Wookieepedia:Featured article nominations/Wam Lufba/Legends

< 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.

Wam Lufba

  • Nominated by: Thefourdotelipsis 06:21, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: Ah do declare this here article nominated.

(5 Inqs/1 Users/6 Total)

Support

  1. Inqvote —Xwing328(Talk) 19:03, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
  2. Inqvote -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 11:38, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
  3. Blam! -- Ozzel 08:46, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
  4. Inqvote Green Tentacle (Talk) 12:31, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
  5. Inqvote Darn Yuzzum. Greyman@wikia(Talk) 02:10, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
  6. Inqvote Toprawa and Ralltiir 19:40, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Blah blah:
    • Jabba should never be referred to as just "Desilijic;" only "Jabba."
      • I don't see why not, since it's his family name.
        • "Desilijic" is his clan name. If anything, "Tiure" is his family name, but I don't think that's ever been used alone for any Hutt in an official source. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 12:59, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
    • "Allowed" is used twice in the opening paragraph. Also, "do the actual hunting" looks a bit off to me; please try and find some alternative to "do." Actually, one of those "allowed to..."s should probably be axed.
      • Alterfied.
    • Shouldn't you just say that they were captured by a poacher, rather than doing it like the DB entry is?
      • Could, but I choose not to. I tend to tell the story as it occurs to the character.
        • Fair enough, though I think it would look better changed.
    • There's a bit of extraneous detail about "Boushh" and Han which ought to be cut.
      • I've added a bit of relevance to that situation, but it was really there to explain the Carkoon situation.
        • Better.
    • "Skilled in..." "Skilled in..." in the P&T. Please reword one of them.
      • Yarp, done.
    • I'm a bit wary of the use of "would" in the article. Not being a grammar expert, I may be wrong, though.
      • It's use is correct as far as I know, but I seem to be subconsciously obsessed with using it, which is more of a concern. Pared down, at any rate.
      • One of reasonably few interesting WTSes. :-) -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 12:45, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
        • I'd say that the duds are the rare ones, having roamed much of the WTS land. Sometimes, though, you come across a complete turd, like Greejatus. Thefourdotelipsis 08:55, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
  2. Toprawa:
    • This reads literally that he was dismissed because he was regarded as a legitimate hunter, which isn't what you're trying to say, I understand. Please reword appropriately: "Dismissed as a legitimate hunter because of his size"
      • Reworded.
    • This reads kind of awkwardly considering those who had judged him previously weren't present at the moment to be proven wrong directly. Please reword this a little bit: "These peers were later proven wrong"
      • I've added "indirectly," but I think you can prove someone who's not present to be wrong. Like Nostradamus or whatever. :P Sing out if you think it needs rewording though.
        • You're fine. I almost made the exact change, but thought I'd see what you would change it to Toprawa and Ralltiir 20:40, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
    • I'm really not one to ever pick on images, since I'm rather image-handicapped myself, but the Jedi screen shot is kind of terrible. I'm sure someone could grab a cleaner and higher res version. Toprawa and Ralltiir 05:04, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
      • I'll get someone on it, but he's really in the dark and poorly lit. The improvement might be minimal. Thefourdotelipsis 05:27, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Comments