Wookieepedia:Featured article nominations/Gray Jedi

< 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.

Gray Jedi

  • Nominated by: —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 02:11, April 14, 2010 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: My first nom. This one started as a GAN but needed major work. After a number of helpful objections and a few rewrites, the improved article is longer and I was advised that it would be better suited as a FAN. I requested that it be removed from GAN so I could add it here. I look forward to addressing your objections so that I can improve the article to FA status. Thanks. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 02:11, April 14, 2010 (UTC)

(4 Inqs/3 Users/7 Total)

Support

  1. It's good eatin'! Thefourdotelipsis 14:26, May 21, 2010 (UTC)
  2. Nice job. JangFett (Talk) 04:31, May 23, 2010 (UTC)
  3. Good job.--Jedi Kasra (comlink) 01:59, May 25, 2010 (UTC)
  4. Inqvote —Xwing328(Talk) 03:28, May 25, 2010 (UTC)
  5. Inqvote I'm very impressed by your hard work, and I hope to see more noms from you in the future. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 03:08, May 31, 2010 (UTC)
  6. Inqvote CC7567 (talk) 01:36, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
  7. Inqvote --Eyrezer 04:43, June 5, 2010 (UTC)

Object

The Grand Master
  • In the second sentence of the History section, you link to Jedi Enclave, but I'm not sure if that was your intention, based on the context of the sentence.
    • My only guess is that I thought "Enclave" was just another term for "Academy", like "praxeum". I simply removed the link. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 03:02, April 26, 2010 (UTC)
  • I'm seeing several linking mistakes in the article, particularly underlinking, especially regarding events. Please make sure that you have everything linked once in the intro, and once in the body, and make sure you link directly to the correct page, and not to redirects. I've fixed a couple of these during my copy-edit to show some examples.
    • I'm not sure what the term "underlinking" refers to. That I'm not linking enough, especially to events? I will see if I can fix these and add more event-related links where appropriate. (might take me a day or so) —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 03:02, April 26, 2010 (UTC)
      • Yes, that is correct: "underlinking" means that there are missing links. And no problem, better to take some time and make sure you get it right than to rush through it and still miss some. :) Jonjedigrandmaster Jedi symbol (We seed the stars) 16:53, April 26, 2010 (UTC)
        • Okay, I did linking sweeps for 1) repeat links, 2) links to redirection pages, and 3) obvious missing links. I have yet to dig through events in order to find some more specific links for the article, but it's a start. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 17:30, April 26, 2010 (UTC)
        • Done with adding event-related articles. Main focus was in the History section. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 15:43, April 27, 2010 (UTC)
  • "However, between the Great Sith War and the Dark Wars, the Jedi went from the height of their power to a mere remnant of their existence…" A couple things: first, could you provide actual BBY date(s) here, just for more solid clarification of the time? (Actually, it would be good to do so throughout other parts of the history section as well; you commonly refer to wars for keeping track of time, which is fine, but it would be better to include some ABY/BBY dates in there, too, even if they're "circa.") Second, how did they become a "mere remnant of their existence?" Do you mean their numbers dwindled, or that they lost control over the galaxy, or something else?
    • I assume dwindled but that text is very close to the source text. I wasn't sure, so I didn't assume. Source text: Between the Great Sith War and the Dark Wars, the Jedi go from the height of their power to a mere remnant of their existence. Unlike the Jedi of later years, the Jedi in a Knights of the Old Republic campaign are likely to be fractious and unwilling to bow to their own central authority—the Jedi Council. (KotORCG, p104) I added dates to the sentece, but I'm not sure I can clarify without making an assumption about what the author meant. Also, I added some dates throughout the history section. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 03:02, April 26, 2010 (UTC)
    • I just added a link to the First Jedi Purge in that sentence. I figure that there might be other types of "reductions" to the Jedi Order in that time, but the purge is the clearest example we have, and it did happen in the dark wars. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 14:16, April 26, 2010 (UTC)
  • Please create a stub for Halcyon's battle with Tyris, if such a page does not yet exist.
    • Will do. Probably won't get to it tonight (need to check dates in the novel). Will post again when done. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 03:02, April 26, 2010 (UTC)
    • Article added for the Tyris duel. I also added an article for the duel between Bindo and Nayama. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 17:30, April 26, 2010 (UTC)
  • "Jensaarai participated in the Yuuzhan Vong War alongside the Jedi." Could you please provide me with a quote/page number that supports this sentence? After reading Edge of Victory II a couple weeks ago myself, I have a sneaking suspicion that this may refer to Kelbis Nu, whom I believe had become a Jedi by this point in time.
    • It was a reference to Kelbis Nu as far as I know. Clarified and added a date. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 03:02, April 26, 2010 (UTC)
  • Sorry for not reviewing this sooner, I've been quite busy of late. The article is much improved; I'll continue with the Traits and techniques section once you work through these. Jonjedigrandmaster Jedi symbol (We seed the stars) 01:15, April 24, 2010 (UTC)
    • No problem, I will post again when I'm done with the linking fixes. It will take me some time to comb through the events. Thanks again! —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 03:02, April 26, 2010 (UTC)
    • Okay, so just to sum up, I think I've hit everything except for doing an in-depth exploration for events that should be linked to in the article. I will post again after doing so. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 17:30, April 26, 2010 (UTC)
    • Last of the objections addressed. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 15:43, April 27, 2010 (UTC)
  • One more for now: does Legacy 33: Fight Another Day, Part 2 say that Fel became Head of State of the Empire in 41 ABY? If not, please source this bit to Legacy of the Force: Invincible: "Some time after 41 ABY, when Jagged Fel was selected as the Head of State of the Galactic Empire…" Jonjedigrandmaster Jedi symbol (We seed the stars) 22:06, April 27, 2010 (UTC)
    • Sourced to Invincible. Thanks for another copy-edit. I see that I went too far in the other direction adding event-related links. :) —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 22:15, April 27, 2010 (UTC)
      • Haha no problem, it can be hard to find the right balance of linking sometimes. When pipelinking things (linking like this: [[Battle on Had Abbadon|assassination attempt]]), just try to link everything that directly relates to an event (such as in the above example). If the wording doesn't directly relate to it, then it isn't needed. Jonjedigrandmaster Jedi symbol (We seed the stars) 22:23, April 27, 2010 (UTC)
  • Continuing with "Traits and Techniques": "In fact, Gray Jedi have opposed those who did embrace the dark side, such as when Bindo opposed the Sith during the Great Sith War and the Jedi Civil War." Incorrect tense usage here.
    • What about: In fact, Gray Jedi opposed those who embraced the dark side; Bindo fought against the Sith Empire during the Great Sith War and again during the Jedi Civil War. ?—fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 14:45, April 30, 2010 (UTC)
      • Yes, that's fine; the problem with the original phrase was the "have."
  • "Still, the Jedi claimed that Gray Jedi became tainted and carried the dark side's influence within them, even if they did not realize it." Do we know which Jedi in particular claimed this? This makes it sound like all Jedi that ever lived believed this. Perhaps it was the Jedi of Bindo's time, or maybe the New Jedi Order's Jedi? Or perhaps it was one Jedi in particular who said this? Are there any example that could be given here?
    • JATM source quote: According to the Jedi, these individuals become tainted and carry the dark side's influence within them, whether they realize it or not. Some people claim to have witnessed a slow metamorphosis of the persons' personalities over time as a result of tehir flirting with the dark side. So there is no specific example. However, I altered the text to Still, the Jedi Order taught that Gray Jedi carried the dark side's influence within them, even if they did not realize it. The above source text follows discussion of the Jensaarai, which tempts me to say "NJO", but it's speaking too generally. Simply saying "Jedi Order taught" I think makes it clear that this is an "official stance" and not necessarily a universally held opinion. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 14:45, April 30, 2010 (UTC)
      • Hmm, but we don't know that the Jedi Order as a whole taught that; saying "Jedi Order" in general leads the reader to believe all Jedi of all time did that, which I doubt is true. Also, I'm not sure that "taught" is a good word to use here, based on the source text. The source doesn't really say that the Jedi taught that to anybody; just that some Jedi thought that. Jonjedigrandmaster Jedi symbol (We seed the stars) 19:00, April 30, 2010 (UTC)
        • I suppose that's the answer then. New text: Still, some Jedi thought that Gray Jedi carried the dark side's influence within them, even if they did not realize it. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 19:25, April 30, 2010 (UTC)
  • "Some early Gray Jedi wore custom, gray robes. The Gray Jedi Jolee Bindo once wore a unique version of these robes." Please move this phrase to elsewhere in the section, as it does not really follow its current context.
    • I moved it to the History section, just under the Jolee Bindo paragraph, altering the text to Some Old Republic Gray Jedi wore custom, gray robes. Bindo once wore a unique version of these robes. to make it fit the context better. Without a proper "Equipment" section, I think it's best suited in the History section, especially as it only appears in one era. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 14:45, April 30, 2010 (UTC)
  • "All Gray Jedi displayed the use of both light and dark side Force abilities, and have shown skill with techniques common to Jedi and Sith…" Tense issue here.
    • Changed to: All Gray Jedi displayed the use of both light and dark side Force abilities, and demonstrated skill with techniques common to Jedi and Sith, such as the ability to construct and wield a lightsaber, as well as some unique Force talents. Is that sufficient? —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 14:45, April 30, 2010 (UTC)
      • Yep; the problem before was the "have shown."
  • "The Imperial Knights were said to be…" Said by whom?
    • I will have to look it up in the Legacy Era Campaign Guide. Will post again when I have done so. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 14:45, April 30, 2010 (UTC)
    • Source text, LECG, p43: Despite opinions to the contrary, Imperial Knights are every bit as capable in the use of the Force as their Jedi counterparts, though their training has considerably more martial focus. Changed the text to be stated as a bald fact rather than an opinion: The Imperial Knights were as capable in the use of the Force as Jedi Knights, though their training concentrated more on martial prowess. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 01:42, May 4, 2010 (UTC)
  • "Imperial Knights displayed various Force abilities, such as Levitation, Telekinesis…" Isn't levitation a form of telekinesis? (If you mean self-levitation, and not just the levitation of other objects, please specify)
    • Doh! That should have been obvious to me. Clarified to self-levitation. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 14:45, April 30, 2010 (UTC)
  • "Other Gray Jedi have been known to wield powers such as Force thrust and Ionize." Tense issue here. Also, could we get a tiny bit of context for these powers, since their applications aren't as obvious or well known as things like telekinesis or mind tricks?
    • Tense clarified (tricky because these were powers listed in a "Gray Jedi" NPC stat-block, and not known Gray Jedi). Also added some context: Other Gray Jedi have wielded powers such as Force thrust, a telekinetic attack similar to Force push, and Ionize, an technique that deactivates and destroys machines. Note, I will have to double-check sourcing on this sentence, as the power descriptions for these might be in other source books. Will post again when sourcing is confirmed. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 14:45, April 30, 2010 (UTC)
      • Hmm, tense issue remains. The problem is with the use of "have," as it changes the text from past tense to present perfect tense. Jonjedigrandmaster Jedi symbol (We seed the stars) 19:00, April 30, 2010 (UTC)
        • Removed "have" so it just says some Gray Jedi wielded. It just reads strangely to me for some reason. I'll have to watch that in my writing. Did a quick search of the article and found that the rest of the "have"s were all in quotes and not article content. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 19:25, April 30, 2010 (UTC)
        • "Ionize" power is from the KotORCG (p51), so that source is good. "Force thrust" is from the core rulebook. The sentence as been rearranged to allow for accurate sourcing: Other Gray Jedi wielded powers such as Ionize, a technique that deactivates and destroys machines, and Force thrust,[6] a telekinetic attack similar to Force push.[23] —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 01:42, May 4, 2010 (UTC)
  • "and encouraged his students—Rosh Penin and Jaden Korr—to think of Force powers as mere tools. Penin fell to the dark side but was later redeemed, although Korr remained faithful to the light. Korr was later plagued with doubt over Master Katarn's description of Force abilities as tools." I'm not entirely sure how relevant this is to the article's topic, seeing as how none of these beings were considered Gray Jedi. Is it not enough to just say, as you already do, that using both light and dark side powers doesn't instantly make you a Gray Jedi? Thoughts on this?
    • I think that it helps the definition to show Plo Koon and Katarn's similarities when pointing out why they're not Gray Jedi. Katarn not only used dark side powers, he encouraged his students to do the same. I feel that's relevant considering he was still not considered "Gray" and was on the High Council. The fates of his students however, is not. I have truncated the sentence to: Similarly, Kyle Katarn, a light side Jedi who later became a member of the New Jedi Order's High Council, freely used light and dark side abilities, and encouraged his students—Rosh Penin and Jaden Korr—to think of Force powers as mere tools. This provides a complete example of Katarn, the relevant person, without needlessly elaborating on his students. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 14:45, April 30, 2010 (UTC)
    • Thanks once again! I'll get back to you once I can dig through my sourcebooks. Also, random thought, should I add another image to the History and Traits sections? Or would that be too much? —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 14:45, April 30, 2010 (UTC)
      • I think if you shift around the current images a bit, you could add one more to either the History or the Traits and techniques section without making them too cluttered. Jonjedigrandmaster Jedi symbol (We seed the stars) 19:00, April 30, 2010 (UTC)
        • I may try to add one to the History section, and I may end up putting the "Gray Jedi" section images on one side, as other organization articles do. But I would need to find a quality image first. I don't want to put something there just for the sake of putting it there. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 19:25, April 30, 2010 (UTC)
        • Remaining concerns points addressed. Looking forward to more! —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 01:42, May 4, 2010 (UTC)
          • Well done. I'm gonna be pretty busy this week, but I'll try to continue with the review in the next couple days. :) Jonjedigrandmaster Jedi symbol (We seed the stars) 01:52, May 4, 2010 (UTC)
  • Continuing on with the next few sections: "While the term could be used to refer to Force users who walked the line between light and dark…" Why the speculation here? It could be used? Do we know whether or not it actually was used in that way?
  • You jump from talking about the days of the Council consolidating power (which you have mentioned to be approximately 4,000 BBY or so in the history section) to mentioning Qui-Gon Jinn; please specify that Jinn is from a different time frame—the current wording implies he was one of the Jedi from that time.
    • Good point. I added: Thousands of years later, around 30 BBY, This highlights the time jump and puts a hard date from the quote's source without repeating "stark hyperspace war" or "44 BBY", which are already given in the history section. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 22:43, May 8, 2010 (UTC)
      • Quick question: is The Stark Hyperspace War a source for the rest of the paragraph, though? Does it say all of this, and does it specify that this all took place thousands of years before Jinn's time? "While the term was used to refer to Force users who walked the line between light and dark, Jedi were also labeled as Gray Jedi for distancing themselves from the Jedi High Council. This practice dated back to the days of the Old Republic, when the High Council was attempting to consolidate power. Jedi who frequently clashed with the will of the Council were sometimes thought of as Gray even if they did not entirely separate themselves from the Jedi Order and the High Council."
        • No, I had forgotten to cite the JATM midway through that paragraph. Source added. Also, I removed "Thousands of years later," as it was kind of pointless when followed by an exact date. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 04:08, May 9, 2010 (UTC)
  • "Jolee Bindo was a Human male Jedi in the time of the Old Republic." Could we be more specific time-wise? The Old Republic stretches across twenty-five thousand years. Jonjedigrandmaster Jedi symbol (We seed the stars) 16:35, May 8, 2010 (UTC)
    • Added "circa 4000 BBY", the year the Great Sith War kicked off. I know that the next few sentences describe events that took place prior to 4000 BBY, but without known how much prior I don't feel comfortable speculating, hence the "circa". Hopefully that's sufficient. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 22:43, May 8, 2010 (UTC)
  • In the "Jensaarai" section: please add some context on the Saarai-Kaar
  • Also in that section: please mention Nikkos Tyris a bit sooner, and give a bit more context on him
    • Added him to second sentence, as well as his master-apprentice relationship to the Saarai-Kaar.—fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) |
  • In the BTS: "that gave a definition for Gray Jedi that did not seem to require a 'balanced' Force alignment." Could you elaborate some on this definition?
    • I had figured quoting the text in the section intro was specific, but I see that the reader may not understand that was the text I was referencing. Added: and instead focused on operating independent of the Jedi Council without succumbing to the dark side. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) |
  • "Later sources conflicted with each other over the defining characteristic of a Gray Jedi: that they spurned the Jedi High Council or that they dabbled in the dark side without becoming corrupted by it." Could you give a couple examples of which sources said what?
    • I had sourced both to the correct statements, but I see no reason not to expand this. I have added more context, spelling out the definitions rather than referencing them. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) |
      • Yes, that is correct. You should detail such things, or else the reader will wonder what you're talking about. Also, when sentences such as these are self-referencing, then you don't have to reference them. (i.e. if you said "In Knights of the Old Republic II, Gray Jedi were described as…" You wouldn't have to source that statement to Knights of the Old Republic II, because it is self-sourcing—you've already given the source) I've gone ahead and removed the extra references. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 17:08, May 13, 2010 (UTC)
  • "therefore meeting both qualifications" What qualifications? Do you mean the balanced Force alignment as well as operating outside the Council? Another way to fix this would be to say something like "…therefore meeting the qualifications of Gray Jedi as defined by [source 1] and [source 2]."
    • I worry then that I would be elevating said sources above the others, and I don't want to list seven sources in that sentence. Expressly described these qualifications again as per above. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) |
  • "However, the New Jedi Order has been confirmed to consider as Gray the entire Force traditions of the Jensaarai and the Imperial Knights." Can you state the sources that say this? i.e. say something like, "In [source 1] the New Jedi Order is stated to consider the entire…" Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 18:11, May 12, 2010 (UTC)
  • Was "Gray Jedi" mentioned in every single issue of the Star Wars: Republic: The Stark Hyperspace War comic arc? If not, you need to specify which separate issues in which it was mentioned. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 17:08, May 13, 2010 (UTC)
    • Negatory. It was either issue 36 or issue 37, and I'm not sure which off-hand. I'll have to dig through my long-boxes. Will post again once the change is made. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 16:25, May 14, 2010 (UTC)
    • It was issue 36, I have altered the sourcing accordingly. Also, if you didn't catch the above comment, the article has some new text centered around the Voss Mystics, who were just confirmed as "Gray". —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 22:34, May 16, 2010 (UTC)
      • In the future, make sure you remember to change that comic issue in the appearances section as well :). I'll take a look at the Voss Mystics soon. Sorry for being a bit behind on my review lately, school's been cutting into my free time. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 01:49, May 19, 2010 (UTC)
        • Yeah, I saw that, thanks for making that edit for me. And no worries, school comes first obviously. Thanks for the ongoing review! —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 13:56, May 19, 2010 (UTC)
QUARTERS!
  • When you introduce the Voss in the History section, you need to establish their connection to the Gray Jedi. Without that, it seems a little random in there.
    • Oh duh! That is kind of important, isn't it! I didn't want to repeat myself between the history and the Voss Mystics section, so I just stated that 1) they were considered gray by both orders, and 2) that they rejected offers of teaching from both orders in favor of their own dogma. Hopefully that's sufficient for that section. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) |
  • I think a few times you make some fairly broad generalizations about just whom the Jedi Council called "Grey Jedi" and why, wheras The Stark Hyperspace War uses this only in reference to Jinn. And Tyvokka doesn't go into details, either. While you can use some of this, occasionally you extrapolate a bit too much.
    • Fair point. I've reigned it in a bit, but I do want Jinn's example in the article. Changes have been made to the intro, the history section, and the relationship with the council section. I truncated my trailing "explanations" sentences, stating simply that he was considered by some as Gray for disagreement with the council. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) |
      • Yeah, no problem, that's fine. I have no problem with the example, as it would be remiss not to include it, but it was just colouring a little bit too far outside the lines. Much better now.
  • Otherwise, excellent work. Very readable. Thefourdotelipsis 09:47, May 21, 2010 (UTC)
    • Thanks! And thanks for the review! I saw that you added the "retcon" tag to one of the Jensaarai appearances, so I went through and added it to every one of their appearances that was released prior to JATM, but I had a question. Should I only use the 
      {{ret}}
      tag once and then use 
      {{C|retcon}}
      the rest of the time so I don't link to retcon multiple times? —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 14:19, May 21, 2010 (UTC)
      • I think you should just use the retcon template, the links aren't too much harm. Although you would likely receive no complaint if you were to change it. Not from me, anyway. Thefourdotelipsis 14:26, May 21, 2010 (UTC)
Long overdue transmission from the cockpit of Xwing328:
  • Very first sentence: "...walked the line between the light and dark sides of the Force without succumbing to the dark side." From what I understand, it's "without necessarily succumbing" to the dark side. (See the quote in the BTS) Which means they could succumb, but don't always. —Xwing328(Talk) 05:40, May 22, 2010 (UTC)
    • Well, the JATM source includes this text: Force-using Jedi who meddle with the dark side without totally surrendering to it are sometimes referred to as Gray Jedi. A Gray Jedi taps into the light side and the dark side equally. So it's a sorta, kinda, but never completely kind of thing. In my mind, "succumbing" was a total surrender, but as you point out that's not how the quote uses it, leading to confusion. I changed the intro to "without totally embracing" instead. Added similar qualifications where appropriate elsewhere, such as the Tat section. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) |
  • Super minor question: Is Grey an acceptable spelling for Gray Jedi? In other words, has the 'e' version been used in canon like the KotOR quote, or is that a typo? The article feels a little repetitive, but overall, I think it's pretty good. Don't forget to spell check next time. Firefox does a handy job of that for you (aside from all the weird SW names, that is). —Xwing328(Talk) 05:40, May 22, 2010 (UTC)
    • That was taken from the on-screen text, which is why it retains the non-American spelling. Normally it would follow site policy and go with the Am spelling, "gray". I'll continue to look for ways to make it less repetitive, but my concerns thus far have been that it's comprehensive and not confusing. Thanks for the review! —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 04:10, May 23, 2010 (UTC)
      • Cool, that's what I wanted to know. —Xwing328(Talk) 03:28, May 25, 2010 (UTC)
The Grand Master Part II
  • A couple from the Voss Mystics section: "Though their rule was totalitarian, they were considered to be as infallible as their visions…" Considered by whom? The people they ruled? Themselves?
  • "This style of Force mystic existed before they became associated with the Voss species and settled in Voss-Ka." This sentence is confusing to me. Are you trying to say that there were other beings throughout the galaxy who were known as Force Mystics before the Voss Mystics arose and took control of Voss-Ka? If so, this should probably be moved to the beginning of the section. Also, is there any particular reason this "mystic" is not capitalized?
    • Source text: Interestingly, the Mystics have been around as long at the Old Republic has--though the culture and people who would become the Voss came much later. I tried to clean it up to clarify that Force mystics existed before they settled on Voss and became known as Voss Mystics. New sentence: Although they did not settle on Voss and become the Voss Mystics until later, this order of Force mystics is as old as the Galactic Republic. "Mystic" was made lower-case whenever not a part of "Voss Mystic" as it is not an official title, and it would be like capitalizing "user" in "Force user" or "adept" in "Force adept". (IMO) —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) |
      • Yes, that would be the correct capitalization in that case. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 00:54, May 24, 2010 (UTC)
  • I'll give the article one last full look-over soon. Almost there! Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 14:03, May 23, 2010 (UTC)
    • I'm excited for it, and am very grateful for the many reviews you're given to this. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 23:46, May 23, 2010 (UTC)
      • No problem at all. I'm impressed by the amount of hard work and dedication you've put into this article. :) Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 00:54, May 24, 2010 (UTC)
Jedi Kasra

You should probably make some mention that the IKs made an alliance with the Jedi and Galactic Alliance Remnant against Krayt's Empire. And of course, this alliance's fate will have to be updated in the coming months. Otherwise, great job, Fodigg!--Jedi Kasra (comlink) 01:03, May 25, 2010 (UTC)

  • Good idea. Added During the Second Imperial Civil War circa 137 ABY, the Imperial Knights made alliances with both the Galactic Republic[4] and the Jedi Council to oppose Darth Krayt's Galactic Empire.[5] Thanks for the review! —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 01:54, May 25, 2010 (UTC)
The Grand Master's last bit
    • One more image could probably be used in the History section; I think (when considering the placement options here) the best choices would be an image of Qui-Gon Jinn or Kelbis Nu
      • I went with Nu, as I already have an image of Jinn in the "relationship with the council" section. I also added a new image of Bindo for his member section, as I felt the old one was too "tall" and the closeup was a bit too close up. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) |
    • You have this statement:" They were fully trained in the ways of the Force and rejected the dark side of the Force, unlike the Force-based organizations of Emperor Palpatine's Galactic Empire, such as the Emperor's Hands and the Prophets of the Dark Side." sourced to Star Wars: Legacy 0, but does that issue specifically state that about the Emperor's Hands and the Prophets of the Dark Side?
      • Good point. Upon looking for a source for Emperor's hands, I found that they weren't all dark side, so I dropped that one. I sourced to the dark side sourcebook for the Prophets. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) |
    • And that's all. Fantastic work on this article; it's come a long way, and I'm glad to see that you've worked so hard and have been so dedicated to seeing it through this process. :) Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 18:19, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
      • Awesome, I'm glad to hear it's finally getting there! Thanks again for all the reviews! —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 02:43, May 31, 2010 (UTC)
Eyrezer

This is very nicely written over all. I have just two concerns.

  1. "They were uninterested in the teachings of either Order[9] and were considered to be Gray by both." Here, and elsewhere, the article indicates that the Sith also had a concept of "Grey", not just the Jedi. Is this correct? If so, can this be explicitely stated? Appropriate places might include the intro and the History.
    • Whoa, trippy! They implemented the article-specific nom pages. Anyway...yes, JATM specificially mentions this: Members of the Jensaarai outwardly deny such claims that they are Gray, but the Jedi and the Sith do not hesitate to say that the Jensaarai refuse to admit the truth to themselves. I have added this to the intro and to the history, and made sure to source correctly. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) |
  2. I think the intro needs to make it clear earlier that there are two concepts of "Grey". Currently, the first paragraph says, "The term Gray Jedi, or Gray, was used to describe Jedi who...", whereas the second paragraph says, "The term was similar to that of "Dark Jedi" in that it could refer to any Force user, and not only to Jedi." Perhaps something along the lines of, "The term Gray Jedi, or Gray, was used to describe two phenomenon; first, individual Jedi with a particular relationship to the Force or the Jedi Council, and second, certain other Force traditions independent of the Jedi Order as a whole." That may not be exactly right, by you should be able to see from there what I am advocating for. After such a sentence, you can then proceed as it currently is. I think I've summed it up correctly: certain indiviudals within the Order and certain organizations outside of it. --Eyrezer 23:41, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
    • Well, the first sentence describes both defintions: The term Gray Jedi, or Gray, was used by Jedi and Sith to describe (1) Force users who walked the line between the light and dark sides of the Force without surrendering to the dark side, or (2) Jedi who distanced themselves from the Jedi High Council and operated outside the strictures of the Jedi Code. The second sentence goes on to clarify: (3) Those who were considered true Gray Jedi met both qualifications and did not belong to any particular Force tradition. I can't imagine a way to get that information any earlier in the article, but I think your objection shows that it does need to be made clearer. The new intro paragraph is: The term Gray Jedi, or Gray, had two meanings. It was used by Jedi and Sith to describe Force users who walked the line between the light and dark sides of the Force without surrendering to the dark side, and also to describe Jedi who distanced themselves from the Jedi High Council and operated outside the strictures of the Jedi Code. However, those who were considered to be true Gray Jedi met both qualifications and did not belong to any particular Force tradition. One example was Jolee Bindo, a former Jedi Padawan and self-proclaimed Gray Jedi of the Old Republic. Hopefully this segments the information in the intro a bit more and makes it clear that there are two competing definitions, with "true" GJ meeting both qualifications. Thanks for the review! —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 14:53, June 4, 2010 (UTC)
Attack of the Clone
  1. Currently one of the few objections from me, in addition to my agreement with Eyrezer's concerns, is the inconsistency between the sporadic hyphenating of "light/dark side" and "light-/dark-side" when you use it as an adjective. Please decide on one to uniformly use throughout the article.
  2. Would it be possible to outline why exactly Outcast and Omen are listed as possible mentions? It would be best to do so rather than just leaving them there in the Appearances section without further explanation. Other than that, do try to watch your linking (every article is linked once in the infobox, intro, and body when it first appears), but nice work nevertheless. CC7567 (talk) 00:19, June 4, 2010 (UTC)
    • Outcast and Omen were listed as "possible mention" in the Imperial Knight article as Jaina and Jag discuss the possibility that a competing school of jedi might be founded in Imperial space. Reflecting on it now, even if this can be considered as a possible mention of some type of organization that the Imperial Knights resemble (which I think is actually pretty tenuous now that I consider it) they clearly discuss the founding of a Jedi school and not a "Gray Jedi" school, so I'm removing those appearances, and honestly am wondering why they are listed in the Imperial Knight article. Thanks for the review! —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 14:53, June 4, 2010 (UTC)

Comments

Approved as a Featured article by Inquisitorius 04:46, June 5, 2010 (UTC)