Wookieepedia:Featured article nominations/Red Sith Purge

< 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.

Red Sith Purge

(4 Inqs/2 Users/6 Total)

Support

  1. 501st dogma(talk) 00:24, June 21, 2012 (UTC)
  2. Plagueis327 (talk) 18:03, June 30, 2012 (UTC)
  3. Inqvote Menkooroo (talk) 20:54, July 6, 2012 (UTC)
  4. Inqvote Cavalier OneFarStar(Squadron channel) 08:34, July 9, 2012 (UTC)
  5. Inqvote Green Tentacle (Talk) 12:13, July 14, 2012 (UTC)
  6. Inqvote CC7567 (talk) 01:15, July 20, 2012 (UTC)

Object

501st
  • From looking it over once, found one thing: a link for the young Sith sentry that was killed defending his post would be nice. 501st dogma(talk) 15:42, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
  • You use multiple times the "Fifty-seven" to repersent the sith during the purge. However, there were only forty-five at that time. Wouln't it be more appropriate to say the "Forty-five" in those cases?
    • No. The Fifty-seven was the official name for the faction, no matter how many were actually left. The book makes note of that.
  • The last sentence of the Purge section indicates Wroth was killed before the purge was complete. However, the quote for that section indicates that Wroth was the last one. Fix that.
    • Fixed.
  • Good work, thats all that I could find. 501st dogma(talk) 11:33, June 19, 2012 (UTC)
Purge
  • The "so-called" Lost Tribe of Sith --- why so-called? It's not a conjectural name.
    • Removed.
  • The intro and body both use "Sith species," "pureblood Sith," and "Red Sith" interchangeably, and it's not totally clear that they all refer to the same group since "Sith" is also a term used for the entire Lost Tribe. Can you pick one and stay consistent, or else make it clear that they all mean the same thing?
    • Made consistent.
  • The intro seems a little strange in that it doesn't mention the article's subject until halfway through. Is there a reason for this? I know there's rule explicitly saying so, but I think that every kind of article should introduce its subject in the intro as early as possible. With event articles specifically, it helps avoid any confusion as to just what the article's focus is, ie not the stuff from the "Prelude" section (in this case Ravilan's poisoning).
    • Rearranged. How does it look now?
  • Could the intro make it clear that the Lost Tribe are stranded, so that "focus on finding a way off-planet" doesn't confuse a reader unfamiliar with the series?
    • Done.
  • Have you ever checked out JJM's production notes on Faraway Press? I feel like they'd probably be a good source of BTS info for your Lost Tribe project. The notes for Paragon include his reasons for creating the Red Sith Purge as a "story springboard" to get from the TOTJ Sith to the FOTJ Sith. Menkooroo 02:19, June 25, 2012 (UTC)
    • Added. IFYLOFD (Floyd's crib) 06:29, June 29, 2012 (UTC)
      • Nice. Could you mention that the diverse form comes from Tales of the Jedi, though? JJM takes care to point that out, and it seems worth a mention if Fate of the Jedi is gettin' some lovin'. Menkooroo (talk) 23:47, July 3, 2012 (UTC)
Cav
  • I'm confused; how many Sith were purged? It fluctuates between referencing 45 and the group as the "Fifty-seven" in the intro. The first part of the article proper makes sense of it by noting the 12 deaths before the event, but the intro is a little confusing. - Cavalier OneFarStar(Squadron channel) 09:39, July 4, 2012 (UTC)

Comments

Approved as a Featured article by Inquisitorius 01:15, July 20, 2012 (UTC)