- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a featured article nomination that was unsuccessful. Please do not modify it.
Quarsh Panaka
Support
- .... 11:44, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
- You know, I think this article's just about good enough to be an FA KEJ 11:12, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
- - breathesgelatinTalk 22:18, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Objections
- Jedi Dude 22:00, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- --IG-Prime(Sentience Core) 22:12, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Besides overall length, sections of it don't read well. Atarumaster88 (Audience Chamber) 02:59, 26 October 2006 (UTC)- I've just read through the article again, made some minor fixes - what parts don't read well? ....
Invasion of Naboo/Return to Naboo need serious revisions. It's choppy and there are lots of spelling and punctuation errors- i.e. "siezed." If it comes down to it, I'm going through the NEGTC one-by-one and expanding the articles, so Panaka will get attention from me eventually. Atarumaster88 (Audience Chamber) 17:41, 26 October 2006 (UTC)- I've cleaned it up to the best of my ability now. And as for your NEGTC scheme - that's nice, but I'll save you half the work - I'm going through the characters in order of appearance through the saga. .... 06:28, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
- One red link? Surely that's just begging to be fixed :D. Cull Tremayne 22:58, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
- I've cleaned it up to the best of my ability now. And as for your NEGTC scheme - that's nice, but I'll save you half the work - I'm going through the characters in order of appearance through the saga. .... 06:28, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
- I've just read through the article again, made some minor fixes - what parts don't read well? ....
Comments
- Again, a short one, but I don't see what else can be said about him. .... 11:44, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, to short, his character hasn't had enough exposure to make an FA out of him, nominate for Good Article status possibly Jedi Dude 22:00, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- Defintitely not FA status. If they don't have alot of content, they obviously weren't meant to be the highlight oh Wookieepedia. Plus, aren't we a little nomination happy, Elipsis? It seems to me that you have been overdoing it a tad bit.--IG-Prime(Sentience Core) 22:12, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- Wait till you see what else I've got in store. A certain Gungan. Anyway, I don't think we should discriminate - Ebenn Q3 Baobab, or whatever the hell he's called has had less exposure than Panaka, and yet he's an FA. .... 23:44, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- To echo what I have said above, even minor characters/events can be deserving of FA assuming that all the information about them is accurate and fully recorded. - breathesgelatinTalk 04:53, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
- Well, I think I've covered everything about Panaka...without going overboard. .... 10:52, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
- Added some content from SWG, which I felt was missing. KEJ 15:02, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
- Let me know what characters you've already done, so we don't duplicate effort! Atarumaster88 (Audience Chamber) 18:28, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
- Defintitely not FA status. If they don't have alot of content, they obviously weren't meant to be the highlight oh Wookieepedia. Plus, aren't we a little nomination happy, Elipsis? It seems to me that you have been overdoing it a tad bit.--IG-Prime(Sentience Core) 22:12, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, to short, his character hasn't had enough exposure to make an FA out of him, nominate for Good Article status possibly Jedi Dude 22:00, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- OK...so...the current objections not having legitimate objections, I suppose that it's 2 - 0. That is, if the objectors want to raise any real complaints. .... 04:41, 5 November 2006 (UTC)