- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a featured article nomination that was successful. Please do not modify it.
Kobok
- Nominated by: ~Savage
14:56, June 16, 2011 (UTC) - Nomination comments: One of the cooler re-imagined Saturday-morning-cartoon species. Special thanks to Demos Traxen for expanding the article. ~Savage 14:58, June 16, 2011 (UTC)
(4 Inqs/2 Users/6 Total)
Support
- I. - Demos Traxen 01:06, June 21, 2011 (UTC)
Teff 02:02, June 24, 2011 (UTC)(Vote struck, reason: Per policy: Wookieepedia:Sock puppetry -- Menkooroo 12:09, July 13, 2011 (UTC))
--Eyrezer 11:20, June 28, 2011 (UTC)
Menkooroo 15:54, July 13, 2011 (UTC)- QuiGonJinn (Talk) 17:31, August 13, 2011 (UTC)
- Green Tentacle (Talk) 19:15, August 17, 2011 (UTC)
- 1358 (Talk) 09:29, August 28, 2011 (UTC)
Object
Droids! :D
Any chance of another image of Gaff in "Koboks in the galaxy" ? This one exists on the Wook, and GT's been able to provide me with high-quality Droids screenshots before.- "although it was not known if he actually participated in the Mavvan Conflict." Does GATORW actually say this? Even if so, it might be worth rewording for omniscient purposes, as there's gotta be somebody who knows it.
- Has he only been in one Droids adaptation book? If so, the sentence in the bts stating "adaptations, such as" is incorrect.
CSWECite?- That's all. Good work! I loves me my Droids. Menkooroo 12:35, July 13, 2011 (UTC)
- Cool beans; all should be taken care of unless noted here. The "it was not known" thing is actually in the OS. I've been wracking my brain trying to make it omniscient, and I have to confess I've hit a wall. I thought about changing it to "Gaff hid any actual involvement" or something, but that attributes actions to Gaff we don't know he took. And the POV of GATORW is not Rebel, Imperial, or anything else; it's an omniscient game book, so I can't say, "The Alliance did not know..." or "The Empire did not know..." I agree that an omniscient encyclopedia would know, but here we are explicitly told that his involvement in the conflict was an unknown thing. Should I axe it? Or do you have any ideas? Finally, I'm awaiting confirmation on what the entry is called in CSWE so I can use the cite template (books are in boxes chez moi). Thanks for the review, and I'll update when these two things are taken care of! ~Savage 14:02, July 13, 2011 (UTC)
- It sounds like you're legitimately stymied. I'll let it go. :D As for CSWE (That's right, I have it now. Gwahahaha), there's no entry on Kobok, but Volume I, p. 307 has Gaff which begins with "A Kobok, he..." Menkooroo 14:14, July 13, 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the assist. There is an entry for "Kobok," it's just really short IIRC. At any rate, QGJ confirmed for me that it's "Kobok" and not "Koboth." Should be all updated and ready to rumble. ~Savage 14:19, July 13, 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the assist. There is an entry for "Kobok," it's just really short IIRC. At any rate, QGJ confirmed for me that it's "Kobok" and not "Koboth." Should be all updated and ready to rumble. ~Savage
- It sounds like you're legitimately stymied. I'll let it go. :D As for CSWE (That's right, I have it now. Gwahahaha), there's no entry on Kobok, but Volume I, p. 307 has Gaff which begins with "A Kobok, he..." Menkooroo 14:14, July 13, 2011 (UTC)
- Cool beans; all should be taken care of unless noted here. The "it was not known" thing is actually in the OS. I've been wracking my brain trying to make it omniscient, and I have to confess I've hit a wall. I thought about changing it to "Gaff hid any actual involvement" or something, but that attributes actions to Gaff we don't know he took. And the POV of GATORW is not Rebel, Imperial, or anything else; it's an omniscient game book, so I can't say, "The Alliance did not know..." or "The Empire did not know..." I agree that an omniscient encyclopedia would know, but here we are explicitly told that his involvement in the conflict was an unknown thing. Should I axe it? Or do you have any ideas? Finally, I'm awaiting confirmation on what the entry is called in CSWE so I can use the cite template (books are in boxes chez moi). Thanks for the review, and I'll update when these two things are taken care of! ~Savage
From the sunbed of Ecks Dee
"Strong and nimble despite a skeleton-like frame, a Kobok was a formidable opponent in combat due to natural spikes that projected from each limb and delivered a potent venom that was able to knock out Human-sized targets for several hours." I think this could be modified a little bit. It's the "that projected [...] that was able" that is the problem. Maybe split the sentence in two parts for a Smooth Read™?1358 (Talk) 19:22, August 25, 2011 (UTC)
Comments
Approved as a Featured article by Inquisitorius 09:29, August 28, 2011 (UTC)