- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a good article nomination that was successful. Please do not modify it.
Corona-class frigate
- Nominated by: Cavalier One
(Squadron channel) 18:58, 28 May 2009 (UTC) - Nomination comments: As far away from Gastrulans as possible.
(4 ACs/1 Users/5 Total)
Support
CC7567 (talk) 22:57, 1 June 2009 (UTC)- Jonjedigrandmaster (Jujiggum) 11:05, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
- Grand Moff Tranner
(Comlink) 22:04, 15 June 2009 (UTC) - More starships, please. Toprawa and Ralltiir 22:21, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
- Cylka-talk- 00:43, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Object
- (Somewhat) returning to the GAN page
I know that the article currently isn't against the MOS (with the lack of italics for "Corona"), but is there a chance you can reword some of the "Coronas"? It's sometimes a bit tricky to establish the difference between fanon in this case, because the ship classes aren't always addressed. It's also a bit confusing, because it appears the Corona is an individual ship itself.B If you disagree, that's fine, but it's just something to consider.- I understand what you're saying, but the alternative is to use a lot of "vessel", "ship", and "frigate" to replace it, which I don't think works when we know the actual class name. I've changed a few to remove overuse of the word, however.
- FWIW, I've made edits to try and resolve this (without reading this objection beforehand). Toprawa and Ralltiir 03:24, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
- I understand what you're saying, but the alternative is to use a lot of "vessel", "ship", and "frigate" to replace it, which I don't think works when we know the actual class name. I've changed a few to remove overuse of the word, however.
"Coronas required a crew of seven hundred and eighty-two to operate, with fifty-six gunners, but could be manned by a skeleton crew of two hundred and eighty-one." Just slightly on the choppy side; could use a little rewording.- Tweaked it a little.
Was the Boldheart a Corona or not? Bit unclear.- I thought the fact that it was in the notable ships section was a clue, no? :P Clarified the situation. - Cavalier One(Squadron channel) 10:11, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- I thought the fact that it was in the notable ships section was a clue, no? :P Clarified the situation. - Cavalier One
- Good work otherwise, Cav. :) CC7567 (talk) 18:36, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Throughout the article, you switch between numbering things using words (such as "twenty-five"), and numerals (such as "2"). For consistency, pick one and stick to it.Jonjedigrandmaster (Jujiggum) 22:40, 9 June 2009 (UTC)- Fixed. All numerical values in the article body have been changed, apart from those designating years. - Cavalier One(Squadron channel) 07:38, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
- Fixed. All numerical values in the article body have been changed, apart from those designating years. - Cavalier One
- Toprawa:
My only real objection concerns the Appearances list. You only include the one novel, but as I understand it, the ships that were retconned to be Coronas appear in Shield of Lies as well. Should this novel (and the third, if appropriate) then not be included in the Apps list too? Also to note, I've made the "Notable ships" section a subsection of "History," to best conform to the LG.Toprawa and Ralltiir 03:24, 12 June 2009 (UTC)- That was my error; I must have accidentally left that out. Shield of Lies added. I'll recheck the third and see if it needs to be included. - Cavalier One(Squadron channel) 07:55, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
- That was my error; I must have accidentally left that out. Shield of Lies added. I'll recheck the third and see if it needs to be included. - Cavalier One
I understand that you spelled out the references of "782" and "281" per a previous objection on the grounds of consistency, but I think it would be best if you used numerals for numbers 100+. This isn't a matter of consistency so much as it's about readability, and it becomes a bit awkward to read "seven hundred eighty two" compared to just "782." If I may draw a comparison to professional media style practices, they often spell out numbers 10+ or 100+ for this very reason, and we typically do use numerals across the site in instances of starship statistics.Toprawa and Ralltiir 21:24, 15 June 2009 (UTC)- Changed. - Cavalier One(Squadron channel) 09:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you, sir. Toprawa and Ralltiir 22:21, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
- Changed. - Cavalier One
Comments
- Did any Coronas participate in the Black Fleet Crisis? I can't recall whether or not they were mentioned as participating in any battles of the conflict. Grand Moff Tranner (Comlink) 21:50, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
- Not to my knowledge. The Fifth was entirely New Class vessels which the Corona was not part of. The three named vessels revealed to have been Coronas were not refered to have been part of any conflict shown in the series. - Cavalier One(Squadron channel) 09:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- Not to my knowledge. The Fifth was entirely New Class vessels which the Corona was not part of. The three named vessels revealed to have been Coronas were not refered to have been part of any conflict shown in the series. - Cavalier One
Approved as a Good article by AgriCorps 00:43, 19 June 2009 (UTC)