- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a featured article nomination that was successful. Please do not modify it.
Judder Page
- Nominated by: Menkooroo 07:33, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
- Nomination comments: Because he's really fricking tough.
(4 Inqs/2 Users/6 Total)
Support
Xicer9
(Combadge) 01:12, August 31, 2010 (UTC)- Awesome dude. Great work, Menkooroo.—Jedi Kasra (comlink) 17:43, September 1, 2010 (UTC)
- Very nice. Grand Moff Tranner
(Comlink) 15:49, September 6, 2010 (UTC) - Nice article, good job. That's the beauty of the Expanded Universe: some nondescript character with a cameo appearance in the films can have an entire developed backstory.--ID-21 Dolphin 13:34, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
- Something DarkStryder-related that wasn't written by Cav?—Surely you jest. Anyway, fantastic work. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 16:22, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
- --Eyrezer 02:38, October 2, 2010 (UTC)
Object
Xicer
The intro should briefly mention why he defected to the Rebel Alliance.- Good call. Added.
Two person, two line quotes should use {{Quote}}.- Got it!
- That's it actually, great work. Do Pash Cracken next. =P Xicer9(Combadge) 23:34, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
- I really want to! And thanks for the kind words. Menkooroo 00:11, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
Eyrezer
Later missions: "The various explosions were set to coincide with one another, and the commandos escaped the planet on their two freighters before detonation occurred." Did they destroy the factories, etc? If so, I think you should make this clear. --Eyrezer 04:42, September 18, 2010 (UTC)- Added a few words at the end of the paragraph --- whaddya think? Menkooroo 06:12, September 19, 2010 (UTC)
You should include the information from The New Republic Campaign: The Battle for Endor from the PCs' Perspective in the body, using the {{Ambigstart}} and {{Ambigend}} templates. It's what we do :)- It just stinks of absolutely non-canon to me --- I mean, the Bothans who recovered the Death Star plans obviously weren't rescued by some player characters who don't actually exist. Is a role-playing scenario that involves player characters actually ambiguously canon? If so, then wouldn't articles be required on the player characters that Page "may have" had a conversation with? This scenario really doesn't seem like it was meant to be ambiguously canon --- it seems more akin to those choose-your-own-adventure books that let you put yourself into the adventures of the OT. Menkooroo 05:59, September 19, 2010 (UTC)
- A bit more: The player characters in that rpg scenario are, IMO, the same deal as Luke Skywalker's Best Friend. And we would never put the crap about him in the body of an article. Menkooroo 06:07, September 19, 2010 (UTC)
- This doesn't seem any different to me than any other roleplaying game adventure in content. There is a storyline, with encounters with creatrues etc, and alternative options. We use these kinds of sources all the time across the Wookieepedia, without any difficulty in dealing with player characters. In particular, Page recruits a group of individuals and we discourage articles on groups, anyway. It does differ in its canonicity, but we have ways of dealing with such sources. For the record, planets from both this adventure and its prequel have been included in the Atlas, indicating that some small elements of these adventures have been incorporated into canon. Basically, I think it needs to be in there, but it can be as small as the sentence I have just added. The tags might look ugly, and it would be better if the warning could be reduced to one line, but it is what it is,at the moment. --Eyrezer 00:36, September 21, 2010 (UTC)
- Sounds good. I haven't encountered any ambig-canon stuff in a nom before, so I'll defer to your wisdom. Do you think the bts note is still necessary? Menkooroo 07:57, September 21, 2010 (UTC)
- This doesn't seem any different to me than any other roleplaying game adventure in content. There is a storyline, with encounters with creatrues etc, and alternative options. We use these kinds of sources all the time across the Wookieepedia, without any difficulty in dealing with player characters. In particular, Page recruits a group of individuals and we discourage articles on groups, anyway. It does differ in its canonicity, but we have ways of dealing with such sources. For the record, planets from both this adventure and its prequel have been included in the Atlas, indicating that some small elements of these adventures have been incorporated into canon. Basically, I think it needs to be in there, but it can be as small as the sentence I have just added. The tags might look ugly, and it would be better if the warning could be reduced to one line, but it is what it is,at the moment. --Eyrezer 00:36, September 21, 2010 (UTC)
- A bit more: The player characters in that rpg scenario are, IMO, the same deal as Luke Skywalker's Best Friend. And we would never put the crap about him in the body of an article. Menkooroo 06:07, September 19, 2010 (UTC)
- It just stinks of absolutely non-canon to me --- I mean, the Bothans who recovered the Death Star plans obviously weren't rescued by some player characters who don't actually exist. Is a role-playing scenario that involves player characters actually ambiguously canon? If so, then wouldn't articles be required on the player characters that Page "may have" had a conversation with? This scenario really doesn't seem like it was meant to be ambiguously canon --- it seems more akin to those choose-your-own-adventure books that let you put yourself into the adventures of the OT. Menkooroo 05:59, September 19, 2010 (UTC)
Is the (12) shown by his birth date meant to be a Great ReSynchronization date? If so, shouldn't it have a notation with it? --Eyrezer 05:09, September 18, 2010 (UTC)- I actually have no idea about the GrS dates; that was leftover from what the article was before. Is it better form to leave it in (with a note) or to take it out entirely? Menkooroo 05:59, September 19, 2010 (UTC)
Comments
Approved as a Featured article by Inquisitorius 02:50, October 2, 2010 (UTC)