paragraph. Two footnotes to [1], the same source. Only the last one is needed, affecting the whole paragraph.
    • Ditto in Biology, first paragraph; notes: [1][4][5][1][1][2] You could remove the second [1].
    • No new info from A Guide to the Star Wars Universe, 3rd ed. or from The Complete Star Wars Encyclopedia? (Or at least no references to them) If so: Maybe BtS could use "The information about Fuzzum in Star Wars Encyclopedia was repeated, word by word, in The Complete Encyclopedia"? Or the footnote could mention "information from A and B"
    • 80's toons. Sweet.--Skippy Farlstendoiro 13:08, October 22, 2009 (UTC)
      • These should be fixed now. Thanks for your review! Yeah, other 80s species should probably be written up too. It's unfortunate that Clone Wars is the current series. I can imagine the flurries of activity there would be around Droids if it were being aired for the first time nowadays. ~ SavageBob 14:31, October 22, 2009 (UTC)
  2. IFYLOFD:
    • "Captured enemies faced a dire fate: droids could be sold or dismantled for other uses (like turning an astromech into a stew pot), and sentient beings could be cooked and eaten." Reword without parentheses.
    • Please check your linking. Articles should be linked once in the intro and once in the rest of the article.
    • That's it. Nice job. IFYLOFD (You will pay the price for your lack of vision!) 02:31, October 30, 2009 (UTC)
      • These should be addressed. Thanks, as always, for your review! ~ SavageBob 15:32, October 30, 2009 (UTC)
  3. Toprawa:
    • I'd prefer to see a less POV-ish descriptive term than brave, unless the source literally calls them this: "Fuzzums were brave opponents"
    • You source the location of their homeworld's sector location in the "History" section to the general Essential Atlas Online Companion article here on the Wook. If you open up that article, you will see, as I'm sure you're aware, that the Companion is divided into several SW.com pages organized alphabetically. Please reference these individual SW.com pages for more specific sourcing, rather than just our Wook article.
    • Please de-POV this sentence: "and changed one Fuzzum tribe for the worse."
    • The following are not objections, but rather things to be aware of:
      • I would like to see you pay closer attention to linking within the article. Making sure everything that can be linked is, making sure something isn't actually a link redirect, which may actually require you to open up the page in question to see where its title is at, and even minor things like making sure pipelinks are capitalized. For example, "[[Sentience/Legends|sentient]]," rather than [[sentience/Legends|sentient]]." You've been writing and reviewing articles long enough that this should all be common practice by now.
      • Please note that the community has agreed to format the referencing of different editions of sourcebook and other reference items as, for example, "Galaxy Guide 3: The Empire Strikes Back, Second Edition," not "Galaxy Guide 3: The Empire Strikes Back, 2nd ed." Please adapt this style to your articles.
      • Finally, per this CT regarding quotations, two-speaker quotations should receive the Quote template, rather than the Dialogue template. Only quotes with three or more speakers require the Dialogue template. I realize this is a policy neither strongly followed nor strongly enforced on this wiki, but it does exist.
    • Otherwise, very good job. Toprawa and Ralltiir 21:11, January 6, 2010 (UTC)
      • Thanks for the review; very helpful. I've changed the two POV objections (mostly be removing the offending statements, since it made little difference to the meaning). As for the sourcing to the website objection, I thought the purpose of having articles for sources here was so we could link to them in source lists. Is that not so? I can see the argument both ways. Is there a template like the one we have for the Wizards of the Coast website that includes an optional web link plus an internal article link? That would be the most useful, if so. Thanks for the other tips; I'll definitely keep them in mind. ~ SavageBob 22:54, January 6, 2010 (UTC)
        • If you would like to alter the SW.com template, please feel free. That is not my concern. Linking to our Atlas Companion article on the Wook essentially tells the reader nothing, whereas referencing and linking to the specific SW.com page shows the reader exactly where the information is coming from, which is far more useful. As someone who makes it a practice to be as specific as possible in their referencing in terms of sourcing by specific page, I should think you would jump at this opportunity. Toprawa and Ralltiir 23:01, January 6, 2010 (UTC)
          • The template should probably be altered, but I'll leave it to someone with more skill in that arena. And I wasn't arguing with you, just trying to clarify what accepted practice around here is. Your reasoning is good, so I've changed it. Thanks again for the review. ~ SavageBob 03:10, January 7, 2010 (UTC)
            • Not my intention to come off as combative. I agree that the template should and probably could be altered, but I don't feel it's a killer if it's not done. Thanks, and good job once again. Toprawa and Ralltiir 04:10, January 7, 2010 (UTC)

Comments

  • By the looks of this image, some Fuzzum also wear shoulder sashes. You may like to add that. Unless it is a quiver... --Eyrezer 07:48, October 27, 2009 (UTC)
    • Well, I thought it was a quiver, but I just looked again at the episode, and it's just too hard to tell. I've reworded things a bit. ~ SavageBob 14:40, October 28, 2009 (UTC)

Approved as a Featured article by Inquisitorius 14:30, January 7, 2010 (UTC)