- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a good article nomination that was successful. Please do not modify it.
Amorphiian
- Nominated by: ~ SavageBob 05:32, November 6, 2010 (UTC)
- Nomination comments: Now it's time to vote for the Amorphiian being. And, by the way, let's start calling these articles by their proper names. 'Amorphiian… being…. ~ SavageBob 05:32, November 6, 2010 (UTC)
(3 ACs/2 Users/5 Total)
Support
- Menkooroo 04:10, November 9, 2010 (UTC)
Toprawa and Ralltiir 00:53, November 19, 2010 (UTC)- Grand Moff Tranner
(Comlink) 17:42, November 20, 2010 (UTC) 
1358 (Talk) 14:57, November 22, 2010 (UTC)- OLIOSTER (talk) 15:05, November 22, 2010 (UTC)
Object
The Essential Atlas isn't listed as a source --- does it not mention Amorphiians when it discusses Amorphiia? If not, how do you feel about something like reference [2] in this article?Menkooroo 16:23, November 7, 2010 (UTC)- EA places the Amorphiian system (which itself is mentioned in the Holiday Special) but doesn't mention the planet Amorphiia, which is first mentioned in the CSWE. For that reason, I didn't think one of those "Fooians of Foo" (like in the Bomodon ref you mentioned) was necessary. ~ SavageBob 16:40, November 7, 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, I missed the CSWE reference before. But still... is there no source that actually places Amorphiia in the Amorphiian system? If that's the case, then the article is making conjecture by connecting the dots, isn't it? Referencing Jason's comment could remedy that, I think. As obvious a connection as it seems, it's still gotta be backed up, ya know? Menkooroo 04:01, November 8, 2010 (UTC)
- This came up during the CT discussion for Nigel III (can it be inferred to be in the Nigel system?). There, at least, we decided that it's perfectly reasonable to assume that if the Atlas lists something in the appendix (which is all systems) that has the same name as a known planet, we should all assume that the planet is in the eponymous system. If you really think it needs to be spelled out, though, I don't mind running a SH thread on it. ~ SavageBob 05:44, November 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Nah, it's fine. I'm not really familiar with the Atlas. I trust you. :^D Menkooroo 06:04, November 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Wait --- Holiday Special says they hail from the Amorphiian system, and CSWE says they hail from Amorphiia? Crap, connecting those dots isn't making conjecture at all, then. My bad. :S Menkooroo 06:28, November 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Well, technically, The Holiday Special says they're from "the system Amorphiia," so maybe it is a bit speculative. ;P ~ SavageBob 07:00, November 8, 2010 (UTC)
- This came up during the CT discussion for Nigel III (can it be inferred to be in the Nigel system?). There, at least, we decided that it's perfectly reasonable to assume that if the Atlas lists something in the appendix (which is all systems) that has the same name as a known planet, we should all assume that the planet is in the eponymous system. If you really think it needs to be spelled out, though, I don't mind running a SH thread on it. ~ SavageBob 05:44, November 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, I missed the CSWE reference before. But still... is there no source that actually places Amorphiia in the Amorphiian system? If that's the case, then the article is making conjecture by connecting the dots, isn't it? Referencing Jason's comment could remedy that, I think. As obvious a connection as it seems, it's still gotta be backed up, ya know? Menkooroo 04:01, November 8, 2010 (UTC)
- EA places the Amorphiian system (which itself is mentioned in the Holiday Special) but doesn't mention the planet Amorphiia, which is first mentioned in the CSWE. For that reason, I didn't think one of those "Fooians of Foo" (like in the Bomodon ref you mentioned) was necessary. ~ SavageBob 16:40, November 7, 2010 (UTC)
In the intro: "The cassette touted this cassette" --- should one of those cassettes be a different word?- Third sentence of body's second paragraph: Two commas in one sentence followed by "such as" --- can you vary it up?
- The New Sith Wars began in 2,000 BBY, but the History section seems to imply that they were only four years long.
That's all!Excellent work and hooray for Holiday Special love. :D Menkooroo 06:28, November 8, 2010 (UTC)- Oll dun. ~ SavageBob 16:25, November 8, 2010 (UTC)
Toprawa
Two minor things. Firstly, I think you'll need to find a different source for the BTS quote. Assuming that line isn't actually spoken in the film, the film itself doesn't really qualify as a source. If one exists, some kind of external link hosting the script should suffice.Secondly, please utilize the SW.com Blog template for the external link. It was recently tweaked to be able to accommodate this sort of thing, I believe.Toprawa and Ralltiir 21:14, November 18, 2010 (UTC)- I think I've fixed the BTS quote attribution. The script itself is only available from the site as a .zip file, so I didn't want to link to it that way, but I've linked to the page from which the .zip file can be downloaded. As for the external link, it's the official SW blog, so I'm not sure what to do. Neither the SW.com Blog template nor the SW.com template seems set up for it. ~ SavageBob 00:50, November 19, 2010 (UTC)
- All right, don't worry about it. It's probably not set up for it. I'll see if we can finagle something. Toprawa and Ralltiir 00:53, November 19, 2010 (UTC)
- I think I've fixed the BTS quote attribution. The script itself is only available from the site as a .zip file, so I didn't want to link to it that way, but I've linked to the page from which the .zip file can be downloaded. As for the external link, it's the official SW blog, so I'm not sure what to do. Neither the SW.com Blog template nor the SW.com template seems set up for it. ~ SavageBob 00:50, November 19, 2010 (UTC)
Comments
Approved as a Good article by AgriCorps 15:07, November 22, 2010 (UTC)