Wookieepedia:Featured article nominations/Kazz

< 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.

Kazz

  • Nominated by: Kreivi Wolter 18:51, May 5, 2011 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: My first FA nomination ever. Ooooh boy, am I nervous now.

(4 Inqs/2 Users/6 Total)

Support

  1. Very nice work, Kreivi. ~SavageBOB sig 23:59, June 23, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Wow... I barely remember the series as it is. I forgot all about that episode! TO YOUTUBE! Trak Nar Ramble on 07:28, July 6, 2011 (UTC)
  3. Inqvote Menkooroo 03:39, July 7, 2011 (UTC)
  4. Inqvote Wookieepedia: Treating utter silliness with total seriousness. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 20:45, July 7, 2011 (UTC)
  5. Inqvote --Eyrezer 10:38, July 30, 2011 (UTC)
  6. Inqvote Good job.—Tommy 9281 Wednesday, August 3, 2011, 14:37 UTC

Object

Savaged…
  • The opening quote is good, and should be kept, but it seems a bit odd and ungrammatical without context. Would it be possible to add an extra line above to show what Kazz was responding to?
  • Can we really say he had black eyes? I'm not sure if the Ewoks cartoon is sufficient to say that for a Human, since I believe all Humans were portrayed in typical American-animation fashion with no irises. If there's precedent, though, I'll strike this. If it does stay, this bit of information needs to be mentioned in the body, as does hair color.
    • Uh, I do believe that the color of the eyes is canonical. I mean, they are clearly black, and I don't believe we should ignore the color just because they are poorly animated. Added the infobox-information into the body. Kreivi Wolter 14:00, June 19, 2011 (UTC)
      • I guess my question is, can we really consider black his eye color, when all we see are his pupils? As another example, movie Wicket has brown eyes, but second-season cartoon Wicket has black eyes. In other words, it seems to be the style of the cartoon to just show everyone with pupils only and no irises, hence my question about Kazz's eye color. Does anyone in his episode not have black eyes? (Again, I'm not advocating for the removal of the fact just yet, just asking to make sure we can reasonably assume the black dots represent his eye color.) ~SavageBOB sig 18:26, June 19, 2011 (UTC)
        • This is something I don't know how to approach. What should be done about this? Kreivi Wolter 13:43, June 23, 2011 (UTC)
          • Well, I poked around various other articles on Humans in Nelvana cartoons, and it seems that, for the most part, they have irises (see, for instance, Mungo Baobab, Kea Moll, and Terrinald Screed). So, I retract the objection; leave his eye color as black. ~SavageBOB sig 23:59, June 23, 2011 (UTC)
  • I removed references to Raygar as "the doctor," since it seems he's a doctor in the sense of a Ph.D., rather than an M.D. If the OS refers to him as "the doctor" (as opposed to simply using "doctor" as a title), feel free to restore some of them.
  • Can you rewrite some of the lead to privilege Kazz's point of view? Currently, Raygar and the droid get to be the "protagonists" for large portions of the lead, but this should be Kazz's story. I realize that this may be difficult, since it sounds like Kazz is ignorant of important events, but it may just require the addition of a few "Unbeknownst to Kazz..." phrases and the like.
  • The last sentence of the lead seems rather play-by-play. I'd rewrite it to convey the main points, which are that Kazz escorted Raygar to the hangar and handed him over the Emperor's custody to be punished.
  • The play-by-play issue is even more pronounced in the "Biography" section. Give everything another edit and try to convey the important points, not each and every thing the characters said or did. Again, try to privilege Kazz's point of view over the other characters' whenever possible. The bit about Raygar's actions on Endor is especially over-detailed, since Kazz isn't privy to that information. Ditto the info about Raygar's plot.
    • Better? Kreivi Wolter 14:00, June 19, 2011 (UTC)
      • Much better, but I think it needs another pass. The main problem that remains are in situations where it seems that the article is conveying a conversation between two characters. For example, in the first paragraph of "Mission to Endor," it seems that we have Kazz and Raygar's conversation line by line. Similarly, the mention that Kazz left "the scene" suggests on-screen events. The second paragraph of "Mission to Endor" is better, but the last few sentences also read like dialogue in prose form. The "Emperor's arrival" part is better, but the last bit between Kazz and Raygar seems, again, like a relation of their dialogue; maybe try to get at the important points of their conversation without all the back-and-forth between the two. ~SavageBOB sig 18:26, June 19, 2011 (UTC)
  • Are the droids in the cartoon really referred to as "battle droids"?
  • Is it erroneous for Kazz to refer to Endor as a backwater? The word implies isolation, primitiveness, both of which seem to apply here.
    • It wasn't the word "backwater", but the word "planet". Corrected. Kreivi Wolter 14:00, June 19, 2011 (UTC)
  • Can you give the original airdate of the episode in the BTS? This information should be available in the article "A Star Wars CELibration". That's it! Nice work, and I look forward to re-reviewing once these are taken care of. ~SavageBOB sig 23:26, June 15, 2011 (UTC)
    • Is the airdate really neccessary? I'm rather hesitant to add such information to the articles, as it technically doesn't relate to the subject. Kreivi Wolter 14:00, June 19, 2011 (UTC)
      • Yeah, I think it does relate to the subject, since it marked his introduction into canon. I see airdates as the same as giving publication dates for magazines and magazine articles. If it were me, I'd give the full airdate in this case, but I'd be satisfied with just a month and year if you prefer. But I do definitely think it's important information to include. ~SavageBOB sig 18:26, June 19, 2011 (UTC)
        • I recall some user once said on some GA nomination something like wheter or not to give information on the appearance in an article like this is up to the nominator. However, this is such a small task that arguing about it would be total waste of time. Done and done. Kreivi Wolter 13:43, June 23, 2011 (UTC)
  • Some of the play-by-play info might actually better fit into P&T. For example, you mention in certain scenes that Kazz was accompanied by stormtroopers or large droids. This is info that could be put into P&T, since it seems consistent in most scenes that he has some sort of escort. ~SavageBOB sig 18:26, June 19, 2011 (UTC)
Ravaged
  • Can you use {{WebCite}} for the references to the sw.com forums? Check out Snow King for an example of how to do it. It's a really good format to use when citing forum posts, as it indicates the author of the post and the date & time it was written.
  • In the intro, the claim that Raygar had a change of heart kind of makes it seem like he realized the error of his ways, rather than plotted to assassinate the Emperor. Can you change "change of heart" to something about his treacherous ambitions?
  • And... that's all. Very well-done for your first FAN. Keep 'em up. Menkooroo 07:04, July 6, 2011 (UTC)
Eh?
  • I'm curious as to how you decided that Kazz's unnamed Star Destroyer is Imperial I-class. There don't seem to be any sources that specify, and at the visual quality of the Ewoks episode it's a debatable point at best. If you can explain it, then I won't argue with it staying, but it might be better to move it to just plain Imperial-class like other ambiguous ISDs and be less specific in the article. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 04:26, July 7, 2011 (UTC)
    • Now that I have a copy of the episode, this view is more like an Imperial II than an Imperial I with the lack of baffle plates on the main engines. But the bridge tower has a pronounced rim around the edge more like an Imperial I than an Imperial II. Unless you have a more solid justification for one or the other, given the conflicting details, I would definitely suggest moving it to the generic Imperial class rather than trying to differentiate a subclass. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 06:24, July 7, 2011 (UTC)
      • It was Raygar's (Featured) article where it originated. Changed. Kreivi Wolter 20:00, July 7, 2011 (UTC)
        • And I have fixed it in Raygar's article as well. Thank you for pointing that out. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 20:45, July 7, 2011 (UTC)
For My Ickle Dudlickins
  • Right from the beginning the article has the same PBP issues that plague another of your noms. Please rectify, I'll continue afterward.—Tommy 9281 Friday, July 8, 2011, 20:12 UTC
    • This has apparently become a major problem, so please specify what you deem irrelevant for this article. Kreivi Wolter 19:20, July 13, 2011 (UTC)
      • This is your nomination, and such issues should be identified and rectified by you. Very rarely does Tommy give answers to things that nominators should already know; the last ones you got were freebies. Please comb your article for all instances of PBP and amend.—Tommy 9281 Wednesday, July 13, 2011, 19:27 UTC
        • I went ahead and removed what I considered PBP from the article. Now, Kreivi is within rights to revert me, but if my version stands, I hope this will address your objection, Tommy. ~SavageBOB sig 23:06, August 2, 2011 (UTC)
          • Nice job, Bob. Both of you can lay claim to this.—Tommy 9281 Wednesday, August 3, 2011, 14:37 UTC

Comments

  • Okayyy, apparently, the SW message board is... gone. Didn't see that coming. So, uh, how to proceed with the now-death ref links? Kreivi Wolter 15:35, June 6, 2011 (UTC)
    • The awesome and amazing Tm_T has archived them. Ref [2] is here, and Ref [6] is here. Menkooroo 06:56, June 8, 2011 (UTC)
      • Splendid! Uh, should the links descriptions be left as they are? I mean, shoud it still be "Star Wars Forums", or should it be changed to something like "Star Wars Forums archive"? Kreivi Wolter 15:24, June 9, 2011 (UTC)
        • I actually think the forum.starwars.com links should be in some template that has an archive link included, but what you have now suffices I think. –Tm_T (Talk) 12:04, June 11, 2011 (UTC)
          • Allright then. And many thanks for archiving those links! : ) Kreivi Wolter 16:07, June 11, 2011 (UTC)
  • No need to vote to remove this nomination; feel free to remove it. I have too little time to spend it here right now. Sorry! Kreivi Wolter 10:33, August 3, 2011 (UTC)
    • If it's only one Inqvote away from passing, I'd recommend simply deferring to someone else to handle the nom for you so that it can pass, since it won't take that much more time. CC7567 (talk) 10:35, August 3, 2011 (UTC)
      • I'll volunteer to take this in for a landing, if Kreivi doesn't mind. Seems a shame to give up so close to passing. (Should Kreivi agree, I'll strike my support vote above as a conflict of interest.) ~SavageBOB sig 14:16, August 3, 2011 (UTC)
Vote to remove nomination (Inq only)
  1. Inqvote Objection unadressed since 7/13. Today is 8/2.—Tommy 9281 Tuesday, August 2, 2011, 22:01 UTC
    • Bob took care of it.—Tommy 9281 Wednesday, August 3, 2011, 14:37 UTC
  2. Inqvote Toprawa and Ralltiir 22:06, August 2, 2011 (UTC)