- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a featured article nomination that was successful. Please do not modify it.
Operation: Knightfall
- Nominated by: NaruHina Talk
02:36, February 24, 2010 (UTC) - Nomination comments: Same reason as Gelesi
(3 Inqs/5 Users/8 Total)
Support
- Good article. Coruscantfan 03:29, May 11, 2010 (UTC)
- Thefourdotelipsis 12:48, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
- Menkooroo 16:23, June 18, 2010 (UTC)
Captain Scout(Vote struck, reason: Per policy: Fails productivity requirement. -- -- 1358 (Talk) 20:18, June 24, 2010 (UTC))
Officers Report. 15:14, June 24, 2010 (UTC)
- Nice. --Gmalek (The ability to edit does not make you intelligent) 05:58, July 3, 2010 (UTC)
Cavalier One
(Squadron channel) 08:58, July 5, 2010 (UTC)- CC7567 (talk) 02:27, July 23, 2010 (UTC)
- My long overdue review is complete. Good job! —Xwing328(Talk) 23:40, August 21, 2010 (UTC)
- —Jedi Kasra (comlink) 23:49, August 21, 2010 (UTC)
Object
Jedi Kasra
Needs info from Star Wars Purge: Seconds to Die.--Jedi Kasra (comlink) 13:59, March 4, 2010 (UTC)
Kreivi Wolter
Image for the prelude? Kreivi Wolter 10:04, April 3, 2010 (UTC)
Coruscantfan
The section at the end of the prelude where the transfer of the 501st is mentioned needs to be reworded. The timeline of events doesn't flow as well as it could. It seems confusing and could come across as in conflict with the movie at first glance. Good job keep it up! Coruscantfan 00:13, May 11, 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what you mean by a problem with the timeline flow. Vader was coronated, told to go to the Temple for Knightfall with the 501st being assigned to him, then Order 66 was given; in that order. Neither does it conflict with the movie because the clones taking part during the movie were the 501st, per SWBF2. NaruHina Talk 01:46, May 11, 2010 (UTC)
Sorry let me clarify. The way its written makes it sound like the 501st was transferred from Utapau after Order 66 came down in which case it would be in conflict since they were already there waiting to march on the Jedi Temple when the actual order was given. My suggestion is you rewrite that part of the section or just the sentence to say that "The troopers of the 501st Legion had been transferred to Coruscant..." I know it seems minor but it would make the section flow better. I have to say you have done a very good job with this article!! Keep it up.Coruscantfan 02:14, May 11, 2010 (UTC)- No, Vader was given his orders then Order 66 was given moments after. The 501st were sent concurrently with the former event or at the same time 66 was given. The 501st were therefore physically transferred after 66 was in full swing (i.e. the Jedi deaths montage), arriving that night, just before the assault. Skywalker then killed Jurokk and they marched. NaruHina Talk 02:49, May 11, 2010 (UTC)
- Actually (This part of the movie came on TV just now) Order 66 was given as Skywalker and the 501st walked up the steps of the Jedi Temple. I do have to make a small shange to the article to account for that, but everything except the placement of 66 is correct per the movie. NaruHina Talk 02:59, May 11, 2010 (UTC)
- Ok, well it looks better now. I think the problem was that you were making a distinction between Vader's personal orders and Order 66 which makes sense but I wasn't thinking along those lines. Article looks great, good job. Coruscantfan 03:23, May 11, 2010 (UTC)
- Actually (This part of the movie came on TV just now) Order 66 was given as Skywalker and the 501st walked up the steps of the Jedi Temple. I do have to make a small shange to the article to account for that, but everything except the placement of 66 is correct per the movie. NaruHina Talk
- No, Vader was given his orders then Order 66 was given moments after. The 501st were sent concurrently with the former event or at the same time 66 was given. The 501st were therefore physically transferred after 66 was in full swing (i.e. the Jedi deaths montage), arriving that night, just before the assault. Skywalker then killed Jurokk and they marched. NaruHina Talk
Things and such
"Operation: Knightfall, which took place in 19 BBY immediately before the end of the Clone Wars between the Galactic Republic and the Confederacy of Independent Systems," - Extraneous exposition and context. Since you're using the Clone Wars as a framing and dating device, you don't need to explain it."After assisting in the death of Jedi Master Mace Windu and submitting to Dark Lord of the Sith and Supreme Chancellor of the Republic Palpatine's teachings, the newly anointed Darth Vader—formerly a Jedi Knight—and the clone troopers of the 501st Legion stormed the Jedi Temple on Coruscant, initiating a massacre concurrent with the activation of Order 66, a galaxy-wide hunt of the Jedi by their former clone comrades." - This sentence needs to be broken up and rejigged a bit, for readability and flow.The intro itself feels a bit lopsided; half of it is about the aftermath instead of the battle itself."The Knight was shocked by this revelation and he fled to the Jedi Temple to inform Jedi Master Mace Windu, who immediately alerted the Temple and took a squad of Masters to apprehend him." - This reads oddly, namely the "immediately alerted the Temple," part. I would have said "those present at the Temple," but I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "alerted" in this case.The first paragraph of the "The battle" is too play-by-play, and should be cut down.There might be just a little bit too much detail on Koon's movements.If you're going to specify the Jedi by their in-game class types, you should link to them. But since those were TC'd long ago (I think,) I'd suggest not mentioning the class types, and just referring to them colloquially as Jedi Knights or whatever.- Removed. Apparently Chee said the classes were non-canon. NaruHina Talk 21:02, May 16, 2010 (UTC)
- Good, although there are still a few mentions of the classes in the infobox and the body. Thefourdotelipsis 00:01, May 17, 2010 (UTC)
- Removed. Apparently Chee said the classes were non-canon. NaruHina Talk
Were the Jedi interceptors trying to flee? As far as I can recall, the fighters move to attack the anti-aircraft gun.The murder of the younglings in the High Council Chamber is sourced to the game... does it actually show that? I can't remember if it's mentioned in the text or not, but it's not ringing any bells.Palpatine visiting the temple to congratulate Vader might be relevant.Much of the "Jedi Casualties" section is redundant.There's only scant detail on the actual clone occupation of the Jedi Temple, and next to no detail on how much damage was actually inflicted on the temple itself. There's probably a lot of juicy detail in the second Jedi Temple mission of the ROTS game for that kind of stuff. Thefourdotelipsis 11:47, May 15, 2010 (UTC)- It'll take me some time to get my hands on the game again, I'll deal with those objections when I can. NaruHina Talk 21:02, May 16, 2010 (UTC)
- No problem. And if it looks as though you've addressed the objections and I haven't struck after a while, feel free to give me a nudge on my talk page. Thefourdotelipsis 00:01, May 17, 2010 (UTC)
- Added some. NaruHina Talk 04:43, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
- It'll take me some time to get my hands on the game again, I'll deal with those objections when I can. NaruHina Talk
No Mercy:
The intro states that it took place before the end of the Clone Wars --- as such, shouldn't the Clone Wars be included in the "Conflict" section of the infobox? After all, it does play a big part in ending the war.- If I may interject here, I don't think this really counts as a part of the Clone Wars, as it is a totally internal Republic conflict. Just like how the Battle of Imperial Center isn't a part of the GCW. ;) Thefourdotelipsis 15:21, June 4, 2010 (UTC)
- It wasn't part of the Clone Wars, it was part of the Great Jedi Purge. Since no battles of the Clone Wars were going on at the time, I decided not to add it to the infobox. On top of that, that's more of a Galactic conflict wheras this is just one battle of another war. NaruHina Talk 16:17, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
Intro: Did Vader alter the beacon? Didn't he just create it, and then it was later altered by Obi & Yoda?Should there be an article for Obi & Yoda's mission?- I'm debatable on that issue, it's come up before. I think was the main problem with creating it was that it technically wasn't really a "mission" and more of an "incursion," used quite loosly. NaruHina Talk 16:17, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
- Fair enough. Although it's referred to as a mission throughout the article, including the subheading "The Jedi mission" --- maybe change those instances to "incursion" or another synonym? The wook seems to have a "mission = article" policy, so if it's not really a mission, it's probably best not to call it so.
- I'm debatable on that issue, it's come up before. I think was the main problem with creating it was that it technically wasn't really a "mission" and more of an "incursion," used quite loosly. NaruHina Talk
Intro: "After this battle..." Obi & Yoda's mission hasn't been identified as including a battle yet. Reads kind of confusingly."had gone to the Temple upon hearing of General Grievous's death..." This is the first and only time Grievous is mentioned. Link him and give him context.Same thing happens with the Confederacy of Independent Systems a bit later on.Why do you wait until the aftermath section to mention Vader's slaughter of the younglings?- Because it's placement in the timeline was odd between information from the game and movie. That section is there for that kind of thing. NaruHina Talk 16:17, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
- I'm going to disagree there. If it happens during the actual operation, then it should be placed where it chronologically occurs. Finding a way to include it without it sounding odd is the challenge of writing! :^D Menkooroo 04:50, June 6, 2010 (UTC)
- Because it's placement in the timeline was odd between information from the game and movie. That section is there for that kind of thing. NaruHina Talk
Is it necessary to mention in Behind the scenes that Shaak Ti's death has since been rendered non-canon, when you're already talking about its appearance in a non-canon source?- I meant to review this a lot sooner. This is a really good choice for a FAN. Menkooroo 14:44, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
Jinzler
The attack on the Temple is mentioned on p.231 of Luke Skywalker and the Shadows of Mindor, where Nick Rostu says that he heard that Anakin Skywalker defended jedi children from Vader and the 501st during the attack, and that Skywalker was the last jedi left standing. You might want to consider adding something in the article about this --Jinzler 15:47, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
Graestan
I'm going to simplify my objections and say that I am currently reading Dark Lord. You should really re-read that book and add as much pertinent info as possible because otherwise you're looking at something on the order of a hundred requests for more information.- Updated. NaruHina Talk 02:30, June 24, 2010 (UTC)
- We already had the discussion about what reading the book and updating the article actually entailed, but the article has not been updated in such a manner since that discussion. I have decided that I am simply not going to get through to the nominator on the importance of thoroughly reading the source materials before endeavoring to nominate an article for featured status. Word-searching the text file is, simply put, the easy way out, and it leads to a lack of quality. But I am being harassed around the internet about this objection, so I will strike it to silence the mob and let this article slide in, another FA we might be looking at during an Inq meeting soon if it isn't fixed up right. Thanks for your patience. Graestan(Talk) 04:10, July 10, 2010 (UTC)
- Updated. NaruHina Talk
BtS: "It was not until 2005, with the release of LEGO Star Wars: The Video Game, a non-canonical video game that came out a month before the theatrical release of Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith, that a depiction of the event was seen." The novel and junior novel for RotS both came out before Lego Star Wars. Please amend your statement, or clarify it as the first on-screen appearance. Graestan(Talk) 14:25, June 9, 2010 (UTC)
Cav
Intro: Just afterward, he was assigned the clone troopers of the 501st Legion TCW shows he was in command of the 501st - or elements at least - long before Knightfall. Please check and clarify, and amend if necessary.- Y'know this was one of the few things TCW couldn't touch.... Anyway, command of this detachment of the 501st wasn't under his command before Knightfall, whatever his relationship with the organization is in TCW, per BF2 where they were under Secura, Kenobi, Mundi, etc. Fixed by specifying it was a detatchment. NaruHina Talk 18:12, July 1, 2010 (UTC)
- Wait until TCW says that Rex was at the Temple as well :P
- Y'know this was one of the few things TCW couldn't touch.... Anyway, command of this detachment of the 501st wasn't under his command before Knightfall, whatever his relationship with the organization is in TCW, per BF2 where they were under Secura, Kenobi, Mundi, etc. Fixed by specifying it was a detatchment. NaruHina Talk
Operation: Knightfall: The message, reaching to the Outer Rim world of Murkhana, where it was received by Jedi Master Roan Shryne and his group of Jedi that had been allowed a head start by the clones of their unit after Order 66 came down. Master Bol Chatak, her Padawan, Olee Starstone; and Shryne he resolved to charge into Murkhana City to reach a landing port where they would be able to find transport offworld. Not sure exactly what you're trying to say here. Please re-read, rewrite and clarify as necessary.The Raid Continues: This prompting Vader, he executed the clan in its entirety.Fragmented and incomplete sentence - please rewrite. - Cavalier One(Squadron channel) 08:48, July 1, 2010 (UTC)
Attack of the Clone
"He also knew they would object to his rule of the galaxy after he would kill Sidious for the position he would soon hold." The verb tenses are rather jumbled here, and Vader's intentions aren't completely clear either. Please reword.Please smooth out the inconsistent Temple/temple capitalizations.How exactly is the Murkhana info relevant to "The battle" section of the article? I understand that it might be there for greater convenience, but if it's not relevant to the section, it should not be there and should be incorporated in the Aftermath section. (As it stands, I'm not even sure that the current amount of information is necessary if it isn't directly relevant to Operation: Knightfall.)If you can somehow combine a few of the Aftermath sections, please do so. The lengths of the sections vary, and it aesthetically isn't very attractive or consistent."He was disillusioned by the Empire claiming the Jedi were the galaxy's enemies and decided to write about it in a digital journal." It isn't very clear who "claimed" that the Jedi were the galaxy's enemies. Please reword."creating a theocracy based around the Force." Again, it isn't clear which subject this clause is referring to."He would further claim that General Grievous was a fabrication and that they had come to arrest him because he had not taken them at their word that the war was suddenly over with his death." Who's "they"? It sounds like it's somehow related to Grievous from the context of the sentence, but either way, please make it clearer.Much of the last paragraph of the Confusion section is not directly relevant to Operation: Knightfall. Please chop off the unnecessary context."These people assisted some of the survivors of Operation: Knightfall, such as the Temple workers and according to rumor Jedi Knights and Padawan learners." The "and according" is creating a sentence flow problem here, as it needs to be reworded to link to a specific subject.- Please make sure to watch your linking. Otherwise, that's all I have. CC7567 (talk) 04:02, July 10, 2010 (UTC)
I still can't see why all of the detail in the Murkhana section is directly relevant to the aftermath of Operation: Knightfall. How is it different from all of the other instances in which Jedi fought against their rebelling clones? Please clarify this inconsistency.CC7567 (talk) 07:39, July 11, 2010 (UTC)- It was in Dark Lord and Grae tolds me to include it. It's relevent because they recieved the message from the Jedi beacon in a released product, which is why I had the first mention of them in the battle section before. I'll remove it if you think that's not enough though. NaruHina Talk 07:49, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
- Well, while I do agree that the concept is relevant, I don't agree that all of the detail is. Things like their trek through the jungle and Murkhana City I do not find directly relevant to Operation: Knightfall, which is my main concern. CC7567 (talk) 08:26, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
- Cut down. NaruHina Talk 07:33, July 18, 2010 (UTC)
- I apologize if I'm sounding rather blunt here, but can it be shortened any further? Let me be more specific: I don't think mentioning details like the Jedi's debate on whether to take an ARC-170 or not, or the flotilla of LAAT/i gunships is relevant to the event as a whole. Here's more or less the level I'm looking for: "The Jedi beacon's message reached the Outer Rim world Murkhana, where it was received by Jedi Master Roan Shryne. Master Bol Chatak; her Padawan, Olee Starstone; and Shryne escaped when their clones turned on them in concordance with Order 66, and later received the second message from the Temple while trying to leave the planet from Murkhana City. Flabbergasted by the contradictory transmission, Shryne and Starstone evaded capture by the clones [with something to indicate specifically when Chatak was killed by Vader, as the article doesn't fully make it clear right now] and eventually learned what had happened in the past few days: that the Galactic Empire had risen and the Jedi Order was no more. The duo resolved to find other Jedi that had survived so they could band together to rebuild the Order from the ground up." Basically, I'm trying to say that the Aftermath section should detail what these Jedi did and not exactly how they did it. Please let me know if I'm making anything unclear. CC7567 (talk) 08:15, July 18, 2010 (UTC)
- Cut down. NaruHina Talk
- Well, while I do agree that the concept is relevant, I don't agree that all of the detail is. Things like their trek through the jungle and Murkhana City I do not find directly relevant to Operation: Knightfall, which is my main concern. CC7567 (talk) 08:26, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
- It was in Dark Lord and Grae tolds me to include it. It's relevent because they recieved the message from the Jedi beacon in a released product, which is why I had the first mention of them in the battle section before. I'll remove it if you think that's not enough though. NaruHina Talk
There was more than one response to the beacon, if that is the criteria you are using to include info from other sources. Even aside from that, there's info missing on the aftermath at the Temple from Republic 80. Please check it and see what you can add.CC7567 (talk) 08:26, July 11, 2010 (UTC)In the third paragraph of the Aftermath section, please check your verb tenses. If Yoland Fee, Ali-Alann, and the Temple Security Force were killed during the raid, please specifically say that they "had been killed during the raid" instead of using the basic past tense. Right now, that section is a little ambiguous with tenses, and the generic past tense currently leaves room for the reader to assume that those victims you mention were killed after Operation: Knightfall. Let me know if this objection isn't clear, and I can try to explain it better.Into the Unknown, Part 2 takes place after Kenobi and Yoda returned to the Temple and switched the beacon, yet the modified beacon is mentioned in the Aftermath section before it's even chronologically changed. Please fix this misplacement as best you can; you might want to consider further cutting down the Aftermath sections if it's necessary to avoid a series of small and uneven sections.CC7567 (talk) 08:15, July 18, 2010 (UTC)
Clone Attack II
- I'm going to give this article one more run-down just to make sure everything's spic and span.
In ref 32, can it be specified which article of Star Wars Insider 87 is being referenced through the {{InsiderCite}} tag?Is the event a battle or a raid? Since you seem to refer more to it as the latter, I would recommend changing "The battle" section to "The raid"; that should still be covered by the Layout Guide.Since you mention him in the infobox, can Commander Appo's participation in the raid be referenced somewhere in the body? Even if his specific role isn't known, the info is otherwise exclusive to the infobox.Similarly, how and where were the AT-RTs and the Venator-class Star Destroyers used? Please specify."Vader, seeing through Sidious's manipulations when the Dark Lord carefully admitted he did not know the secret to preserve Amidala's life while dubbing him": the tense is a little confusing here. Overall, this sentence could use a little rewording, particularly with the "while dubbing him" clause, which is a little unclear. Also, how was this a machination?Can more context be given for Sha Koon's state of "weariness"? Not too much context, but it's currently unclear why she was weary.The first paragraph of the Operation: Knightfall section is getting a bit p-b-p. Please try to smooth out the wording and make the sentences less short and choppy.Can you reference Palpatine's Declaration of a New Order earlier? Currently, it follows several allusions to it, like the Murkana section and the early references to Fel'Kona and Rostu in the Confusion section, and its placement is rather confusing. I know that you're trying to group the information by subject ("Confusion" and "The Jedi incursion"), but doing so should not disrupt the proper chronology of events to a point where it's not comprehensible. Please do what you can to make the chronology more uniform and direct."in the rebuilt Jedi Temple": is this still the Jedi Temple, or is this the New Jedi Temple? Please clarify.- That's (now) it from me. CC7567 (talk) 21:05, July 18, 2010 (UTC)
I obviously lied. :P Are there any available appropriate quotes for the "Murkhana," "Confusion," and "Legacy" sections of the Aftermath, since they all currently lack quotes?CC7567 (talk) 03:30, July 21, 2010 (UTC)
Comments
Approved as a Featured article by Inquisitorius 23:52, August 21, 2010 (UTC)