Wookieepedia:Good article nominations/Azzameen cargo fields

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a good article nomination that was successful. Please do not modify it.

Azzameen cargo fields

• Nominated by: ^{Jorrel Fraajic}_{Mar 25, 2014} ^{Wookieepedian}_{21:11:08 UTC}
• Nomination comments: This was supposed to be a simple redlink fix for Ace Azzameen's article. I don't know what happened.

(4 ACs/1 Users/5 Total)

Support

1. Clone Commander Lee ^Talk 20:56, March 27, 2014 (UTC)
2. Sir Cavalier of One^{(Squadron channel)} 13:33, May 7, 2014 (UTC)
3. Green Tentacle ^(Talk) 11:26, May 31, 2014 (UTC)
4. Good job. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 00:12, June 9, 2014 (UTC)
5. IFYLOFD ^{(Enter the Floydome)} 23:46, June 9, 2014 (UTC)

Object

• Needs images. ^{Jorrel Fraajic}_{Mar 25, 2014} ^{Wookieepedian}_{21:11:08 UTC}
  • Needed quotes too. Now it needs neither. ^{Jorrel Fraajic}_{Mar 26, 2014} ^{Wookieepedian}_{02:39:23 UTC}

Lee's charge

• Context for the Azzameen family in intro and description section please.
  • Contextified in both.
• A little bit context for Azzameen station would be nice, it could be a planet-based base. (urgh)
  • Also contextified here.
• Context for both Azzameens. Is (s)he already a rebel at this point or just a businessman.
  • Contextified.
• You need a date in intro and bio, for now that is infobox-exclusive
  • Added in both, though the infobox one is removed now.
• In the infobox you say that the containers were moved, while the body only says that the droid lamented they had to be moved. Which one is correct?
  • It is heavily implied by the droid in both the mission itself and the post-mission briefing, though there is nothing that explicitly mentions they were moved. Exact words:

That said, no, nothing explicitly says they were moved. I've removed the date in the infobox.

• Clone Commander Lee ^Talk 11:09, March 26, 2014 (UTC)
  • Did some work. ^Jorrel_Fraajic 03:23, March 27, 2014 (UTC)
• Is all the linking in captions really needed? Clone Commander Lee ^Talk 14:29, March 27, 2014 (UTC)
  • Probably not, though I'm not sure what it hurts. Regardless, captions cleaned up a little. ^Jorrel_Fraajic 20:45, March 27, 2014 (UTC)

Exiled Jedi

• Are the two events mentioned in the introduction of any individual significance? I don't know enough about the game to know if they should have articles or not, so I thought I would check.
  • Not particularly, no. The first is a single ship that tried to take off with a container; this ship is driven off. The second, while a component of an increasing feud between the Azzameens and Viraxo, isn't real notable by itself: two enemy starfighters and a freighter against two family YT-1300s.
• "The cargo area was owned by the Azzameen family" The "cargo area" just doesn't give the impression of a space location. It would probably be best to refer to them as cargo fields again since that is the article title.
  • Good point, fixed.
• Can the circa 3 ABY date be directly supported by the game?
  • Nope, which I figured out on a later article. Fixed.
    • Just making sure, but does the NEC refer directly to the events of the game or is there some calculating that needs to be done to get the date? If additional calculations are necessary, please add them to the reference.--Exiled Jedi (Greetings) 04:36, May 18, 2014 (UTC)
      • Added, though I have a question. Is the reference to NEC necessary since I have a reference explaining the dating, giving the NEC as the source of the second reference? ^Jorrel_Fraajic 06:04, May 18, 2014 (UTC)
        • Just use the long reference to source the date. The NEC-only source doesn't really add anything.--Exiled Jedi (Greetings) 22:51, May 28, 2014 (UTC)
          • Ref nuked. ^Jorrel_Fraajic 09:46, May 30, 2014 (UTC)
• "and the last of the three contained Class-K and Class-L cargo containers" You already have been using container a lot, so you should probably use a word besides "contained" here.
  • I added different words, though I started to run out having to put in the next
• "The plots were separated from each other and the Azzameen's home, an orbital platform known as Azzameen Station, by a distance requiring a jump through hyperspace." Again, I don't know much about the game, but this seems to indicate that the three plots were three separate locations instead of one.
  • They do require three jumps, each leading to a separate area. The game goes back and forth on it: On one hand, it suggests all three considered one cargo "area", but then breaks up the fields into three cargo areas. The Prima guide also seems to think they're three areas in one. Based on your objection, though, it seems like it could be considered three separate areas for the purposes of the article(s, in this case). I'll work on splitting it presently. As such, this should probably be closed and archived, seeing as it's gonna end up at a different name.
    • After examining your reply and discussing this topic with others, I think that leaving the three fields together in the same article would be the best course of action.--Exiled Jedi (Greetings) 04:36, May 18, 2014 (UTC)
• Could you break up the history paragraph?
  • Split.
    • You forgot to source the first paragraph.--Exiled Jedi (Greetings) 04:36, May 18, 2014 (UTC)
      • Resourced.^Jorrel_Fraajic 06:04, May 18, 2014 (UTC)
• You should probably use technician instead of tech.
  • Done.
• I know that in the original X-Wing game that you can see the contents of the cargo containers when you scan them. Could you add information about the cargo they had stored in the different plots?--Exiled Jedi (Greetings) 04:14, May 5, 2014 (UTC)
  • Added. Tried to keep "contained" varied as well. ^Jorrel_Fraajic 04:58, May 5, 2014 (UTC)
    • I'm not sure how the game displays the text exactly, but it doesn't seem right that all of these items would start with a capital in the middle of a sentence.--Exiled Jedi (Greetings) 04:36, May 18, 2014 (UTC)
      • You're probably right. The identification has capitalization, but it's most likely a style choice. LOX is an exception, though: it is fully capitalized, while the rest aren't, so I'm leaving it the same. ^Jorrel_Fraajic 06:04, May 18, 2014 (UTC)
• You need to source all of the 3 ABY dates with a separate citation.
  • Sourced and clarified, per earlier objection.
• You currently have four redlinks, which is over the limit for a GA.--Exiled Jedi (Greetings) 04:36, May 18, 2014 (UTC)
  • I have de-redlinked the article. ^Jorrel_Fraajic 06:04, May 18, 2014 (UTC)
• You use owned twice in the first sentence of the description section.--Exiled Jedi (Greetings) 22:51, May 28, 2014 (UTC)
  • Changed. ^Jorrel_Fraajic 09:46, May 30, 2014 (UTC)
• Intro: "Due to this breach..." This implies that one of the breaches led to the move being necessary. Please specify which incident led to the move if one triggered it, otherwise please reword this to make it more clear.--Exiled Jedi (Greetings) 04:07, June 7, 2014 (UTC)
  • Reworked the intro a bit to add minor context. ^Jorrel_Fraajic 05:03, June 7, 2014 (UTC)
• Hmmm, now that you updated the intro, I notice that you did not say the database deletion was accidental in the body.--Exiled Jedi (Greetings) 17:37, June 7, 2014 (UTC)
  • Indeed I did not. Oversight has been corrected. ^Jorrel_Fraajic 10:03, June 8, 2014 (UTC)

Green Tentacle

• The quote under history needs to identify the second speaker. Green Tentacle ^(Talk) 10:35, May 30, 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks for catching that. ^Jorrel_Fraajic 02:59, May 31, 2014 (UTC)

El Jefe

• Would like just a word of context on why the ships were trying to screw with the fields in the intro.
  • Expanded to provide context.
• Is there any available info on how the fields were compromised? IFYLOFD ^{(Enter the Floydome)} 04:49, June 8, 2014 (UTC)
  • Not explicitly, no. There's implications of a mole in the Azzameen family throughout the game, but never any confirmation. ^Jorrel_Fraajic 01:09, June 9, 2014 (UTC)

Comments

• I added a piece about an alternate outcome to the scenario based on player ability. ^Jorrel_Fraajic 03:23, March 27, 2014 (UTC)
  • I removed it because it's a cut line/outcome. The game files and sound clips imply that the line offers a differing outcome, but the line is only actually spoken when the mission has already failed. ^Jorrel_Fraajic 10:32, April 4, 2014 (UTC)

• Updated article with information from Star Wars: X-Wing Alliance: Prima's Official Strategy Guide. ^Jorrel_Fraajic 10:32, April 4, 2014 (UTC)
• Approved as a Good article by AgriCorps 23:46, June 9, 2014 (UTC)