Wookieepedia:Good article nominations/Callef

< 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.

Callef

  • Nominated by: Cade Calrayn GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit 23:46, May 23, 2012 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: Project Hero. QUOTES GALORE! Are you happy now, Menk?

(3 ACs/4 Users/7 Total)

Support

  1. Good work, Cade. No more objections from me. Winterz 16:53, May 24, 2012 (UTC)
  2. Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 03:21, June 6, 2012 (UTC)
  3. ACvote Cavalier OneFarStar(Squadron channel) 22:23, June 16, 2012 (UTC)
  4. ACvote—Cal JediInfinite Empire (Personal Comm Channel) 23:50, June 16, 2012 (UTC)
  5. Plagueis327 15:50, June 25, 2012 (UTC)
  6. Inqvote Menkooroo (talk) 04:14, June 28, 2012 (UTC)
  7. Trak Nar Ramble on 04:16, June 28, 2012 (UTC)

Object

Winterz
  • More content in the intro Winterz 16:08, May 24, 2012 (UTC)
  • Great. Well, if he has appeared in 3 different quests it would be great if you extended the "Behind the scenes" section and mention them too(though I'm not completely sure this is necessary?). Winterz 16:20, May 24, 2012 (UTC)
    • Only appeared in one. The other references are for info about the Hero, Orgus Din, and Bengel Morr. Cade Calrayn GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit 16:21, May 24, 2012 (UTC)
  • Either way, you must mention the non-light side choices in the same section ;) Winterz 16:27, May 24, 2012 (UTC)
    • Bah. Knew I forgot something. Cade Calrayn GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit 16:33, May 24, 2012 (UTC)
Exiled Jedi
  • Could you make it clearer that the Bith is a Jedi in the body?--Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 03:34, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
Bith
  • I'd like to see another image of Callef rather than the image of Unaw --- images of the article's subject are always preferable to semi-relevant images of other people. Menkooroo 01:57, June 11, 2012 (UTC)
  • Reload your infobox, sucka!
    • Bah! The "mass" field disappeared!
  • I think the third paragraph of the biography should be condensed. There's quite a bit of info not too relevant to Callef's biography --- eg, Aharo being alarmed, Weller welcoming a new Padawan to the planet, Weller asking the Hero of Tython to confirm the reports --- this kind of info would be great in an article on the battle, but for the purposes of Callef's biography, I think a lot of it could be cut down in order to focus on what's relevant to Callef --- ie, that Aharo was captured and brought before Callef.
    • Dun..
  • Could you reword some of the bio's fourth paragraph to make it more from Callef's perspective rather than the Hero of Tython's?
    • Dun...
      • Well-dun. However, it now smells like the dreaded play-by-play! Which in this case means recounting conversations line-by-line. "The wounded Jedi asked Callef why he would attack a fellow Jedi, and the Dark Jedi responded scathingly that Aharo was to weak to be a Jedi. Callef believed that the Order must be reborn, and Aharo would be the first of many to fall." Rather than give every detail of the convo, can you condense it so as to only get the key points across? The current level of detail is overkill.
        • Done.
          • Some of it still seems a little too detailed: "The wounded Jedi asked Callef why he would attack a fellow Jedi, and the Dark Jedi responded scathingly that Aharo was too weak to be a Jedi." I think this could be cut down to describe what they did rather than what they said; some of it might be more at home in the P&T, too. See what you can do. Menkooroo (talk) 03:15, June 28, 2012 (UTC)
  • The quote for P&T seems to indicate that Callef can understand the Bith language. Could that be added to the P&T?
    • Dun....
      • "Fluent in both Basic and the language of the Bith people, Callef was arrogant and cruel." This reads as if he's arrogant and cruel because of the languages he speaks. Also, do we know for sure that he's fluent in (ie speaks) the Bith language, or only that he understands it?
  • Based on Trayus's comments here, here, and here, I'm led to believe that TOR doesn't actually date its events, meaning that the date needs to be reffed to something else. Check out Trayus's comments for some examples of how he's done it. Menkooroo 19:13, June 25, 2012 (UTC)
    • Dunnnnn!!!! Cade Calrayn GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit 16:58, June 26, 2012 (UTC)
      • The link to the forum post redirects to swtor.com. Is it archived on archive.org, maybe? If so, can you use {{WebCite}} for it? It's a great template to use for forum posts, as it indicates the author and the date the message was posted. Also, ref [3] is broken.
        • That template scares me. Done. Cade Calrayn GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit 01:25, June 28, 2012 (UTC)
      • A question --- the game takes place over the course of two years from 3643 BBY tp 3641 BBY, right? If that's the case, then what's the evidence for pinpointing this mission in 3641? Is it fair to say anything other than "at some point between 3643 and 3641 BBY" without making any assumptions? Menkooroo (talk) 21:18, June 26, 2012 (UTC)
        • Although saying "between" the two date might work, I've heard developers on numerous occasions say either "around a decade" or "around ten to twelve years" after the Sacking of Coruscant. The "around" makes me thing that the game might not be under such a definitive timeline, and the "between" these two dates excludes the possibility of it any story starting, say, nine years after the Sacking of Coruscant. If we pick either 3643 BBY or 3641 BBY (the only two rough dates we've been given) and say "around" or "approximately," we leave open the possibility that the events might have happened in 3,644 BBY—and given the developer's penchant for using the term "around," that date is entirely possible for many of these articles. So that's my recommendation. Pick one of those two years based on the context of the game's setting and add the modifier to leave open possibilities. The "between" is too definitive. Darth Trayus(Trayus Academy) 02:13, June 27, 2012 (UTC)
          • I'm fine with around/approximately. Also, Cade, I think that both the forum post and The Essential Atlas need to be sourced, since the former says "around ten years after the treaty" and the latter says "treaty is in 3,653 BBY." You could use two refs and ref them both, or do one explanatory ref like ref [25] in Jace Malcom. Either one is OK.
          • I would also like to apply this objection to every past, present, and future TOR nom! Get fixin'! :D Menkooroo (talk) 04:03, June 27, 2012 (UTC)
            • Menk's absolutely correct. Both need to be mentioned in the reference note. Darth Trayus(Trayus Academy) 04:11, June 27, 2012 (UTC)
            • Gah! Why must you give me so much work? The timeline isn't finished yet! :P Oh, and Trayus, my reasoning for choosing 3641 - Annihilation is in 3,640, and it supposedly directly follows the end of JK Act III and the Battle of Ilum/Malgus's defeat. The JK's storyline is the one that's tied the closest to the central storyline of the game, and I'm thinking that the Emperor's defeat occurred more towards 3,640 and 3641 than 3643. Cade Calrayn GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit 04:14, June 27, 2012 (UTC)
                • Alrighty, Callef's good to go. I'll make my way through my other articles now. Cade Calrayn GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit 01:25, June 28, 2012 (UTC)
                  • The ref is good but needs some more explanation. "The Emperor" and Malgus aren't mentioned in the article and will thus need context. It's also not really explained why the Jedi Knight storyline has to occur just before that year. Since the explanation is getting pretty long for a ref now, it might be simpler to explain it in the BTS. Give it a try and see if you like it. Menkooroo (talk) 03:15, June 28, 2012 (UTC)

Comments

Approved as a Good article by AgriCorps 00:41, June 29, 2012 (UTC)