Wookieepedia:Featured article nominations/Sith battlelord

< 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.

Sith battlelord

  • Nominated by: Jinzler 20:08, January 13, 2011 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: Some kind of Sith

(5 Inqs/1 Users/6 Total)

Support

  1. Inqvote—Tommy 9281 Saturday, February 5, 2011, 15:01 UTC
  2. Inqvote Nice job. It's an interesting topic. Grand Moff Tranner Imperial Department of Military Research (Comlink) 13:39, March 25, 2011 (UTC)
  3. Inqvote Cavalier OneFarStar(Squadron channel) 20:03, March 30, 2011 (UTC)
  4. Menkooroo 04:31, March 31, 2011 (UTC)
  5. Inqvote Green Tentacle (Talk) 18:54, April 14, 2011 (UTC)
  6. Inqvote --Eyrezer 21:25, April 21, 2011 (UTC)

Object

Xd1358
  • As a preliminary objection: Quote attributions shouldn't end with periods. 1358 (Talk) 20:21, January 13, 2011 (UTC)
    • Apologies for my ignorance, but what do you mean by the term "period"? --Jinzler 21:08, January 13, 2011 (UTC)
      • Resolved. That was an oversight on my part regarding the leading quote. The rest were fine. --Jinzler 21:14, January 13, 2011 (UTC)
Bouzilla Baby!
  • Intro makes no distinction about Sith magic but article proper does.
    • Mentioned in the intro. --Jinzler 12:37, February 5, 2011 (UTC)
  • Also, I'm familiar with a specific light side Force application used to sever the battle lord connection.
    • Nice catch! I missed that. Fixed. --Jinzler 12:37, February 5, 2011 (UTC)
  • I removed a lot of redundant speech, and you may want to go thru and insure proper linkage. Good work otherwise on an obscure subject.—Tommy 9281 Thursday, February 3, 2011, 01:03 UTC
    • Checked. You did a pretty good job, and IFLOYD picked up the few links you missed. And thanks for the compliment as well. --Jinzler 12:37, February 5, 2011 (UTC)
Cav
  • While I am aware that it is the title of the article, the term "battlelord" is used a lot. Is there any way you can vary the usage at all? - Cavalier OneFarStar(Squadron channel) 22:46, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
    • I have now used the terms "warrior leader" and "bonded leader" in a few instances. Thanks for your review. --Jinzler 23:03, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
Moffship
  • "The rituals took place at sites strong in the dark side of the Force and, according to most reports, would take place inside a structure, in an altar room." - I'm a bit confused by this sentence. Are you saying that the rituals occasionally did not occur within a structure? I think this needs to be reworded a bit for clarity.
    • Reworded --Jinzler 20:51, March 17, 2011 (UTC)
  • "Followers normally paraded past the lifeless body of their leader for about an hour, passing through the leader's blood." - How exactly did they "[pass] through the leader's blood"?
    • Fixed --Jinzler 20:51, March 17, 2011 (UTC)
  • "The Darkstaff desired the Force essences of sentient beings." - This sentence seems rather out of place. Perhaps you could merge it with the following sentence somehow?
    • Done --Jinzler 20:51, March 17, 2011 (UTC)
  • "Furthermore, if warriors succeeded in causing their battlelord master to draw blood, the battlelord would be unaffected by the damage and one of the bonded troopers would be hurt instead." - I believe you mean to say "if warriors succeeded in drawing their battlelord master's blood;" currently, this doesn't make much sense.
    • Fixed --Jinzler 20:51, March 17, 2011 (UTC)
  • As a note, I made several corrections regarding subject-verb agreement and incorrect pronoun use (for example, when referring to a single battlelord, the correct pronoun would be "he or she" and not "they"). Please double-check your grammar in the future. Otherwise, good work. Grand Moff Tranner Imperial Department of Military Research (Comlink) 00:40, March 15, 2011 (UTC)
    • I will bear that in mind. Thank you for taking the time to review the article. --Jinzler 20:51, March 17, 2011 (UTC)
Eyrezer
  • Hi Jinzler. I think there a number of places where you could add a bit more context to the article. For instance, please add more information on the New Sith Wars at their first mention in the Organization section. Mention a rough date for the Wars, and also who they were between
    • Added --Jinzler 15:57, April 11, 2011 (UTC)
  • Please also add some context on Rivan in the History section, to add a bit more flavour to the text.
    • Added --Jinzler 15:57, April 11, 2011 (UTC)
  • I also think that you should add some more context on the Darkstaff, although I will let you judge where the best place for that is.
    • Done --Jinzler 15:57, April 11, 2011 (UTC)
  • I also think you could signpost the transition to the Clone Wars era more - ie mention it is a thousand years later, or some such.
    • Added --Jinzler 15:57, April 11, 2011 (UTC)
  • "bonded warriors were compelled to do anything that a battlelord commanded, or else be left behind." I am not sure what this last bit means. What do you mean "left behind"?
    • "Left behind" is the phrase used by the original source, which was little bit ambiguous on what it meant. I have moved the phrase down a bit so it comes just before the stuff about separation from battlelords, as it makes more sense in that context. --Jinzler 15:57, April 11, 2011 (UTC)
  • Could you also please add in the respective authors of the other articles that mention the battlelords? --Eyrezer 09:58, April 7, 2011 (UTC)
    • Done --Jinzler 15:57, April 11, 2011 (UTC)
      • NIce article! Great to see more from the Living Force campaign. --Eyrezer 21:25, April 21, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Approved as a Featured article by Inquisitorius 21:25, April 21, 2011 (UTC)

  • I was uncertain about how to approach the the layout for this, so I based it on the layout used in the Imperial Sentinel article. Let me know what you think. --Jinzler 20:08, January 13, 2011 (UTC)