Wookieepedia:Good article nominations/Bodo Baas's Master

< 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.

Bodo Baas's Master

  • Nominated by: Darth Morrt 08:33, November 29, 2009 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: This is my first try. Tell me if my English is too weird and I will stay at regular editing.

(3 ACs/4 Users/7 Total)

Support

  1. Your first vote. Not that hard, true? --Skippy Farlstendoiro 14:44, November 30, 2009 (UTC)
  2. Its not that bad for the first GA. Now you only need 3 ACs votes : ) Kreivi Wolter 11:04, December 2, 2009 (UTC)
  3. QuiGonJinn Senate seal(Talk) 11:31, December 20, 2009 (UTC)
  4. ACvote Jonjedigrandmaster (Jedi Beacon) 17:19, December 22, 2009 (UTC)
  5. Looks good. --Jawaman No, I did NOT steal your droid! 17:21, December 22, 2009 (UTC)
  6. ACvote CC7567 (talk) 19:44, December 26, 2009 (UTC)
  7. ACvote It wasn't pretty, but there you go. Toprawa and Ralltiir 00:34, January 4, 2010 (UTC)

Object

  1. The Grand Master, round one
    • Right now, there is simply too much information in the article that is irrelevant to Bodo Baas' master himself/herself. For example, the beginning of the biography is basically a history lesson that is completely unneeded for this article: "By 1000 BBY the New Sith Wars, thousand years of conflict between the Jedi and the Sith, which lasted from approximately 2,000 to 1,000 BBY, was over. The Ruusan Reformation reconstructed the government of the Galactic Republic taking power from the Supreme Chancellor to the Galactic Senate. Simultaneously, the Republic and the Jedi Order disbanded their armies and navies. The Order centralized the Jedi training on Coruscant and allowed only one Padawan per Master. Years of reconstuction began after the Dark Age."
    • Also, please work on your grammar. It is a requirement for GANs per the first part of rule number 1: an article must be well-written.
    • Jonjedigrandmaster (Jedi Beacon) 14:34, November 29, 2009 (UTC)
  2. Skippy wants to read this
    • Source all the infobox.
    • who will face the Dark Side, while the future of all the Jedi is at stake. Use past tense: "who would face" "the future [...] was/would be at stake".
    • Consider avoiding the string "he/she", using instead "the Master", "this Jedi Master", "this person"... For what we know, Baas's Master might well be neither male or female.
    • "he surely knew" "Maybe this led". Speculation; the Master did or did not.
    • The history mentions the writing of a prophecy, but it could also include that the prophecy was then stored on a Holocron (as I deduce from a later paragraph).
    • Consider adding an image of Baas, captioned to indicate it was the Master's apprentice.
    • Quite good for a first; when's the second one coming? :) Skippy Farlstendoiro 12:17, November 30, 2009 (UTC)
  3. QGJ
    • First of all, was it explicitly stated that this individual was a Jedi Master? Having a Padawan does not necessarily equal a Master's title, and Jedi Knight could also be referred to as "master" by his Padawan.
      • It is not explicitly stated, but I think the Master is a Jedi Master because:
    1. He/she lived quite long to be a Master - I know this is speculation.
    2. He trained Bodo Baas - it is still possible not to be a Master, but unlikely.
      • I think it is not speculation, just common sense. As far as I know, there is no one, who trained someone to Master whitout to became a Master himself.
    3. As far as I know, the theory of master-who-not-a-Master comes from the Preques. I think pre-Phantom-Menace sources that say master or Master intended to say Jedi Master. Altough I think this should be true.
    4. TEGTTF says "written by his own Master" on page five, Master capitalized. Darth Morrt 00:51, December 1, 2009 (UTC)
      • There are other examples of mentioning just "Master" in the book, where the actual Jedi is a Jedi Master. Darth Morrt 10:11, December 8, 2009 (UTC)
      • It is still speculation. However, since an AC member has also objected to it and I probably won't be able to dedicate too much time to my review in the future, I'll strike my own objection and leave this matter to Jon's judgment. QuiGonJinn Senate seal(Talk) 20:43, December 8, 2009 (UTC)
    • In the biography, please follow the chronology. You jump from the master making a prophecy, to Bodo Baas telling it to Leia, then back to the master taking Bodo as a Padawan.
      • Done.
    • As per the established rules, the Master took a Krevaaki Padawan, Bodo Baas, descendant of Vodo-Siosk Baas. By 590 BBY, the training was complete, and Baas was assigned to the Adega system, where he served with a group of other Jedi. I'm pretty sure that Dark Empire 5 is not a source for all of this.
      • Done.
    • Context on Vodo-Siosk Baas and Anakin Solo. Leia and Luke also need context.
      • Vodo removed. Anakin is part of the prophecy.
    • How are the quotes in the biography and the P&A relevant to the master? They are just random statements about the Force.
      • Bio quote is not really relevant, deleted. P&A quote is added because the most important thing we know about the Master is his prophecy, seeing the future. I moved it to Bio. Darth Morrt 00:51, December 1, 2009 (UTC)
        • This still doesn't cut it. You can't just take random quotes from various sources and use them in your article. A quote must be taken from a source in which the character is featured/mentioned, and it should talk about the character in question. QuiGonJinn Senate seal(Talk) 20:43, December 8, 2009 (UTC)
    • "Legacy" should be a subsection in the biography.
      • Done.
    • The Master first appeared in the sixth issue of the Dark Empire comic series… No, he did not; he was only mentioned.
      • Done.
    • In the appearances, list the specific issue(s) of Dark Empire in which the master is mentioned.
      • Done.
    • Have you checked all sources that might mention the master, including The Complete Star Wars Encyclopedia and those listed in the Tedryn Holocron's and Bodo Baas' articles?
    • Please watch your linking. Each item must me linked once in the intro, once in the infobox, and once in the main body of the article.
    • Has a little too flowery prose and excessive details to my liking, but overall, quite good for a first try. QuiGonJinn Senate seal(Talk) 17:08, November 30, 2009 (UTC)
      • Mostly done. Checking sources, but not all is availible for me. Darth Morrt 00:51, December 1, 2009 (UTC)
        • I haven't found any fourther info about the Master in these sources: Force Heretic: Reunion, Dark Empire endnotes, Dark Empire Sourcebook, TEGTC, JA Sourcebook, TEGTTF, Dark Empire Handbook, TNEG to Weapons and Technology, TEG Alien Species, TNEG Alian Species, Ultimate Alian Anthology. Darth Morrt 11:10, December 3, 2009 (UTC)
        • These sources are not availible for me: A Guide to the Star Wars Universe, any version; Star Wars Encyclopedia, any version; Fact Files, TEG Weapons and Technology, Firestorm short story. Darth Morrt 11:10, December 3, 2009 (UTC)
          • I have access to most of these, except the Fact Files, A Guide to the SW Universe, and The Complete SW Encyclopedia. I'll try to help you out, but you'll also have to ask other users. There are quite a few people here who have the CSWE; Borsk Fey'lya is the go-to guy regarding the Fact Files; and I believe Muuuuuurgh has ATTSWU. QuiGonJinn Senate seal(Talk) 20:43, December 8, 2009 (UTC)
            • Nothing in Firestorm, The Essential (and the New Essential) Guides to Weapons and Technology and the SW Encyclopedia. QuiGonJinn Senate seal(Talk) 17:27, December 9, 2009 (UTC)
              • Also nothing in Fact Files.Darth Morrt 17:33, December 9, 2009 (UTC)
                • Also nothing in any edition of AGTTSWU. Darth Morrt 10:05, December 14, 2009 (UTC)
  4. The Grand Master, round two
    • If something is "unknown" it should not be placed in the article: (i.e. "It is unknown if the Master fought in the New Sith Wars...")
    • If it actually is confirmed that this prophecy came from an actual Force Vision, than this should be mentioned in the biography, and not just the Powers and abilities section. If this is not confirmed, then it cannot be put in the article.
    • In the BTS you refer to the Master as "him/her." Is the Master's gender unknown? If this is so, then you should go through the article and remove all of the references to the master's gender. If it is actually confirmed that this master is male, then this should be stated in the infobox as well as the article body.
    • Also, just because the prophecy was written around 990 BBY doesn't mean the master was born before that time. As the date is "approximate," the master could easily have been born shortly after 990 BBY and have had the prophecy early enough in life to still make it approximately one thousand years before 10 ABY. While it is likely that the master was born beforehand, it is still speculative, and therefore cannot be put in the article.
      • This cannot go in the infobox, either.
        • Deleted. He could be born much earlier too. Around 990 BBY is not good for birth date. Darth Morrt 01:34, December 1, 2009 (UTC)
    • Jonjedigrandmaster (Jedi Beacon) 18:05, November 30, 2009 (UTC)
  5. The Grand Master, round three
    • The prophecy that this Jedi made should be mentioned sooner in the intro. Right now it seems like context for the Tedryn Holocron rather than a major event in the Jedi's life.
    • The sentences in the first paragraph of the biography are all short and abrupt. See if you can make them flow better. Also, why don't you go into details about the prophecy here? As far as we know, it was the most important event of the Jedi's life, and should be detailed more upon its first mention.
      • Please fix your grammar here.
        • You cannot refer to "the male one" or "the pregnant female" here, since you have not yet introduced either one.
    • "where he served with a group of other Jedi."The meaning and purpose of this is unclear. What other Jedi? How and who/what were they serving? How is this relevant to the Master?
      • You've overelaborated on this now. Just explain the basics here, since this isn't something that's actually hapening to the master him/herself; it's just relating to something he/she did. Also, please word this section better, as it's become very awkward to read.
        • Better information-wise, but it's still very awkward.
          • Better? Darth Morrt 19:38, December 10, 2009 (UTC)
            • Some, but "teaching" is confusing (teaching who/what?)
              • There is no specification on this in the Dark Empire. Palpatine just said "Jedi history and teachings".Darth Morrt 20:03, December 10, 2009 (UTC)
    • You say in the BTS that this Jedi was only mentioned in the Jedi vs. Sith sourcebook, but this is not specified under the Sources section. If he was indeed only mentioned and did not actually appear, you need to add a mentioned only tag to the source. Jonjedigrandmaster (Jedi Beacon) 23:30, December 1, 2009 (UTC)
      • Mentioned only tag goes only to the Appearance section, doesn't it? In sourcebooks everything is mentioned only, because nothing is appearing. Others done. Maybe a little too much semi-relevant details, but there is very few thing that are clearly and strictly relevant to the Master.Darth Morrt 22:55, December 2, 2009 (UTC)
        • Sorry, my mistake. However, unless this particular Master has his own entry in the source, then you need to state what entry he is mentioned in (i.e. the Tedryn Holocron, unless I am mistaken). Also, please work on your grammar throughout the article. Once again, this falls under Rule 1 of the GAN page, and it shouldn't be the reviewers' job to have to fix this for you. Jonjedigrandmaster (Jedi Beacon) 00:26, December 5, 2009 (UTC)
          • Done. I do my best with grammar, but my English is not perfect. Darth Morrt 13:09, December 7, 2009 (UTC)
            • I understand, just please be extra-careful about it; grammar mistakes often make reviewing more difficult, as the reviewer is not always sure of your meaning. Jonjedigrandmaster (Jedi Beacon) 19:04, December 7, 2009 (UTC)
    • Regarding Qui-Gon's objection above; every single bit of evidence you used to refer to this Jedi as Master is complete speculation. If it is not stated in an official source, then it cannot be stated in an article here. Jonjedigrandmaster (Jedi Beacon) 19:04, December 7, 2009 (UTC)
      • Isn't it just a logical deduction to state that the Master was a Jedi Master, since he had a Padawan who made the trials? Darth Morrt 22:22, December 8, 2009 (UTC)
    • "The renewal of the Galactic Republic by the Ruusan Reformation affected not only the Government's structure, but also the Jedi Order itself. New educational rules were applied by the Jedi Council to prevent any unsupervised student from falling to the dark side. As per the established rules, the Jedi took a Krevaaki Padawan, Bodo Baas." Are you sure that this is the actual reason that this Jedi took Baas as his Padawan? Baas' article doesn't mention this reasoning at all. Remember, if this reasoning is not stated in any source, then it cannot be stated here.
      • This is just some average statement about the Jedi Order after the Ruusan Reform. They applied he rule of only-youngs-to-padawan and the Master should follow this rule. If any info not explicitly stated in a source should be removed, then nearly nothing would remain. The only direct and clear info about the master is in the Dark Empire: "For you, Bobo Baas will speak a prophecy written one thousand years before your time, by my own master." And this is all, the TEGTTF just repeat this. So it is not stated that he is a Jedi (he could be a karatemaster of Baas), nor that he was the prophet (he could write down someone else's prophecy). Darth Morrt 15:14, December 12, 2009 (UTC)
        • Speculation is not allowed here, because speculation is original research that does not come from any official source and therefore is not canon. For instance, because no source says that this individual took Baas as a Padawan because of those rules, it is speculation. Because it has not come from any actual source it is not canon and must be removed. If it is really as unclear as you imply whether or not this master actually made the prophecy, then it must be removed, because it is unverified by any Star Wars source and is therefore not yet canon. However, by the lead quote of this page, you can at least say that the master at least documented the prophecy, even if the master didn't actually create it. Be careful with this, though, and double-check everything to make sure that you're not removing valid information.
          • Deleted the reasoning. Is it good, or the "The renewal of the..."-section should be deleted also?
          • I can't decide whether the prophesying is original research or not. The lead quote is the main source of the article. I would say the master is not just a documenter and he is a Jedi Master, but the last was objected. Can you help me to decide? Darth Morrt 19:50, December 12, 2009 (UTC)
            • Adressed. Darth Morrt 10:05, December 14, 2009 (UTC)
              • This still remains. Why is the information still there if this Jedi has no direct connection to it as far as we know?
    • Please check your grammar in the third paragraph of the bio.
    • Is there an article for the confrontation of between Palpatine and Luke and Leia? If so, then you should link to it in the article.
      • Battle of Pinnacle Base. Darth Morrt 15:14, December 12, 2009 (UTC)
    • Some of the Legacy section just restates what you've said earlier in the bio. Jonjedigrandmaster (Jedi Beacon) 21:15, December 11, 2009 (UTC)
    • I believe that if Baas said that his Master wrote down the prophecy "1,000 years ago" in 10 ABY, then you can say that this individual lived around the time of the New Sith Wars and wrote the prophecy around 990 BBY, so that you give a time frame for when the prophecy was written.
      • Done.
    • The wording of the second half of the first sentence of the intro is rather awkward. Jonjedigrandmaster (Jedi Beacon) 21:12, December 15, 2009 (UTC)
    • The last paragraph of the bio should be merged to the Legacy section. Jonjedigrandmaster (Jedi Beacon) 21:31, December 16, 2009 (UTC)
      • Done. Darth Morrt 07:05, December 17, 2009 (UTC)
        • Okay, but why is the first confrontation with Palpatine mentioned if it is not the confrontation that ultimately defeated him?
          • I think, the prophecy is refering to the first confrontation, which happens at the end of the same story arc. I have added the final confrontation to give an end to the section.
    • Grammar issue for the final sentence of the intro: the way you have it written now, the thing "which contained the prophecy" could refer to either Bodo Baas or the Holocron.
  6. Attack of the Clone
    • Can the intro be expanded at all? It's a little on the measly side at the moment.
    • In the Bio, you first say that "Later, the written prophecy was stored in the Tedryn Holocron" but later state that "By 590 BBY, Baas had put the prophecy written by his Master in the holocron." Which is correct? Please clarify this redundancy and fix the bit you put in at the end of the intro if necessary.
    • Please find a replacement for the colloquial usage of "put."
      • Previously an AC changed it from 'add' to 'put'. Redone.
    • Is there any chance you can find some suitable pronouns to use instead of the constant "this Jedi" or "Jedi"? It often gets confusing with the other Force-sensitives you mention.
      • His/her gender is not confirmed. I haven't found any other than 'this Jedi' and 'this individual'.
        • "Being"? "Personage"? In any case, you should try using "Jedi" less to avoid confusing the Force users in the article with the article's actual subject. CC7567 (talk) 01:31, December 25, 2009 (UTC)
          • Not to an excessive point, though. He's still a Jedi, and taking that out completely isn't good either. CC7567 (talk) 19:44, December 26, 2009 (UTC)
    • Can you clarify how the confrontation between Skywalker, Organa Solo, and Palpatine was relevant to his Legacy (and the prophecy)?
      • "She must battle join against this thief" - I think this refers to the confrontation in Dark Empire 6.
        • Then you need to clarify that in the article to leave no room for speculation. CC7567 (talk) 01:31, December 25, 2009 (UTC)
          • Is this enough, or sould I add something about Luke held in semi-captive and about Leia joining him and the Emperor. Darth Morrt 08:10, December 25, 2009 (UTC)
    • How did the prophecy foretell the "specific beings" who would take part in it when the prophecy did not include any names?
      • Previously an AC removed the 'in a poetic form' part. I think "A brother and sister born to walk the sky" is a poetic form of 'Skywalker'. Darth Morrt 23:05, December 24, 2009 (UTC)
        • "Only she can save the Skywalkers from certain doom" "Skywalkers" is pretty exact. Jonjedigrandmaster (Jedi Beacon) 00:14, December 25, 2009 (UTC)
    • Possibly more to come. CC7567 (talk) 21:24, December 24, 2009 (UTC)

Comments

Approved as a Good article by AgriCorps 00:34, January 4, 2010 (UTC)