Wookieepedia:Good article nominations/Battle of Anx Minor

< 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.

Battle of Anx Minor

  • Nominated by: Grand Moff Tranner Imperial Department of Military Research (Comlink) 21:07, February 3, 2011 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: Essentially the long-undetailed climactic end of the Galactic Civil War. And I wanted to GA a battle. So yeah.

(3 ACs/3 Users/6 Total)

Support

  1. ACvote Nicely done. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 21:40, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Clone Commander Lee Talk 20:15, February 5, 2011 (UTC)
  3. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 20:40, February 5, 2011 (UTC)
  4. ACvote 1358 (Talk) 16:40, February 6, 2011 (UTC)
  5. ACvote Grunny (talk) 10:21, February 7, 2011 (UTC)
  6. Menkooroo 02:43, February 9, 2011 (UTC)

Object

Ruby
  • Context on those planets in the prelude.
    • The links are to battles, not planets; the context for these engagements is provided in terms of their outcomes. I'd rather leave the links to the battles rather than complicate matters by trying to include links to both the battles and the planets.
  • "Ackbar, commanding from the Super Star Destroyer Guardian, led the New Republic Third and Fifth Fleets..." This is redundant with the Prelude. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 09:22, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
    • Actually, it isn't. Without it, it would be unclear if the Third and Fifth Fleets participated in this battle.
  • Further clarification is needed when you're talking about the EX-F. At first you call it a prototype vessel, then you call it a testbed when it's destroyed by Ackbar without specifying that it is serving as a testbed for the weapons and drives. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 09:30, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
    • Added some clarification on "testbed." I'd rather not go into too much detail on the EX-F's specifications, given the ship's minor role in the engagement. Thanks for the review. Grand Moff Tranner Imperial Department of Military Research (Comlink) 20:40, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
A few questions
  • Is it appropriate to pipelink "Empire" to "Galactic Empire" in the intro? The Remnant is a collection of warlords that was unified by Daala into a new state, while the Galactic Empire itself ceased to exist after Crimson Empire II, AFAIK. I'd sofixthis, but I know that you're more of an expert on the Empire than I am.
    • The sources don't really agree on what the Empire has become as of the battle. Earlier sources refer to it as the "Galactic Empire;" later sources, the "Imperial Remnant." I figured there's no harm in linking to the Galactic Empire article anyway.
  • Behind the scenes states that neither NEC nor TEA provided any new details on the conflict, but the sourcing in the article seems to indicate that they did --- only a small part of "The Battle" is sourced to NEGTC, while the rest is sourced to TEA and NEC. I'm interpreting the bts as claiming that all of the info from that section is already from NEGTC --- if so, can't the entirety of the section be sourced to NEGTC? If not, then isn't that bts statement incorrect? Menkooroo 14:31, February 7, 2011 (UTC)
    • Neither, actually. Later sources merely clarify what the earlier sources stated. No new information has been released on the battle since it was first mentioned in the NEGTC. Thanks for the review. Grand Moff Tranner Imperial Department of Military Research (Comlink) 21:39, February 7, 2011 (UTC)
      • I'm still a bit confused by the bts statement... just to clarify: If the entirety of the "The battle" section can't be sourced to NEGTC, then didn't the NEC and TEA technically "expand upon the details of the conflict," even if they just clarified them in more detail? Sorry to push this, but I just kinda feel like the bts statement is a bit misleading. Menkooroo 02:21, February 8, 2011 (UTC)
        • "New details" would involve information not present in any form in any of the sources. An example of this would be information on a part of the battle other than the destruction of the EX-F. I don't count clarification of preexisting information as "new details." Grand Moff Tranner Imperial Department of Military Research (Comlink) 20:51, February 8, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Approved as a Good article by AgriCorps 23:06, February 10, 2011 (UTC)