- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a featured article nomination that was successful. Please do not modify it.
Soontir Fel
(7 Inqs/2 User/9 Total)
Support
Havac 00:16, 1 September 2007 (UTC)- A well put-together article.--Goodwood 05:14, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
- Cull Tremayne 07:32, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
- Havac, this is your best work, in my humble opinion. One of the most fascinating articles I've read in the past few weeks. And the infobox picture is just fine. Thefourdotelipsis 07:45, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
Green Tentacle (Talk) 10:51, 6 September 2007 (UTC)- Very enjoyable read, and very well written. Greyman(Paratus) 02:37, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
- Havac, this is a thing of beauty. Hobbes15(Tiger Headquarters) 05:38, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- Jaina Solo(Talk) 21:00, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
- Atarumaster88 (Talk page) 23:25, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
Oppose
BTS: "Fel's name is misspelled as "Baron Soontir Fell" in More Starships!." This sentence is completely disconnected from the other paragraphs, and seems like uninteresting trivia at best. Can we remove it?--Imperialles 13:27, 2 September 2007 (UTC)- Again, I prefer to note any instances in which character names are misspelled (and Jaymach absolutely insists on it :p). Those sorts of burps in canon are, I feel, notable, because they're in canon, yet we're expected to dismiss them as typos. In More Starships!, that's the only time Fel's name is given. So, theoretically, one could say that Fel never appears in it. A new character, Baron Soontir Fell, does. But it's an obvious misspelling and we accept it as such, but some misspellings have created entire new entities or vast confusion. So it's worth at least a note. Note, Imp, that my paragraph-heavy style is by far the exception among BTSes, and so when more conventional one-line notes come along, they look slightly out of place, but that doesn't mean they are out of place. Havac 18:00, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
- Very well. --Imperialles 18:10, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
- Again, I prefer to note any instances in which character names are misspelled (and Jaymach absolutely insists on it :p). Those sorts of burps in canon are, I feel, notable, because they're in canon, yet we're expected to dismiss them as typos. In More Starships!, that's the only time Fel's name is given. So, theoretically, one could say that Fel never appears in it. A new character, Baron Soontir Fell, does. But it's an obvious misspelling and we accept it as such, but some misspellings have created entire new entities or vast confusion. So it's worth at least a note. Note, Imp, that my paragraph-heavy style is by far the exception among BTSes, and so when more conventional one-line notes come along, they look slightly out of place, but that doesn't mean they are out of place. Havac 18:00, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
Intro needs to be shorter (Rule 7).- Lord Hydronium 03:06, 4 September 2007 (UTC)- I've trimmed it some, but I just can't get it any shorter and still try to keep it coherent and containing a reasonable level of detail -- the guy simply has too much story. If that's really not enough, I can try to just completely rewrite the whole damned thing. Havac 18:15, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
- From the long-distance desk of Atarumaster88
Trim intro please. My friend Mr. White has some advice for you: "Omit needless words." Atarumaster88 (Talk page) 02:25, 8 September 2007 (UTC)- Intro significantly trimmed yet again. I think it's pretty reasonable. Havac 02:51, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Small clarification on whether Fel knew about throwing the Battle of Nar Shaddaa please. IIRC, he didn't know.- Addressed. Havac 03:38, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Bracket error in intro.- Fixed. Havac 03:38, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Should Fel's position in the Chiss phalanxes earn a mention in the succession box? Is that sort of info available?- It's not available in clear enough form to create succession boxes around it, unfortunately. Havac 03:38, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
The caption that reads "Empire of Hand-style uniform" is not from a source related to the Empire of the Hand. Please correct.- That's why it says "-style". Fel's 181st uniform, with the red stripes, appears to have been made the basis of EOTH uniforms, with all sources that describe EOTH pilot uniforms describing them as sporting red-striped sleeves. Ergo, the image is not labeled, "Fel in an EOTH uniform" but instead "This is pretty much what Fel would have looked like in an EOTH uniform". Images for that period of his life being sparse, that was the best I could do. If you still can't bear it, take it out. But the caption isn't saying anything wrong or particularly misleading. Havac 03:38, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- I'd prefer the caption be changed, as it is not as relevant or contextual as it could be. Atarumaster88 (Talk page) 04:45, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- I'd prefer the caption be changed, as it is not as relevant or contextual as it could be. Atarumaster88
- That's why it says "-style". Fel's 181st uniform, with the red stripes, appears to have been made the basis of EOTH uniforms, with all sources that describe EOTH pilot uniforms describing them as sporting red-striped sleeves. Ergo, the image is not labeled, "Fel in an EOTH uniform" but instead "This is pretty much what Fel would have looked like in an EOTH uniform". Images for that period of his life being sparse, that was the best I could do. If you still can't bear it, take it out. But the caption isn't saying anything wrong or particularly misleading. Havac 03:38, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Some info from P&T (and/or bio) should be moved to Relationships section.- He's only got one relationship (at least in the sense in which Relationships sections are traditionally used -- lover). Not worth it. There's not a massive amount of relationship analysis stuff -- just little personality bits. He loved his wife very much. He demanded high standards of his children. The focus remains on his personality, not his relationships themselves. I don't think there's a need to wall information off like that. Havac 03:38, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Bah, but I have made a compromise by adding more content and giving Syal her own paragraph. Atarumaster88 (Talk page) 05:07, 9 September 2007 (UTC)- Relationships section requested per Rules 9 and 1. Atarumaster88 (Talk page) 05:27, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- As I've said, those rules don't cover that. Any information that would be present in a relationships section is already present in the bio and P&T. As Fel does not have multiple relationships, the primary value of a relationships section -- laying out all the romances in such a way to provide a benchmark for comparison -- is nonexistent. There's just no need. 'Tis a silly section. Havac 06:19, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- I cite Rule 1 and 9- the article is not detailed enough without the section and has insufficient coverage of Fel's and Syal's relationship. The rules demand thorough coverage, which was/is not given in the article. Atarumaster88 (Talk page) 20:48, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- And I've said the rules don't cover that. The information is all present. There's no detail that would be in that section that is not in there currently. There's absolutely no precedent for this sort of thing. Havac 22:01, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- Precedent seems to be conflicted, but other research in this area seems to indicate it's not needed. Atarumaster88 (Talk page) 02:48, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
- Precedent seems to be conflicted, but other research in this area seems to indicate it's not needed. Atarumaster88
- And I've said the rules don't cover that. The information is all present. There's no detail that would be in that section that is not in there currently. There's absolutely no precedent for this sort of thing. Havac 22:01, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- I cite Rule 1 and 9- the article is not detailed enough without the section and has insufficient coverage of Fel's and Syal's relationship. The rules demand thorough coverage, which was/is not given in the article. Atarumaster88
- As I've said, those rules don't cover that. Any information that would be present in a relationships section is already present in the bio and P&T. As Fel does not have multiple relationships, the primary value of a relationships section -- laying out all the romances in such a way to provide a benchmark for comparison -- is nonexistent. There's just no need. 'Tis a silly section. Havac 06:19, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- Relationships section requested per Rules 9 and 1. Atarumaster88
- He's only got one relationship (at least in the sense in which Relationships sections are traditionally used -- lover). Not worth it. There's not a massive amount of relationship analysis stuff -- just little personality bits. He loved his wife very much. He demanded high standards of his children. The focus remains on his personality, not his relationships themselves. I don't think there's a need to wall information off like that. Havac 03:38, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Rule 3. This article is NPOV. Examples of bias include "Imperial propaganda heartthrob" and excessively long paragraph lauding his reputation in "Command of the 181st" section.- He was a propaganda heartthrob. He did have a tremendous reputation. It's fact. The article never says, "He's awesome," it says, "Lot and lots of people think he's awesome," which is the truth. The guy's a legend, and that needs to be addressed. Havac 22:01, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- I think it's overmuch, but not worth objecting. Atarumaster88 (Talk page) 02:48, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
- I think it's overmuch, but not worth objecting. Atarumaster88
- He was a propaganda heartthrob. He did have a tremendous reputation. It's fact. The article never says, "He's awesome," it says, "Lot and lots of people think he's awesome," which is the truth. The guy's a legend, and that needs to be addressed. Havac 22:01, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Excessive detail on children's activities should be trimmed some- not removed wholesale, but condensed per Rule 1. This article is about Soontir Fel, not Jagged, Chak, etc.- All the information we get about Fel after VOTF is filtered through his children. Fel's the one issuing the orders that Jag follows or doesn't follow. All the sentences there focus on the relationship of Jag's actions to Fel. Havac 22:01, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- Apparently context isn't for sissies. I would not write it this way, but it's not worth objecting over. Atarumaster88 (Talk page) 02:51, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
- Apparently context isn't for sissies. I would not write it this way, but it's not worth objecting over. Atarumaster88
- All the information we get about Fel after VOTF is filtered through his children. Fel's the one issuing the orders that Jag follows or doesn't follow. All the sentences there focus on the relationship of Jag's actions to Fel. Havac 22:01, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Unneeded speculation on Chak's birth.- It addressed the failure of Chak's existence to appear where it would be relevant. I don't see how it could go. Havac 22:01, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
I recall there being available information on Fel- an interview with Stackpole on his site I think- about the influences of the character and other relevant BTS material. Please include this. Atarumaster88 (Talk page) 13:12, 10 September 2007 (UTC)- Checked his site and I can't find it. Could be it's no longer archived, could be it's somewhere else, could be it's one of those funny mistaken impressions. Havac 03:58, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
- Google search yielded the following links. [1] [2] Should be some good stuff in those two. Atarumaster88 (Talk page) 17:24, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
- Information added. Havac 21:48, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
- Google search yielded the following links. [1] [2] Should be some good stuff in those two. Atarumaster88
- Checked his site and I can't find it. Could be it's no longer archived, could be it's somewhere else, could be it's one of those funny mistaken impressions. Havac 03:58, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
Extremely impressive article overall and an absolute pleasure to read.Have a Super Terrific Friendly Un-frustrating Day. Atarumaster88 (Talk page) 03:18, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Comments
- Can we get a better profile pic? That one appears later in the article anyway. QuentinGeorge 01:23, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
- Well, the infobox one is highly cropped relative to the greater image. But, anyway, none of the comic panels really approach that level of detail or realism, which I think is key in an infobox portrait. I've gotten complaints about the infobox pic before, but have yet to see any superior images presented. The closest is the top one in the P&T, which isn't bad quality art, but doesn't look nearly as much like any other representation of Fel we've ever seen, unlike the current infobox shot. The Japanese Refugee cover art would be great in there, but then I'd either have to go completely without an image for the large last section of the article, which would look very odd, or else completely -- rather than partially -- duplicate the infobox image later in the article. It's not something that I haven't thought through, but I just can't come to any other conclusion than that the current picture is the best option. Really, it's not that bad an image. Havac 01:42, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
- The one in the "personality" section seems ideal to me. *shrugs*. It's just not that too big of a deal I guess. QuentinGeorge 03:16, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
- Is there any other art that could replace the Japanese cover art so that that picture can be in the infobox? I gotta say that I prefer the Japanese drawing to the Essential Guide one. Cull Tremayne 07:32, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
- Nothing else in the same timeframe. I'd love to be able to use it, but it's just impractical. Havac 16:11, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
- Is there any other art that could replace the Japanese cover art so that that picture can be in the infobox? I gotta say that I prefer the Japanese drawing to the Essential Guide one. Cull Tremayne 07:32, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
- The one in the "personality" section seems ideal to me. *shrugs*. It's just not that too big of a deal I guess. QuentinGeorge 03:16, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
- Well, the infobox one is highly cropped relative to the greater image. But, anyway, none of the comic panels really approach that level of detail or realism, which I think is key in an infobox portrait. I've gotten complaints about the infobox pic before, but have yet to see any superior images presented. The closest is the top one in the P&T, which isn't bad quality art, but doesn't look nearly as much like any other representation of Fel we've ever seen, unlike the current infobox shot. The Japanese Refugee cover art would be great in there, but then I'd either have to go completely without an image for the large last section of the article, which would look very odd, or else completely -- rather than partially -- duplicate the infobox image later in the article. It's not something that I haven't thought through, but I just can't come to any other conclusion than that the current picture is the best option. Really, it's not that bad an image. Havac 01:42, 1 September 2007 (UTC)