Wookieepedia:Good article nominations/"AT-AT" SpecPlate

< Wookieepedia:Good article nominations
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a Good article nomination that was successful. Please do not modify it.

"AT-AT" SpecPlate

(4 ACs/0 Users/4 Total)

(Votes required: No additional votes required to pass, please consider reviewing another article.)

Support

  1. ACvote TanDivoInsignia-SenateMurders Anıl Şerifoğlu (talk) 22:32, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
  2. ACvote Well done Commander Code-8 Hello There! 09:53, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
  3. ACvote Ayrehead02 (talk) 10:44, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
  4. ACvote Lewisr (talk) 04:28, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Object

CC-8
  • The first sentence of contents should be split up
    • Split. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 18:42, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
  • "With a limited set of 25 pieces," this gave me the impression that only 25 of these were made, could you rephrase? Commander Code-8 Hello There! 07:26, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
    • You understood it correctly. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 03:01, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
      • I think some of the wording could make this a little clearer then, like specifying that 25 SpecPlates were made rather than 25 pieces. That could go in the intro as well. Commander Code-8 Hello There! 13:32, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
        • Reworded. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 00:03, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
  • I think there's enough content in the technical details included in the Specplate to warrant a continuity section, the details from The Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels could go there and I'd really like to see a breakdown of the names and references made with the IU names listed. Would discussing the first appearances of the AT-AT and it's link to Kuat Drive Yards be too much? Commander Code-8 Hello There! 13:22, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
    • I'm not opposed to a continuity section, but per my responses Imp's objection on the original CAN for this article, the info on the specplate is not 1:1 with EGVV nor can we confirm that it was derived from it (could have been an internal LFL doc). The names I can probably do no problem. First appearances of AT-AT and Kuat Drive Yards is too much I think, borderline trivia imo. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 06:07, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
      • If I may interject, agree that KDY isn't that relevant, but do think that it'd make sense to note the reason why this specific vehicle was chosen for this special type of medium, i.e., its appearance in ESB. Imperators II(Talk) 09:42, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
        • Added. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 21:32, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
  • The AT-ATs first appearance should be the first item mentioned in the continuity section
    • Moved. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 18:29, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
  • The continuity section should specify that the names are included as the IU designers/engineers of the AT-AT
    • Added. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 18:29, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
  • I think all of the OOU people named had some role in designing the AT-AT for the films, that's worth researching and documenting. Commander Code-8 Hello There! 05:34, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
    • I've found evidence for McQuarrie, Gawley, and Johnston, but Beasley and Cantwell appear to have only worked on Episode IV. Should be noted the AT-AT SpecPlate isn't the only one that has these names on it. I've gone ahead and added the bits regarding McQuarrie, Gawley, and Johnston. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 21:08, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
      • Excellent work
  • Last round: pre the Layout Guide the continuity section should come after the development section
    • Swapped. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 20:36, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
  • Some extra referencing will be needed for the non-ESB members being LucasFilm employees
    • Added. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 20:36, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
  • You could use some quotes from the announcement post or the Specplate itself
    • Two quotes added; the rest of the article doesn't work contextually well enough to work as quotes though so that's about it. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 16:27, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
  • We technically can't definitively say that the names are references to the employees, the wording could be replaced by something like "share their names with"
    • I feel like this one's not a necessary change, and in all honesty this is one of our rare cases of "justified assumption" on the wiki. I see no reason we cannot state this just because it was not explicitly stated to be the case, when the names are literally the same. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 13:58, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
  • Since the AT-AT would have have some preview appearances before ESB's release like the novelization, "first introduced" should be replaced with something like "was created for." A source like the Making of ESB would be preferrable there. Commander Code-8 Hello There! 09:19, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
    • Added. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 16:27, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Comments

Approved as a Good article by AgriCorps 04:28, 29 January 2024 (UTC)