Wookieepedia:Good article nominations/BB-2 Starfire fighter-bomber

< 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.

BB-2 Starfire fighter-bomber

  • Nominated by: Omicron(Leave a message at the BEEP!) 18:58, March 20, 2011 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments:I love starships, and figured I'd try to get WookieeProject Legacy Era up to an even 120 GA.

(3 ACs/2 Users/5 Total)

Support

  1. Yeah, sorry, probably should have been more clear with my objection. Still, nice job. Kilson 22:14, March 21, 2011 (UTC)
  2. LECG, hooray! Menkooroo 00:58, April 5, 2011 (UTC)
  3. ACvote Nicely done, Omicron. Toprawa and Ralltiir 19:35, April 8, 2011 (UTC)
  4. ACvote Grand Moff Tranner Imperial Department of Military Research (Comlink) 20:27, April 8, 2011 (UTC)
  5. ACvote Grunny (talk) 09:50, April 9, 2011 (UTC)

Object

Imperators II

Is it precise to say it was a "bomber of the Galactic Alliance" during the Second Imperial Civil War? The Alliance technically didn't exist anymore by then. Imperators II 19:02, March 20, 2011 (UTC)

Shouldn't the Legacy Era Campaign Guide in Bts section be put in quotes, too? Imperators II 21:03, March 20, 2011 (UTC)

Kilson
  • In the Intro "...the main bomber of the Galactic Alliance during the Sith–Imperial War and the subsequent Second Imperial Civil War." You should probably put in the Galactic Alliance Remnant into that sentence.
    • Haha Kilson 19:18, March 20, 2011 (UTC)
  • Also, could you expand the Intro to beyond one sentance. I know it's a small article, but you could work in some info about the Starfire's characteristics or armament.
  • In the Role section, "Secondary weapon systems included a pair of forward mounted laser cannons, as well as a dorsal turret on each wing that contained a light laser cannon or small anti-fighter missile launcher." You should move this to the Characteristics section.
  • Given the fact the article is too small to have a History section, could you add in the Sith-Imperial War and the Second Imperial Civil War into the Role section, given the fact you mentioned them in the Intro.
    • rewrote and expanded Role some, not sure what else to add. Already states what it did under Alliance and how it changed tactics after Camas.<-Omicron(Leave a message at the BEEP!) 21:49, March 21, 2011 (UTC)
      • I added a little to the Role section, what do you think? I just wanted to mention the two Wars. If you don't like the edit, feel free to delete it.Kilson 21:55, March 21, 2011 (UTC)
  • Otherwise, nice job Omicron, interesting read. Kilson 19:17, March 20, 2011 (UTC)
Ecks Dee
  • Infobox-only stuff.
    • think I added all pertinent stuff to the body of the article.
      • Everything mentioned in the infobox needs a mention in the article. Manufacturer, hyperdrive class, and so on. 1358 (Talk) 20:10, March 24, 2011 (UTC)
        • added all I could see from the infobox.
  • Lacking linking in body. 1358 (Talk) 20:42, March 23, 2011 (UTC)
    • linked everything I could think of. Let me know if I missed anything in regards to your concerns. thanks<-Omicron(Leave a message at the BEEP!) 21:25, March 23, 2011 (UTC)
      • Still looks a bit sparse. You'll be very surprised by our articles—we have articles on very strange things. :P One example is [[engine]]. 1358 (Talk) 20:10, March 24, 2011 (UTC)
        • linked everything I could think of, let me know if I am missing something.
  • You could say in the Bts something like "The BB2[...] was first mentioned in the LECG, released on <date>." and then the stuff you currently have there. 1358 (Talk) 20:10, March 24, 2011 (UTC)
  • Please source the two fact tags.
    • referenced.
  • The infobox references need to use the {{Ref}} template.
    • I don't know what you mean by this. I don't know what that template does or how to use it.
      • You can take a look at other GAs. It's basically just {{Ref|<ref name=...>}}. Its purpose is to make references in the infobox a lil' bit smaller. 1358 (Talk) 20:12, March 28, 2011 (UTC)
  • The introduction could use some expansion. 1358 (Talk) 12:10, March 26, 2011 (UTC)
    • Expanded some more, not sure what else to add in there. Already mention its role, its users, its crew and weapons. <-Omicron(Leave a message at the BEEP!) 17:07, March 28, 2011 (UTC)
Oh my cron!
  • Hey there! I'm looking in the Legacy Era Campaign Guide, and I can't find a reference to this model being used by the Galactic Alliance. The section immediately before it on p. 141 does admittedly say that the GA Remnant prefers to use Galactic Alliance starfighter models, but I can't find anything that specifically identifies the BB-2 as something that was definitely around when the GA Remnant was still just the Galactic Alliance. Am I missing something?
    • Not sure, article states "..the Galactic Alliance Core Fleet squadrons move their ships as close as possible.." This could mean it's used throughout the war, not just after Stazi split off and forms the Galactic Alliance Remnant.
      • Hmmm... the thing is that the Galactic Alliance Core Fleet seems to refer to the GA fleet both pre- and post-war, having been in use by both the GA Remnant and the GA before it. I don't think a mention of the ship being in use by the "Galactic Alliance Core Fleet" is enough to say that it was definitely in use by the Galactic Alliance. It would be, IMO, like interpreting a mention of "Imperial Navy" to refer to both the Fel Empire and the later Empire-in-exile. Additionally, specifically regarding the sentence you mentioned, those tactics of moving as close to the enemy as possible are tactics of the GA Remnant, aren't they? Menkooroo 04:06, March 31, 2011 (UTC)
        • I don't know. I took the line from the source to mean that it was used by the GA before and after the Battle of Caamas, therefore it seems logical to me that it was used by the Galactic Alliance Defense Fleet and subsequently by the Remnant. Since the article doesn't specify, I think it's justified to assume it was used by both. The changing of tactics described in the article make no mention of a timeline, so I am guessing that might be speculation on the part of the original author.<-Omicron(Leave a message at the BEEP!) 17:52, March 31, 2011 (UTC)
        • I've removed some of the things I think are speculation.<-Omicron(Leave a message at the BEEP!) 00:09, April 1, 2011 (UTC)
          • Looking over the LECG again, I think you're right. The stuff discussed in the GA section seems to refer to generic use by the GA Core Fleet unless otherwise noted. For some reason I thought that it specified GA Remnant, but that was my mistake. Menkooroo 04:05, April 4, 2011 (UTC)
  • LECG indicates that the missile and torpedo barrages are "rapidfire" --- can you mention that? Menkooroo 16:42, March 30, 2011 (UTC)
  • Good stuff! Just remember to only link to things once in the body. One more small thing: "The standard tactic employed by the Galactic Alliance during the Sith–Imperial War was to fire multiple salvos from maximum range, then return to their carrier and reload." This kind of makes it sound like the entire Galactic Alliance returns to a carrier to reload --- can you reword it so it's clear that it means the Starfire? Menkooroo 04:30, April 4, 2011 (UTC)
    • ok, I reworded it a bit. If you think it's still a little vague, let me know and I'll rewrite it some more. <-Omicron(Leave a message at the BEEP!) 00:54, April 5, 2011 (UTC)
      • Nope, that's perfect. Menkooroo 00:58, April 5, 2011 (UTC)
Toprawa
  • I feel like there should probably be some kind of History section, if it might be exceptionally brief. We know it has some kind of history. Toprawa and Ralltiir 20:04, April 6, 2011 (UTC)
    • I added something, but we really know nothing historical about it. The single source has no information about first usage, major battles it was used it, squadrons, etc. <-Omicron(Leave a message at the BEEP!) 20:28, April 6, 2011 (UTC)
      • That's fine. Now go back and re-read that sentence and see what things you've left out. ;) Toprawa and Ralltiir 20:29, April 6, 2011 (UTC)
        • Ok I've linked things in the section, but if you're referring to something specific, I don't know what you mean. <-Omicron(Leave a message at the BEEP!) 21:18, April 6, 2011 (UTC)
          • There's a typo/missing word in that sentence, and you've forgotten to source the sentence, which is something I've noticed you neglected to do in a previous addition to this same article. Sourcing is quite literally the most important part of an article, so this is something you need to start remembering to do. Toprawa and Ralltiir 21:22, April 6, 2011 (UTC)
  • Infobox objections: I think we can probably fill in the "Engine" field with the general "Equipped"
    • fixed.
  • I've left a redlink for the "interceptor missile" in the infobox, which will require you to fill it in.
    • page created to get rid of redlink.
  • Is there any specific reason why the "Ion bomb" mention is capitalized in the infobox? Please double-check the source to see how it presents it.
    • stupid wook, automatically capitalizing links. Fixed.
  • Not an objection, but there were a number of instances of double linking in the infobox. Please remember that items should be linked once upon first mention in the infobox, intro, and article, and nowhere else. Toprawa and Ralltiir 21:58, April 6, 2011 (UTC)
    • think I removed all the redundant links. Thought it was required for each section of the main article, not the article as a whole. Fixed. <-Omicron(Leave a message at the BEEP!) 00:04, April 7, 2011 (UTC)
  • I find the Characteristics section rather confusing and not very well organized in terms of laying out the vessel's armament features. As an offensive fighter, this should be the, or one of the, very first things detailed in that section. But these specifics aren't even detailed clearly until the end of that section's second paragraph, and meanwhile all of these specifics are being referenced back and forth in the first paragraph as though the reader is already familiar with these things. Try to rework the order of that section while trying to focus on mentioning specific armaments first, and leave things like deflector shields, engines, and consumables as secondary things. Toprawa and Ralltiir 02:39, April 7, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Approved as a Good article by AgriCorps 09:50, April 9, 2011 (UTC)