Wookieepedia:Featured article nominations/Lumpawaroo/Legends

< 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.

Lumpawaroo

  • Nominated by: Menkooroo 09:31, March 22, 2011 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: Wookieepedia needs more eponymous featured articles.

(4 Inqs/2 Users/6 Total)

Support

  1. Give yourself a Wookiee-ookie, Menk! ~SavageBOB sig 04:57, April 11, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Inqvote --Eyrezer 13:34, May 14, 2011 (UTC)
  3. This must have taken a while menk I took me like 20 minutes+ to read I second what Bob says Give yourself a Wookiee-ookie fantastic job GTQ(Problems?) 01:49, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
  4. Inqvote -- Darth Culator (Talk) 18:28, July 5, 2011 (UTC)
  5. Inqvote Cavalier OneFarStar(Squadron channel) 08:41, August 3, 2011 (UTC)
  6. Inqvote Great work. :) CC7567 (talk) 05:47, August 5, 2011 (UTC)

Object

Prepare to be wasaka'ed, er, savaged…
  • I'll take this section-by-section due to the length. Starting with the lead, perhaps italicize Wookiee-language terms like rrakktorr and hrrtayyk? They look strange(r) to me unmarked.
    • I'm not really too keen on doing it --- they're linked and given explanations, which I think is enough; as long as they're consistently unitalicized, shouldn't it be OK? I don't mean to be beliigerent; I have legitimate reasons for not wanting to do it! :D Words like "Kashyyyk" and "Lumpawarrump" are also proper nouns that are Wookiee-language terms; Wookieepedia shouldn't be Humanocentric; the link-and-context is sufficient; there's no policy on it; blah blah blah. :P
      • The difference is that those are proper nouns, which don't get italicized in any style guide I know of, while foreign terms do. And it wouldn't be humano-centric, it'd be Basic(o?)centric. I wish you'd reconsider, since it looks really jarring to me (and I'd assume many other readers), but there is no policy, so, *shrug*. ~ SavageBob 14:47, March 23, 2011 (UTC)
  • "Mischievous youth": Is a "nursery ring" something specific to Wookiee culture? If so, article is called for!
    • Yes! It is. I have the specific Rwookrrorro one linked later on, but I forgot that there was more than one. Good catch; I've now created and linked an article for the more general "nursery ring."
  • There's an article in one of the Gamer magazines on Wookiee names. Does this explain the Basic meaning of "Lumpawarrump"? I can help you dig it up if you need me to.
    • Just checked. Lumpy was left out, while the rest of his family was included. :( ~ SavageBob 05:24, March 23, 2011 (UTC)
      • He didn't get any love in the Wookiee name section in Galactic Campaign Guide either. :'(
  • Article on soufflé? More later. ~ SavageBob 05:17, March 23, 2011 (UTC)
  • OK, more! "A Life Day to Remember:" Perhaps link to "The Story of the Faithful Wookiee" when you talk about the cartoon? I'm not sure if that's the in-universe name, but the cartoon itself is in-universe.
  • Dromboid's name is not actually spoken in the special, so you'll have to add a source for that (just crib it from the Amorphiian article).
    • Danke! I tacked two sources on the end rather than a single source that contains an explanatory note, but let me know if you think the latter option would be better.
  • Overall, I think this section is a bit play-by-play. I'd normally argue that a bunch of the mundane stuff (especially the first paragraph) be trimmed, but, then again, the first half of THS is Wookiees doing mundane stuff... Maybe tighten things up a bit more so you describe Lumpy's role in the special but avoid the scene-by-scene recap? Otherwise, very nice. More later. ~ SavageBob 15:45, March 28, 2011 (UTC)
    • Yeah, looking over it, I did kinda go a bit heavy on the details. I've tightened it up a bit, mostly in regard to little actions of Lumpy's that aren't really noteworthy. Let me know if there's anything else specifically that you think could go. Also, I want you to know how much I appreciate the copy-edit! I'm a little ashamed at the prevalence of present active participles and preposition-ending sentences. :S Definitely something I'll work on in the future. Menkooroo 11:16, March 29, 2011 (UTC)
      • No worries! :) We all tend to be a bit wordy at times (yours truly included), so it always helps to have another pair of eyes go over your stuff. FWIW, I don't agree with the distaste for participles that has taken hold around here lately, but c'est la vie. As for the PBP, it's still a few notches more detailed than I would have done it, but this is an art, not a science, so I'm fine with it as is. We'll see what others think as you get more reviews. ~ SavageBob 15:30, March 29, 2011 (UTC)
  • "The Solos allowed Chewbacca to return to Kashyyyk to guide his son through the process and lent him the Millennium Falcon" Is this what the OS says? It makes it sound like Chewie is a slave of some sort. Just askin', but it seems out of character for the Solos. ~ SavageBob 15:30, March 29, 2011 (UTC)
    • That's pretty much the gist of it, yeah. The life debt is super important, and Han's kinda bored as he's been doing nothing but raising the kids for two years and wants to spend time with Chewie tinkering with the Falcon. He only reluctantly consents to Chewie going after Leia pokes him in the ribs and says "Try again." Chewie's really hardcore about the life debt (as Tyrant's Test illustrates), and he only leaves Han for a while after asking the Solos' permission. Also! I'll point you to a slight tweak I made, as Tyrant's Test doesn't state that the greeting takes place at the house. Might be at a landing pad or somethin'. Menkooroo 05:21, March 31, 2011 (UTC)
      • Ah, OK. Would it be OK to say something like, "Despite the Life Debt Chewbacca [felt he] owed them, which necessitated round-the-clock protection, the Solos allowed the Wookiee to return to Kashyyyk to ..."? I'm just having problems with the lack of agency Chewie is displaying here. ~ SavageBob 05:31, March 31, 2011 (UTC)
  • "Loss of a Hero": Who assigned Lumpy and Lowie to take over the Life Debt? Chewie's extended family? The passive voice makes it hard to tell. ~SavageBOB sig 03:28, April 7, 2011 (UTC)
    • The novel doesn't explicitly say. All of the Wookiees are committed to the idea, but there's no indication of who came up with it. It seems like a given in Wookiee culture that somebody would have to do it, but the novel just surprises you with "Lumpy and Lowie will be taking over the life debt" and all of the Wookiees nodding in agreement.
  • "Loss of a Hero": Are we sure Lowie and Lumpy gave up their Life Debt to Solo due to their absence in The Joiner King? I mean, does the novel explicitly mention them being gone, or could they just be on, say, vacation or something? ~SavageBOB sig 03:28, April 7, 2011 (UTC)
    • The novel makes no mention of Lumpy, but Lowie plays a role in it as an active member of the Jedi Order who has nothing to do with Han. It doesn't mention the life debt at all, but Lowie's role in it makes it pretty clear that the Wookiees aren't with Han anymore. Nine years later, in-universe, they're still not with Han --- it's definitely not a vacation. Menkooroo 04:20, April 7, 2011 (UTC)
      • OK, but how well-covered are the intervening 9 years? You're more familiar with the novels than I am; I'm guessing it's pretty clear the arrangement is somehow changed during that span in that there is a good amount of stuff going on without Lumpy's involvement? ~SavageBOB sig 04:25, April 7, 2011 (UTC)
        • Yeah, there's a crazy amount of stuff. The entire Dark Nest Trilogy, seven of the nine books of Star Wars: Legacy of the Force, and the first six books of Fate of the Jedi so far have all involved Han and Leia heavily. As you'll see in the next section, Waroo is even back living on Kashyyyk midway through Legacy of the Force, officially serving Rwookrrorro but briefly volunteering his aid to the Solos. And that's the only time he shows up or is mentioned. Menkooroo 04:37, April 7, 2011 (UTC)
  • I'm not sure the last line of P&T really has anything to do with P&T. ~SavageBOB sig 16:37, April 10, 2011 (UTC)
    • Yeah, you're right. I was trying to relate it to some of the earlier points, but it did seem kinda tacked-on and random. Removed.
  • BTS: Is it right to assert that the EU was "relaunched?" West End Games was active during the tail end of the Marvel run and during the early years of the new novels, so in a way, the EU has never stopped and restarted. ~SavageBOB sig 21:12, April 10, 2011 (UTC)
    • Ah, good point. I checked Novel Approach for some inspiration and changed the wording to "experienced a renaissance."
    • Also, thank you for the extensive copy-edit and review! Really, really appreciated. The only tweak I made to it was nyah --- I thought that it read kinda weird with all of the Solos' full names being repeatedly used. I figured that since the article early on establishes Han as "Solo" and later introduces Leia and Jacen as "Organa Solo" and "Jacen," it could stick with those descriptors and avoid being confusing. I've always done that with Roan and Marasiah Fel and I've seen others do it with "Skywalker" and "Jade Skywalker," etc --- whaddya think? Menkooroo 04:41, April 11, 2011 (UTC)
      • You're welcome! I'm glad to see Lumpy get some attention. As for the names, I was pretty sure we had a policy somewhere that said we're supposed to refer to folks by last names, since first names makes us sound all chummy and unprofessional. But when I checked, I found no consistency. From an academic standpoint, using first names alone is a huge no-no (forcing the writer to use full names when two folks share a surname), but since there's no policy here, I'll recommend you do the same, but not oppose over it. :P. ~SavageBOB sig 04:57, April 11, 2011 (UTC)
Eyrezer
  • No mention in the second edition of A Guide to the Star Wars Universe?
    • I have it at home in Canada, and I combed through it when I was home for a couple of weeks in January. I couldn't find anything about any member of Chewie's family anywhere --- they don't have their own entries, and nothing under Chewbacca, Wookiee, Kashyyyk, or anything else relevant. It was kind of puzzling. Unless I missed something, it's possible that in 1994, they weren't quite sure yet whether the Holiday Special was part of the new post-Heir to the Empire canon.
  • Has anyone official ever commented on Lumpy only serving 6 years life debt? --Eyrezer 09:46, May 14, 2011 (UTC)
    • Frustratingly enough, no. Neither in-universe nor out-. I searched through countless Troy Denning interviews, too. It seems like it was just one of the many things about the post-The Unifying Force galaxy that was ignored. Menkooroo 12:05, May 14, 2011 (UTC)
The Clone
  • This is very, very minor, but what is the correct capitalization for "Holographic tumblers"? It's capitalized that way in the text, but an image caption uses it as "holographic tumbling," decapitalized. Please select the best one for consistency, unless it was intentional.
    • I'm not sure if there's any evidence for it being a canonical name beyond speculation based on here, so I've now decapitalized it and kept it vague, referring to them as "some holographic tumblers" rather than THE "Holographic tumblers."
  • When you say "Skywalkers," whom besides Luke are you referring to? Since is the first time you introduce another Skywalker, I'd recommend identifying him/her explicitly to avoid confusion.
    • Done. Meet Mara.
  • "Organa Solo retrieved Tarfang's blaster with the Force": has she been trained as a Jedi by this time? If so, I'd recommend getting that in somewhere, since it hasn't been mentioned before.
    • Added.
  • Per FAN Rule 8, there can't be any redlinks in templates, so please take care of The Toys That Never Were redlink. CC7567 (talk) 00:11, August 5, 2011 (UTC)
    • Got it. Here are my changes; I made a slight tweak to your copy-edit since Anakin Solo, not Han, was piloting the Falcon when Chewie died. Thanks for the copy-edit and review. Menkooroo 02:25, August 5, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Approved as a Featured article by Inquisitorius 05:47, August 5, 2011 (UTC)

  • As you've been working on this, Menk, I've been wondering: Should the infobox show the adult Lumpy instead of the child Lumpy? I mean, we don't show 8-year-old Anakin in his infobox, and the Ahsoka infobox was recently changed to show the more "mature" version of her. The only reason I can think of to not use the adult Lumpy image is that it's painted while the kid image is live-action. I could honestly go either way on this, but I'd lean toward the adult image myself. I was just curious what you (and others) thought. ~ SavageBob 15:27, March 22, 2011 (UTC)
    • It's definitely a good question. The only image of adult Waroo we have is from the Japanese cover of Hero's Trial, so I guess it would be the contender. Truthfully, though, I don't think it looks that different than Holiday Special-aged Lumpy --- maybe a few years older, but not really the lanky, powerful and tall Waroo that's described in Inferno and Fury. Using it would be, IMO, like using this image or this image for Han's infobox --- a few years older but not really noticeably so. The live-action image vs. illustrated image argument is a tricky one with no real defined parameters, but I've always seen live-action images used even if illustrated images of the character at an older age exists (such as in Wedge Antilles, Kyle Katarn, Luke Skywalker, etc). Granted, those characters were a bit older than Lumpy in their live-action appearances, but, again, I'm not really convinced that there's enough of a difference between this image and this image to warrant the change. Thoughts? Menkooroo 15:53, March 22, 2011 (UTC)
      • In contrast to some of the examples you cite above, the difference here is that we've got a child image vs. an adult image, rather than an adult image vs. an older adult image. In this case, I would lean toward the adult image, even though in this case the artist is clearly basing the depiction on the Holiday Special still you're using in the infobox. It's not a big deal, which is why I put it down here rather than as an objection, but it is something to consider, I guess. ~ SavageBob 21:24, March 22, 2011 (UTC)
        • You're right; the examples aren't perfect, as Lumpy is still a child in his live-action appearance. If we had an image of him as an adult where he actually looked like an adult rather than a slightly-older child, I'd probably campaign for it to be in the infobox, but I don't think we're quite there yet. Maybe in the upcoming The Essential Reader's Companion? Cal Omas can't hog all the glory. :P Menkooroo 04:11, March 23, 2011 (UTC)

The translated quotes should not use the default quote template, but rather {{Quotetrans}}, shouldn't they? I am more than happy to assist you if you encounter troubles. :) 1358 (Talk) 16:31, March 22, 2011 (UTC)

  • Is there any way to apply {{Quotetrans}} to two-speaker, multi-line quotes, such as in "His father's son"? Ditto to two-speaker quotes where only one is translated, such as in "Loss of a hero" --- any way to make it work? Menkooroo 04:11, March 23, 2011 (UTC)
  • Personally, I prefer live action images over same-quality animated images, and animated over drawn/painted. As long as both contenders are of relative quality, I would prefer the live action image. MasterFredCommerce Guild(Whatever) 16:41, March 22, 2011 (UTC)

Are the names "Lumpawarump" or "Lumpawaroo" ever mentioned (by full name, in English/Basic) in an audio source? If so, would you be opposed to adding a pronunciation guide after those names appear in the article? I thought there was precedent for this, however I can't seem to find any examples, now. While we're on the subject of audio, do you think Audiobook narrators, who voice all the characters in a book, should count as "portrayals" in the Bts? SinisterSamurai 20:53, May 18, 2011 (UTC)

  • No audio source save for audiobooks. Unless we can pinpoint which of Itchy and Malla's growls in the Holiday Special translate to "Lumpy." :P Are audiobook pronunciations definitely canon? I feel like the readers probably make guesses at half of the crazy words that are on the page in front of them. Not sure. To answer your last question, no, I don't think that audiobook readers should count as portrayals, as they're just kinda default portrayers and use the same voice for many of the characters. A full-cast audio drama such as Nightlily: The Lovers' Tale (audio), definitely, but audiobooks, nah. Menkooroo 04:15, May 19, 2011 (UTC)
    • I wasn't sure if Han or someone human from the Holiday Special called to the fuzzy little Lump. I was mostly referring to the audiobooks, unless some source actually provides a pronunciation guide. As far as it Audiobook pronunciations being canon, I figured that they were until something makes them non-canon. I used some giant torrent full of abridged audio books to try and get one on Kerrithrarr, but he was cut from all the audio books I could find (Bts!). If you're interested, the hash is 6cb0de9bd845d3e187ab4c5c1ec8700431041512. You (Or JMAS, or whoever) might even be able to turn a few of the quotes in your article into audio quotes. SinisterSamurai 05:21, May 19, 2011 (UTC)
    • Tyrant's Test abridged audiobook pronounces it "Loompa-warump". It seems to have "abridged" his renaming entirely. SinisterSamurai 22:15, June 26, 2011 (UTC)
      • Loompa? Like Oompa Loompa? In that case, I think we're better off not relying on audiobook pronunciations. I didn't see anyone named "Loompy" in the Holiday Special. :P Menkooroo 03:19, June 27, 2011 (UTC)