- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a featured article nomination that was successful. Please do not modify it.
Nek Bwua'tu
- Nominated by: Cavalier One
(Squadron channel) 15:31, January 24, 2011 (UTC) - Nomination comments: Its been a while. I may be rusty.
(4 Inqs/3 Users/7 Total)
Support
- A master tactician who might alreadt be dead, evenm though the FOTJ authors are withholding that from us right now…--ID-21 Dolphin
(Talk) 01:46, March 8, 2011 (UTC) 
Although I am a bit disappointed that this is not a DarkStryder nom. :p Grand Moff Tranner 
(Comlink) 17:51, April 21, 2011 (UTC)- 1358 (Talk) 19:44, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
- Good show.—Tommy 9281 Wednesday, June 8, 2011, 19:24 UTC
- For Thrawn Simulator beater. –Tm_T (Talk) 19:35, June 17, 2011 (UTC)
- CC7567 (talk) 01:36, July 24, 2011 (UTC)
- Nice JangFett (Talk) 00:26, August 1, 2011 (UTC)
Object
The Dolphin Attacks
- Wow…I planned to do a little bit of work on this article, but you've done a lot more than I ever would have dreamed. That being said, I have a few minor comments:
In the infobox, only Ruweln should be mentioned as his homeworld, without saying that it's in the Bothan sector of the Mid Rim. You already mention that at the beginning of the Biography section, so it's unnecessary in the infobox. While details are good, I haven't seen any other character articles that do it this way, so it would be simpler just to have the planet's name.- Done.
I don't know exactly where this would fit, but mention somewhere that he was related to Yantahar Bwua'tu, a Jedi Knight, as well as Eramuth Bwua'tu. Perhaps in the section about the siege, since Kenth thinks that having a relative in the Jedi Order makes Nek more pressed to prevent war between the Order and the Alliance. Or, perhaps, you could mention his relationship to Eramuth and Yantahar in the first part of the biography, since that talks about his background and his family ("married three times"). --ID-21 Dolphin(Talk) 01:06, January 26, 2011 (UTC)- Added.
- The Yantahar thing is good, but there's actually a place where the mention to Eramuth would fit better than now: saying that during Tahiri's trial, Eramuth decides to leave under the pretext that his nephew is in the hospital, though the judge finds it strange considering that Nek has already been in a coma for weeks.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 19:26, January 26, 2011 (UTC)
- However, this is not Eramuth's article. Adding the mention there, as you suggest, would entail adding more context towards him and the Tahiri trial than would be advisable. If you mention the judge's confusion, then you have to add Eramuth's real reasons, which stem from the addition of a second chair to the trial, which would then mean possibly including details of the trial itself which are simply not relevant to this article. - Cavalier One(Squadron channel) 22:38, January 30, 2011 (UTC)
- I see the problem. Then I guess you can just eliminate the first mention to him outright. Plus, it's possible that more details regarding the two will be revealed in future novels, especially since Tahiri's trial will be prominent in the next novel, so then it might make more sense to connect the two in this article.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 21:29, February 7, 2011 (UTC)
- Now its in there, I see no reason to remove it. As you say, it may become relative later on, so having a lead in is prudent. - Cavalier One(Squadron channel) 21:32, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
- Eh, OK. Why not?
- Now its in there, I see no reason to remove it. As you say, it may become relative later on, so having a lead in is prudent. - Cavalier One
- I see the problem. Then I guess you can just eliminate the first mention to him outright. Plus, it's possible that more details regarding the two will be revealed in future novels, especially since Tahiri's trial will be prominent in the next novel, so then it might make more sense to connect the two in this article.--ID-21 Dolphin
- However, this is not Eramuth's article. Adding the mention there, as you suggest, would entail adding more context towards him and the Tahiri trial than would be advisable. If you mention the judge's confusion, then you have to add Eramuth's real reasons, which stem from the addition of a second chair to the trial, which would then mean possibly including details of the trial itself which are simply not relevant to this article. - Cavalier One
- The Yantahar thing is good, but there's actually a place where the mention to Eramuth would fit better than now: saying that during Tahiri's trial, Eramuth decides to leave under the pretext that his nephew is in the hospital, though the judge finds it strange considering that Nek has already been in a coma for weeks.--ID-21 Dolphin
- Added.
In the infobox, his affiliation should also state the Galactic Alliance Defense Fleet, in addition to the Defense Force.- Added.
In the "later career" section, an image of Kenth Hamner, such as this one, would fit well.- Added.
The opening quote is a great choice, but the descriptive line is too long. You could probably just shorten it to the names of the speakers and hearers, which is generally the convention for quotes, especially lead quotes.- Shortened somewhat.
You link to the galaxy in two consecutive sections: "Early years" and "Blockading the Utegetu Nebula". It should be linked only the first time. Also, in the first paragraph, the word "married" should be linked to "marriage".This quote would work somewhere: "We all do what we must", which Bwua'tu says to Daala in Allies.- No, it wouldn't. All the other quotes have been chosen specifically to complement the sections. That quote needs more context to be applicable, while the others don't. It may fit in a later section that may be added in the future, but not at the moment. I'm not changing the current quotes to shoehorn one it that doesn't fit.
- I see your point.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 20:02, January 25, 2011 (UTC)
- I see your point.--ID-21 Dolphin
- No, it wouldn't. All the other quotes have been chosen specifically to complement the sections. That quote needs more context to be applicable, while the others don't. It may fit in a later section that may be added in the future, but not at the moment. I'm not changing the current quotes to shoehorn one it that doesn't fit.
In the last section, when you mention Bwua'tu's brain response to Madhi Vaandt, there are a few small details that you could add, particularly mentioning how Daala first believed that Bwua'tu was stimulated by Vaandt's beauty, but that she then realized that there had to be something more.- Added a small mention.
- Much better—just one tiny thing, you say, "It was suggested that…", and it might be nicer and more specific to say "Daala believed that…". It sounds better than passive voice.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 20:02, January 25, 2011 (UTC)
- Except that Daala does not believe this. Dorvann and Bwua'tu's aide imply the notion through glancing at each other. Daala dismisses that immediately. - Cavalier One(Squadron channel) 09:48, January 26, 2011 (UTC)
- Except that Daala does not believe this. Dorvann and Bwua'tu's aide imply the notion through glancing at each other. Daala dismisses that immediately. - Cavalier One
- Much better—just one tiny thing, you say, "It was suggested that…", and it might be nicer and more specific to say "Daala believed that…". It sounds better than passive voice.--ID-21 Dolphin
- Added a small mention.
In the latter paragraph, I see a few links missing: reporter Madhi Vaandt…slave revolts on Blaudu Sextus.Now, just remember that with the releases of future FOTJ novels, you might need to do a little bit of updating on this, if he dies or something.- I would not have chosen to write and nominate this article unless I was prepared to keep it updated throughout the new releases. This is not my first time on the FA rodeo. - Cavalier One(Squadron channel) 10:45, January 25, 2011 (UTC)
- Agreed. Kota was particularly well written.--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 20:02, January 25, 2011 (UTC)
- Agreed. Kota was particularly well written.--ID-21 Dolphin
- I would not have chosen to write and nominate this article unless I was prepared to keep it updated throughout the new releases. This is not my first time on the FA rodeo. - Cavalier One
- Otherwise, that's about all I have to say, good job writing this!--ID-21 Dolphin (Talk) 01:25, January 25, 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not sure if you're aware of this, Dolphin, but the FAN page regulars have a certain informal clause we refer to as {{Sofixit}}. Meaning that if someone finds little nitpicking grammar, punctuation, or formatting errors, including linking bits, in a nomination, they're expected to fix those issues themselves, rather than leaving a bunch of petty objections. Many of these objections you have listed here fall under the {{Sofixit}} clause. Toprawa and Ralltiir 01:31, January 25, 2011 (UTC)
- Interesting. I have fixed some stuff myself in the past, but I was told not to. However, since this is all minor, I've fixed the stuff like grmmar and left the more substantial objections for the nominator to fix.
- That's the trick, knowing what is minor and should just be fixed by you and knowing what you should leave up to nominator discretion. That comes with experience. You should feel free to always fix grammatical and linking issues. If the nominator has any issues from there, then that can be discussed on a case-by-case basis. Toprawa and Ralltiir 02:53, January 25, 2011 (UTC)
- Interesting. I have fixed some stuff myself in the past, but I was told not to. However, since this is all minor, I've fixed the stuff like grmmar and left the more substantial objections for the nominator to fix.
- I'm not sure if you're aware of this, Dolphin, but the FAN page regulars have a certain informal clause we refer to as {{Sofixit}}. Meaning that if someone finds little nitpicking grammar, punctuation, or formatting errors, including linking bits, in a nomination, they're expected to fix those issues themselves, rather than leaving a bunch of petty objections. Many of these objections you have listed here fall under the {{Sofixit}} clause. Toprawa and Ralltiir 01:31, January 25, 2011 (UTC)
Another thing: the intro should mention why Bwua'tu was attacked now that it was revealed in Conviction.--ID-21 Dolphin(Talk) 19:19, June 15, 2011 (UTC)- I don't have the resources to follow up on this objection, but do you have anything on this, Cav? CC7567 (talk) 01:36, July 24, 2011 (UTC)
- Missed the initial objection, added now. - Cavalier One(Squadron channel) 22:30, July 24, 2011 (UTC)
- Objection(s) overridden by Inquisitorius 02:00, August 2, 2011 (UTC)
- Missed the initial objection, added now. - Cavalier One
- I don't have the resources to follow up on this objection, but do you have anything on this, Cav? CC7567 (talk) 01:36, July 24, 2011 (UTC)
Xd1358
The lead quote should probably be turned into {{Dialogue}} as it has more than two speakers. It is kinda confusing and I have no idea who speaks the fourth line. Full review coming hopefully soon.:P 1358 (Talk) 15:33, January 30, 2011 (UTC)- Done. - Cavalier One(Squadron channel) 22:38, January 30, 2011 (UTC)
- Done. - Cavalier One
This is really minor, and I'm objecting to it since I don't know the proper spelling either…"Jedi under siege": "had revealed that there was a large buildup" ; "Bwua'tu revealed that Daala knew nothing of the build up since he hadn't told her."- A little digging shows that "build-up" is used in the Oxford English dictionary, while "buildup" is apparently the American English form. However, these are from online sources. I've changed it to "buildup" to conform to using American English policy, but if anyone has any more insight, it would be appreciated.
- I've capitalized instances of "admiral" throughout the article, per the LG, which states that ranks should be capitalized when referring to an individual. Keep this in mind in the future. Otherwise, good work. 1358 (Talk) 18:06, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'll get the hang of that one day :P - Cavalier One(Squadron channel) 14:07, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'll get the hang of that one day :P - Cavalier One
Moffship
Excellent work. Just one objection - Please add the before/after years in the succession boxes.Grand Moff Tranner (Comlink) 15:31, April 10, 2011 (UTC)
- Done. - Cavalier One(Squadron channel) 12:07, April 19, 2011 (UTC)
- Done. - Cavalier One
Chicken-neks?
Hey there! Awesome choice for a FAN. In the first paragraph of the bio, I'm a little confused as to why the prose skips ahead to 36 ABY and then reflects on the previous years, rather than proceeding chronologically from the end of the war --- wouldn't it be better to mention his promotion and his marriages before getting to 36 ABY?- Possibly, but we don't know the exact timeline of events. We don't know when he got married, or when exactly he was promoted, or when he was assigned to the Fifth, so writing it like this establishes the date and simply says "this happened by the time".
Ditto his vow of krevi --- the intro states that he swore it on the day he became Admiral, but the bio only reflects on it later, years after it happened. It also states that he swore it upon joining the military, which seems to conflict with the intro's claim that he did it on the day he became Admiral.- Changed the conflicting statements. The reasoning for placing it there is that the vow of krevi becomes important at that point in the bio. By placing it early, I'd then have to repeat the mention of the krevi in that section anyway to remind the reader of it since it is a core part of my Bwua'tu remains with the GA.
Is there anything that can be cut out of the first paragraph of Blockading the Utegetu Nebula? I know that context on the Killik crisis is necessary, but this kinda seems like way too much, and Bwu'atu is only mentioned at the end of the paragraph. As one example, the stuff about Lomi and Welk could maybe be cut down to just mention that they were Dark Jedi who dominated the hive mind --- I don't know if it's necessary to mention that they crash-landed on Yoggoy. Don't get me wrong, It's very well-written, but I feel like brevity is really important here. Can you go through it and see if there are any sentences that could be trimmed or removed?- I don't think so, to be honest. Everything is needed to explain later situations, in my opinion. The Swarm War is one of those events where things need to be explained for the rest of it to make sense. We have to explain why the Utegetu Nebula was blockaded, so we need to explain the background of the war, so we need to explain the arrival of the Jedi/Dark Jedi, etc. Also, while I could cut out the Lomi and Welk stuff, I can't guarantee that another reviewer wouldn't see the need for it to be added back in as contextual background that they want to see in the article. Thoughts? - Cavalier One(Squadron channel) 12:07, April 19, 2011 (UTC)
- I don't think so, to be honest. Everything is needed to explain later situations, in my opinion. The Swarm War is one of those events where things need to be explained for the rest of it to make sense. We have to explain why the Utegetu Nebula was blockaded, so we need to explain the background of the war, so we need to explain the arrival of the Jedi/Dark Jedi, etc. Also, while I could cut out the Lomi and Welk stuff, I can't guarantee that another reviewer wouldn't see the need for it to be added back in as contextual background that they want to see in the article. Thoughts? - Cavalier One
- More from me later. Good stuff so far! Menkooroo 05:18, April 18, 2011 (UTC)
- Hey. I'm really sorry, but I don't think I have time to finish this review right now. I've taken on too many projects lately. Once I finish updating Legacy articles and get out of the Wookiee-poop I'm up to my Nek in, I'll definitely come back here and finish. Sorry again. Menkooroo 06:52, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
Minority Report
I understand the need for context, but in the first paragraph of "Blockading the Utegetu Nebula," is all of it really necessary? As it is, Nek is only mentioned in the very last sentence. You could trim some of the context-heaviness and even lead the para from Nek's POV without compromising anything at the end.- Some context removed, some info shifted to the second paragraph. The first paragraph still lacks Bwua'tu, but the entire set up for the war is necessary, and since it occurs a year before Bwua'tu's IU appearance, can't be incorporated into a paragraph leading from Bwua'tu's POV.
You'll need to introduce the busts chronologically, so that when you speak of them later (where you currently have them introduced), you aren't chronologically backtracking.- Reordered.
There's a plethora of emdashes. See if you can eliminate a good many.- Eliminated a fair few.
"The situation was not helped when Solo took his personal Star Destroyer, the Anakin Solo, to the Kashyyyk system along with the Fifth Fleet." Such wording is POV.- Changed to "worsened".
Really all of what you go on to say after the fourth sentence of "Head of the Galactic Alliance Navy" should be removed, as it only pertains to Bwua'tu with regard to his relation to other beings.See if you can considerably cut down the first para of "Jedi under siege," as it talks nothing about the Admiral and really only serves to set up the beginning of the next paragraph.- The paragraph is only five sentences long and serves to set up Bwua'tu's conversation with Hamner. He contacts him as a result of the raid, so the reason for the raid must be explained.
"Bwua'tu also had a more personal reason; one of his relatives, Yantahar Bwua'tu, was a Jedi Knight currently stationed at the Temple." Does the Admiral specifically name his relative as a reason for wanting to deal with Hamner?- A slight misremembering. Hamner wonders if its one of Bwua'tu's reasons, not Bwua'tu himself. Removed.
Reword "He intended to sound her out about the Jedi as part of his promise to Hamner..." to be a little less colloquial please.- Changed.
"Bwua'tu lapsed into a coma, and was taken to a medcenter." How'd he get to the medcenter? Last we'd heard, he was covered by a pseudo-Jedi with a melted face :P- We don't know. All we know is he was on the walkway, then he was in the medcenter so he must have gotten there somehow. It's just not detailed.
I hear you, it just reads funny as it currently is because of how it's worded. It leaves the question of who took him and how he got there. I'm sure he didn't make it on his own, so perhaps saying that he was discovered and taken to the medcenter?—Tommy 9281 Wednesday, June 1, 2011, 16:55 UTC- True, but saying he was discovered, while a logical supposition, would be OR/speculation. I've tweaked the wording a little, though. - Cavalier One(Squadron channel) 18:52, June 8, 2011 (UTC)
- True, but saying he was discovered, while a logical supposition, would be OR/speculation. I've tweaked the wording a little, though. - Cavalier One
- We don't know. All we know is he was on the walkway, then he was in the medcenter so he must have gotten there somehow. It's just not detailed.
Because you go on to mention it in the P&T, you don't have to talk about the admiral's reminder to stay humble earlier on.- Removed earlier mention, expanded mention in PT.
I also think there is enough information to warrant a "Skills and abilities" section.- Added SA section, moving elements from the PT.
Overall, this thing is very context-heavy, unnecessarily so in many places. I suggest removing some extra details, and keep only what is paramount.- Unfortunately, its unavoidable in most cases. Bwua'tu is not a main character, and especially in his appearances he is reacting to complex events that need to be set up within the article. The context is needed. - Cavalier One(Squadron channel) 14:33, June 1, 2011 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, its unavoidable in most cases. Bwua'tu is not a main character, and especially in his appearances he is reacting to complex events that need to be set up within the article. The context is needed. - Cavalier One
- Good work otherwise, very enjoyable read.—Tommy 9281 Friday, May 20, 2011, 23:58 UTC
- Just a note - I'll get on with these objections once I finish Conviction and update the article for Bwua'tu's (hopefully limited) appearance. - Cavalier One(Squadron channel) 11:51, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
- Just a note - I'll get on with these objections once I finish Conviction and update the article for Bwua'tu's (hopefully limited) appearance. - Cavalier One
Attack of the Clone
This is probably me being picky, but is there any chance that the first sentence of the intro can provide a more defining descriptor of him than just being this male Bothan from Ruweln? What was/were his main affiliation(s)? The first thing said about a character is normally the most important.- Jigged the first sentence to include military service, rank and later position.
Just to double-check, regarding the battles that you capitalize and refer to directly by name (i.e. Battle of Tenupe, Battle of Hapes, Battle of Kuat, Second Battle of Roche, Blockade of the Utegetu Nebula, Battle of Shedu Maad, Battle of Fondor): are they all named as such by an official source? The only reason I ask is because it's a common mistake to treat them as official names when in fact they're not. This shouldn't take too much source-digging to verify, but please clarify.The article gets a little inconsistent in some places between referring to Leia as either "Organa Solo" or just "Solo." Please try to smooth out this inconsistency.- Leia is always refered to as "Organa Solo", and I can't see any instances where she isn't. Granted, the use of Solo to refer to Han, Jaina and Jacen may be confusing, so I've added qualifiers where necessary to clear up any confusion.
- Remember to check WP:DASH next time regarding succession boxes. :P CC7567 (talk) 22:41, June 17, 2011 (UTC)
- I hate dashes :P - Cavalier One(Squadron channel) 11:55, July 12, 2011 (UTC)
- Somehow I missed these objections due to my restricted editing time, but I will be working on them immediately. Currently rechecking sources to determine proper capitalization for the second objection, and will get the rest at the same time. - Cavalier One(Squadron channel) 23:17, July 10, 2011 (UTC)
- I hate dashes :P - Cavalier One
Comments
Approved as a Featured article by Inquisitorius 02:00, August 2, 2011 (UTC)
Vote to strike ID-21 Dolphin's objection (Inq only)
- Unchecked for over a week, ID-21 is currently rather inactive, and objection is currently preventing the article from being approved. CC7567 (talk) 01:43, August 2, 2011 (UTC)
- Grand Moff Tranner (Comlink) 01:44, August 2, 2011 (UTC)
- grunny@wookieepedia:~$ 01:45, August 2, 2011 (UTC)
- -- Darth Culator (Talk) 01:51, August 2, 2011 (UTC)
- IFYLOFD (Floyd's crib) 01:53, August 2, 2011 (UTC)