- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a featured article nomination that was successful. Please do not modify it.
Contents
Kolot
- Nominated by: 501st dogma(talk) 13:12, December 15, 2013 (UTC)
- Nomination comments: A piloting Ewok? Who can resist nomming that?
(5 Inqs/1 User/6 Total)
Support
Yub, yub, Commander. Green Tentacle (Talk) 10:40, December 21, 2013 (UTC)
Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 05:01, March 28, 2014 (UTC)
IFYLOFD (Enter the Floydome) 00:55, April 3, 2014 (UTC)
CC7567 (talk) 19:31, May 1, 2014 (UTC)- Do Kettch next. Jorrel
Fraajic 19:48, May 1, 2014 (UTC)
I'd say that Betrayal and Mercy Kill are mentions, but okay. Cade Calrayn
Object
Toprawa
The article makes it sound like Kolot is the direct byproduct of Zsinj's imagination, which is not supported by Solo Command, as far as I can see. Perhaps it's inferred at best. Kolot merely states that Zsinj orders mechanics to create prosthetics after the doctors put him through flight simulators. I would like to see this reworded to remove Zsinj's "inspiration" and for it to say literally and only what the novel states: "Inspired by this tale, Zsinj desired to have an Ewok made into a pilot and ordered mechanics to create prosthetic limb extensions so Kolot could reach the controls of any starship he chose to pilot. Additionally, the doctors in the program put Kolot through flight simulators to see if the Ewok could learn how to fly." I will continue my review once this is handled.Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 23:45, December 26, 2013 (UTC)- I'm going to leave this be until I know whether Zsinj was inspired by Kettch or not.
Now that I think about it, the same apparently holds true for the article's claim that Kolot was inspired by Zsinj learning of Kettch. Where does Solo Command state this? It seems to me that this is only indirectly inferred, which I don't think is enough for us to make the claim.Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 23:49, December 26, 2013 (UTC)- It is heavily inferred that Kolot exists because Zsinj learned of Kettch - he asks his general after learning of the original Ewok Pilot if any of his altered Ewoks had escaped. Additionally, the Warlord himself ordered that Kolot be given prosthetics so he could reach the controls, which was the same way that Kettch supposedly flew. Petothel's quote for the intro also supports the fact, as he was based off the lie that was Kettch. I believe that is enough to support the argument, but if you think otherwise, I can change it. 501st dogma(talk) 22:06, January 1, 2014 (UTC)
- Removed what you wanted removed. 501st dogma(talk) 21:18, March 14, 2014 (UTC)
I don't think the novel states exactly that Kolot's prosthetics were for "any starship he chose to pilot." The novel just says he was given prosthetics, and we know he was able to pilot a shuttle. I wouldn't expound on that understanding anymore than this. I would like to see this reworded just to say the prosthetics allowed him to reach the piloting controls of a starship.- There you go.
We have something of an issue with the dating for these events. Firstly, this article claims the events of Iron Fist and Solo Command take place in 8 ABY, but The Essential Reader's Companion states that both novels take place in 7 ABY. The thing is, I think we know that some of ERC's info is either wrong or overly generalized, because we know some of the events from Solo Command take place in 8 ABY, according to The Essential Atlas. This is what you need to do: a) Unless you can find a passage in each novel that supports the 8 ABY date, the novels themselves cannot be used as sources for the dates. You will probably need to use the Atlas, which provides exact GrS dates for many of the battles in these stories, to pin these events down, and then explain the dating in reference notes. And b) You should really do some digging to see whether the events being referenced in this article do, in fact, take place in 8 ABY or whether they take place in 7 ABY. Again, the Atlas is probably your best resource here, based on the dating of battles.- Its curious that our articles on the Third Battle of Kuat and the Battle of Selaggis both cite their 8 ABY date to the Reader's companion, but when I checked it, I got 7 ABY from it like you did. I've managed to find the GrS dates for Selaggis (43:2:28), and Kuat (43:1:26). I've added those to the references. Question: If I link to something in one note, should I link to it again in the second one? For exampled should the Atlas be linked to twice in the notes section? Thanks for the review. I'll get to the last 3 objections in a week's time when I get back from a trip. 501st dogma(talk) 12:58, March 15, 2014 (UTC)
- Firstly, you should rewrite your first reference note to avoid referring to the Third Battle of Kuat as its formal title. That its a conjectural title, so it should be treated as such. Secondly, you should rewrite your second reference note to explain exactly how it relates to the events of this article, as you did in the first ref note. Thirdly, to answer your question, I find it's best to link to all relevant subjects in all reference notes, because readers don't go through the Notes and references section reading each reference note in order. They read reference notes via the [1] indicators as they read through the article, so having linking available to them at all possible instances makes their navigation easier. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 20:26, March 15, 2014 (UTC)
- That should do it.
- Firstly, you should rewrite your first reference note to avoid referring to the Third Battle of Kuat as its formal title. That its a conjectural title, so it should be treated as such. Secondly, you should rewrite your second reference note to explain exactly how it relates to the events of this article, as you did in the first ref note. Thirdly, to answer your question, I find it's best to link to all relevant subjects in all reference notes, because readers don't go through the Notes and references section reading each reference note in order. They read reference notes via the [1] indicators as they read through the article, so having linking available to them at all possible instances makes their navigation easier. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 20:26, March 15, 2014 (UTC)
- Its curious that our articles on the Third Battle of Kuat and the Battle of Selaggis both cite their 8 ABY date to the Reader's companion, but when I checked it, I got 7 ABY from it like you did. I've managed to find the GrS dates for Selaggis (43:2:28), and Kuat (43:1:26). I've added those to the references. Question: If I link to something in one note, should I link to it again in the second one? For exampled should the Atlas be linked to twice in the notes section? Thanks for the review. I'll get to the last 3 objections in a week's time when I get back from a trip. 501st dogma(talk) 12:58, March 15, 2014 (UTC)
I think you can subsection the Biography, which would allow you to use more quotes. There's at least one quote at the end of the story in which Petothel mentions Kolot as part of her business that you could use.I don't think this sentence is working in the way you want it to. Ewoks in ROTJ had nods to indicate agreement or disagreement, so it's not like his advanced intelligence necessarily gave him the ability to do this. I would suggest supporting his "many Human-like personality traits" with some evidence other than the nod or otherwise just removing that portion of this sentence: "Modified to have an increased intelligence that dwarfed those of other Ewoks, Kolot had many Human-like personality traits, such as his responsive nod."Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 01:14, March 15, 2014 (UTC)- There you go.
The BTS states that "The novels Betrayal and X-Wing: Mercy Kill, released in 2006 and 2013, respectively, suggest that Kolot was still flying as a co-pilot for Petothel as late as 44 ABY." But this isn't exactly true. According to ERC, Betrayal takes place in 40 ABY, so it can't therefore suggest that Kolot is still piloting in 44 ABY. Additionally, the date of 44 ABY is not self-sourcing. That comes from ERC, so it needs to be sourced accordingly.Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 01:25, March 15, 2014 (UTC)
Attack of the Clone
I'm seeing at least two instances where the article isn't correctly following WP:DASH. Please find them and fix."free it so she could get it off the Iron Fist": are all the test subjects simply "it"s? The rest of the article seems to refer them as living beings. Please reword if that's the case.- Does that work better?
Since his limb extensions are described as prosthetic, they should be listed under the infobox's "cyber" field.CC7567 (talk) 21:27, April 4, 2014 (UTC)
Comments
Approved as a Featured article by Inquisitorius 17:56, May 3, 2014 (UTC)