Wookieepedia:Featured article nominations/Malinza Thanas

Tis all. Nice work, Menk. ~ SavageBob 16:51, January 10, 2011 (UTC)

• 감사합니다, 내 친구! Let me know what you think about my protests. :P Menkooroo 21:30, January 10, 2011 (UTC)
  • 問題ないよ。~ SavageBob 16:28, January 11, 2011 (UTC)

Cause Guilty Feet Ain't Got No Rhythm...

• "Skywalker felt very responsible for and protective of Thanas and pledged to keep her safe, visiting her frequently on Bakura and helping sponsor her education.^[1][2][3]" To what in particular do each of the references correspond? If each is for a different part of the preceding statement, then each part needs to be finished with the applicable reftag, not at the end of the statement.
  • It's kind of weird --- each of the three sources is applicable to about 80% of the statement. If I were to split it up, it would have to look something like "Skywalker felt very responsible for[6] and protective[4] of Thanas and pledged to keep her safe,[7] visiting her[6][7] frequently[4] on Bakura and helping sponsor her education.[4][6]" Which just looks ugly. :( All three sources say the same general thing, though, and if you combine them, they make that complete sentence --- is it OK to keep the reftags at the end? Menkooroo 18:55, January 21, 2011 (UTC)
    • In this instance, yes.—Tommy ⁹²⁸¹ 02:12, January 24, 2011 (UTC)
• This persists throughout the article. If what I suspect above is true about the rest of these instances, you'll need to comb the entire article and correct them.
  • "After he wed a woman named Mara Jade, he began bringing his new wife with him on visits.[2][6]" --- the entire statement can be sourced to both. Ditto "and became a musical prodigy, earning a place in the Bakuran National Symphony.[4][8]" The only other instances of it are in Behind the Scenes, which I've just done a bit of cleanup on. Sourcing should be better there now. The only remaining instances of double-sourcing are statements that can be entirely sourced to both forum posts, and when it comes to bts statements, it's always nice to have a backup source if you can. Menkooroo 18:55, January 21, 2011 (UTC)
    • If a statement can be sourced entirely in multiple instances, only ne of them is necessary.—Tommy ⁹²⁸¹ 02:12, January 24, 2011 (UTC)
      • Done. I left the double-sourcing in Behind the scenes for the purpose of having a backup source, and because both sources are actually kinda necessary to form the complete sentence that's been presented. I also left one in the infobox, as her date of birth is taken from a statement in Assault at Selonia stating that she's 4 1/2 in 18 ABY, and a statement in her CSWE entry that she's fifteen in 28 ABY. NEGTC asserts that she was born "approximately eight years after Endor (12 ABY)", so I think it's good to have multiple sources stating the correct birth date in the face of one contradicting source. I was thinking of making a bts note about NEGTC's statement, but "approximately" leaves enough wiggle room, I think. Menkooroo 01:42, January 25, 2011 (UTC)
• I'm really not comfortable with the prevalence of the present active participle, something I notice you use frequently. Our manual of style currently dictates that "All in-universe articles should be in past tense..." While the use of the present active participle is sometimes unavoidable, most times it is avoidable, and we should take measures to adhere to site policies unless otherwise impossible.
  • Thanks for fixing the one about the ire --- can you point out specific instances of others? I can't seem to find any more. Menkooroo 18:55, January 21, 2011 (UTC)
    • "ING"-words. I fixed most but I left a few for you to work out. Some of them are necessary, so don't kill yourself trying to change every "ING" you've got.—Tommy ⁹²⁸¹ 02:12, January 24, 2011 (UTC)
      • Ah, OK, I see. You're right, I do use that often. Thanks for correcting a bunch of them. I've gone through and killed a few more, but I've left some that seem to work fine either way (eg, "and began protesting" rather than "and protested"). I also changed the "blaming" and "hating" back to "blamed" and "hated", as per your earlier edit, albeit with some slight tweaks. Sorry again if it seemed like I was reverting your edits. Your edit was actually better than mine. :) Menkooroo 01:42, January 25, 2011 (UTC)
• And it is here that I will stop for now. Up to "Peaceful protests."—Tommy ⁹²⁸¹ 18:05, January 21, 2011 (UTC)
  • Hey Tommy, try avoid pasting references on these pages. They just screw up formatting and leave an ugly "citation error" text at the bottom of this page and the FAN itself. Cheers. :) 1358 ^(Talk) 18:08, January 21, 2011 (UTC)
  • Wait five minutes next time, you ol' edit-conflict-causer :P I was in the middle of fixing it but you got it. Thanks,—Tommy ⁹²⁸¹ 18:16, January 21, 2011 (UTC)
    • Haha sorry. :P 1358 ^(Talk) 18:18, January 21, 2011 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the continuing review! Definitely let me know how else I can improve it. Menkooroo 18:55, January 21, 2011 (UTC)
• Condense some of the context you give on the Sii-Ruuvi in the second para of "Peaceful protests."
  • Jettisoned the bit about their home in a nearby star cluster. The rest is necessary context, I think.
• Your brief description of Thanas' feelings in the third para of the same section should be relegated to the P&T.
  • Do you mean "Thanas found that she easily trusted Skywalker's niece"? I feel like it's necessary in the bio to mention why Thanas would suddenly spill her guts to someone affiliated with the New Republic/GA. A few words on her feelings here and there in the bio are OK if they provide necessary context, aren't they?
    • Conceded.—Tommy ⁹²⁸¹ 03:21, January 25, 2011 (UTC)
• "Thanas and Vyram were then fitted with binders, although Solo kept hers from locking via a use of the Force." Jaina used a mind trick on the binders?
  • Clarified.
• Lead the third para of the P&T with Malinza as the main subject.
  • Rejigged.
• That's it. Good read.—Tommy ⁹²⁸¹ 02:43, January 24, 2011 (UTC)
  • Thanks again for the review. And my apologies one more time for being so quick to edit the article after your copy-edit. I'd be lying if I said that I weren't stubborn, and I can definitely see how my actions could come off as protective/narrow-minded/generally bad-faith. I'm not too keen on linking to disambig pages, so I'm always quick to revert that, and, as stated above, I did come around to your edit regarding past tense. Sorry again, and cheers. Menkooroo 01:42, January 25, 2011 (UTC)
    • Don't worry about it man, no big deal. But don't be sorry, simply be justified. Your reasons are sound and leave little room for contest when explained appropriately. Besides, good job handling the objections. You've learned something here; take and apply it to your current and future endeavors, that those who follow you might begin to practice proper technique in turn.—Tommy ⁹²⁸¹ 03:21, January 25, 2011 (UTC)

Xd1358

• Some context on the Cosmic Balance in the bio would be appropriate.
• A question: Why does the infobox birthdate need two references?
• And that's all. 1358 ^(Talk) 15:18, February 7, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Approved as a Featured article by Inquisitorius 09:10, February 14, 2011 (UTC)

• Intro: I'm not keen on the euphemism "passed away" for "died" in an encyclopedia, but this isn't a formal objection.
  • I like to use "passed away" for anyone who died peacefully in their sleep. It seems a lot more fitting and respectful than the blunt "died." No euphemizing intended. Fair?
    • Then perhaps, "died in his sleep"? Again, there's not rule against euphemisms, so this is just me expressing a personal preference and not an objection. ~ SavageBob 16:28, January 11, 2011 (UTC)
      • Despite what I said earlier, "in his sleep" would be conjectural. :P Do you think it's OK to leave it as is? I think it's a polite way of indicating that he died of a disease. The support vote and the unstruck objection are giving me mixed signals here. :D Menkooroo 20:10, January 11, 2011 (UTC)
        • There, it's now a comment and not an objection. :P In all honesty, it's fine. I've just dealt with editors before who stamp out all euphemistic language, and "passed away" is one they cured me of/brainwashed me over. But there's no reason for my preferences to trump yours, so there ya go. ~ SavageBob 00:02, January 12, 2011 (UTC)
• A word of advice: refrain from reverting or partially reverting edits made during review of your status article without first at least making it known that you would like to do so and why. To do so in any other manner is generally frowned upon and often earns you a measure of the particular reviewer's ire.—Tommy ⁹²⁸¹ 03:11, January 24, 2011 (UTC)
  • My apologies. My intent was simply to remove links to disambig pages, fix a couple of spelling mistakes, and clean up a couple of sentences to make the best possible use of past tense rather than present active. Specifically regarding the latter, I intended to point out each instance when I addressed your objections later tonight. No reversions, just some tweaking --- sorry if I gave off the wrong impression. Menkooroo 03:36, January 24, 2011 (UTC)