Wookieepedia:Good article nominations/Dark illusion

< Wookieepedia:Good article nominations
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a good article nomination that was unsuccessful. Please do not modify it.

Dark illusion

  • Nominated by: Squishy Vic | message 04:55, June 15, 2015 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: If you have objections about the images, please note them here instead of changing them, as widescreen images (16x9 or wider) look great at 300px and don't show enough detail at anything smaller. Thanks! Squishy Vic | message 04:55, June 15, 2015 (UTC)

(0 ACs/1 Users/1 Total)

Support

  1. Awesome job. One of the best scenes in the entire series explained beautifully. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 06:35, June 24, 2015 (UTC)

Object

AV-6R7
  • The original SWE entry for Moraband will need to be listed in the sources section, as it features the text that indirectly mentions the ritual. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 05:26, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
  • The Episode Guide specifically refers to it as an ancient Sith incantation in the Balc Tongue, not a Balc incantation. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 05:44, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
    • I'm not sure what you mean. The incantation is in the Balc tongue/language, so you wouldn't say "the ancient Balc language Sith incantation". You would just say "Balc incantation", or perhaps I can say "Sith incantation in Balc. Squishy Vic | message 05:59, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
      • I feel like having Sith in there is important, so something like the latter would be preferable. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 06:04, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
        • Indeed, I rewrote anything that mentioned Balc incantation to address that it's a Sith incantation spoken in Balc. Squishy Vic | message 06:07, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
  • Some parts of the ritual are left out of the description section. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 05:44, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
  • One last thing before you get my vote. It should be specified the the clone were of the 501st, and maybe change company to something much smaller. It's like five dudes. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 06:16, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
    • Added some context on them and their fate, as well as made it a "squad" instead. Squishy Vic | message 06:22, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
      • Excellent, you kinda forgot about them. Captain Rex was there too, so you may want to mention him. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 06:25, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
        • I did indeed, although I think they're irrelevant any further than saying they're from the 501st, mostly because the article is about the dark illusion power, not Yoda's actual journey; Anakin is important because Yoda chooses to save him rather than find out who Sidious is (basically not give into temptation), plus it speaks to Anakin's eventual fall to the dark side later in the article. Where as the clones just serve as death fodder and are instantly killed by Dooku, which is really all that needs to be said about them in this article's context.Squishy Vic | message 06:27, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
Attack of the Clone
  • As far as I can tell based on our current Force power FAs and GAs, the "area" field of the "Force power" infobox is intended for listing which of these areas the power falls under—Control, Sense, or Alter. Since those categories are Legends-only, the "area" field should be left blank here.
    • I looked at others beforehand, and by looking again, I can tell you Thought bomb, Force phantom, and Aura of uneasiness do not use it for the Control/Core/etc. you mentioned. Squishy Vic | message 18:12, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
      • I realize that, and those articles need to be fixed separately. Still, to my knowledge the "area" field was intended for the aforementioned reason, not how it's currently being used here. If you'd like to restructure the infobox code itself, that's fine, but otherwise the infobox field should properly reflect the intended attributes. CC7567 (talk) 21:26, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
        • Well, if it's not objected for me to add a "Purpose" or "Type" field to Template:Force power, then I will do that for the infobox and subsequently add it. Otherwise, the infobox literally serves no purpose as all it will tell you is that it's of the dark side, made by old Sith and Palpatine used it once (without telling us a thing about what 'it' is). Squishy Vic | message 21:48, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
          • Again, as I said, you're welcome to add an additional field to the infobox. All I'm saying is that the "area" field should not be used for something other than what it was intended for. CC7567 (talk) 22:57, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
            • Right, I just wanted to check that's exactly what I could do before changing a pretty largely used template. Squishy Vic | message 05:58, June 25, 2015 (UTC)
              • As a suggestion, I think it might work better to have the extra field as "purpose" instead of "type." That would allow you to mention the exact purpose of the power, while also incorporating some of the technique that makes it happen. "Type" is a little too similar to "area," so that has the potential to confuse users of the template. CC7567 (talk) 14:30, June 25, 2015 (UTC)
    • As a side note, I'd also recommend reading all of the Force power status articles thoroughly, to see how the Force power Layout Guide is best applied.
      • I can switch the Applications and Users, if that's what you're implying, as I seem to have those on reverse. Detailing the how and why is basically currently in users. Squishy Vic | message 18:12, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
      • Layout should now be appropriate, sections have been switched and links were updated to reflect this. As well Description was expanded, applications was rewritten/reincorporated based on earlier placement, and Users was fixed to address the aforementioned changes in linking, etc.Squishy Vic | message 19:42, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
  • The bolding in the excerpts from the Databank entries isn't necessary. The whole point of an excerpt is to emphasize to the reader a specific part of the source, so each excerpt should be able to accomplish that without further bolding.
  • Stemming from the previous objection, there needs to be consistency regarding the criteria for when an excerpt is used in a reference. Right now, excerpts are being used for 2 Databank entries and the "Sacrifice" episode gallery, but not Ultimate Star Wars or the "Sacrifice" trivial gallery, which are also text-based sources. For the sake of consistency, excerpts should be used for all of these textual sources, or none at all.
    • I understand where you're coming from, but why remove all? It's a notes and references section, which I personally feel that we shouldn't be so simple when it comes to using it. I mean, I've seen others object on something simply because they'd have to go click on another link to get context (i.e. Battle of Yavin), so the same thing applies here; if I put something as a source, why make you go looking for it to confirm it? For Ultimate Star Wars, my preference is to add page numbers, so I can and will do that. But I don't think removing all excerpts is a necessity. Either way, I will find something to excerpt from the sources I haven't excerpted already, just because I don't feel it to be the right call to remove them. Squishy Vic | message 18:12, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
    • Excerpts added for the remaining two text references.Squishy Vic | message 19:42, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
      • As a note, it's fine that you don't feel the excerpts should be removed. All I'm looking for is consistency, which should be a priority within articles and across other articles, too. CC7567 (talk) 21:26, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
  • There are several technical aspects of the article that need fixing. All of these are normally {{Sofixit}}-level stuff, but I'm objecting to them because you should keep these in mind for the future.
    • The use of "&hellip;" for ellipses (which generates "…") instead of "..." (three periods)
    • Each line within a quote (denoting a different speaker) needs to be formatted like this: ''"<br />"'' since the italics ensure that the quotation marks are properly formatted.
    • There should be a blank line after each paragraph (and before the image in the following paragraph), to denote the paragraph separation.
  • Images should be used primarily to provide supplementary illustration to the text of an article; the text should remain the focus of the article. That being said, the general precedent is to use one image every 2–3 paragraphs, or just one image per section. The "Applications" section is definitely too crowded—please pick the image that is the most relevant to the text, and remove the other one.
    • Very well, it will be done. Squishy Vic | message 18:12, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
    • Removed one photo as well as rearranged the others based on the sections being rearranged, per above.Squishy Vic | message 19:42, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
  • The intro can be organized a bit more clearly. The most important aspect of the subject—its purpose, i.e. projecting Force visions across the galaxy—should be noted at the very beginning. That can be followed by the specific method for conjuring the power, i.e. the basin, the blood, the Balc incantation, the Force lightning. It would also be worth noting Sidious's specific application of the power during the Clone Wars, since that's its only occurrence in canon so far.
    • Indeed, will do. For the same reason, I had that information in the infobox, as it's the only notable practice so far (aside from the offhand mention of the ancient art comment). I don't think that should be removed, similar to notes and references, it's putting all of the information possible in the infobox, while still being concise. Squishy Vic | message 18:12, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
    • Redid the introduction, and as I mentioned above, added the tidbit back into the infobox.Squishy Vic | message 19:42, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
  • I think the Bts quote should be switched with one of the quotes in the in-universe sections of the article. It's one of the few pieces of dialogue from the ritual itself (the actual ritual in progress, and not just Sidious talking about how the ritual works), so it deserves more of a spotlight.
    • Already considered this in the past, but which would you consider switching? No other quote fits the BTS, aside from that one, as it directly relates to how it was spoken in the episode which is noted in the BTS.Squishy Vic | message 18:12, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
    • Rearranged.Squishy Vic | message 19:42, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
  • It's worth noting in the article that based on "Voices," Jedi such as Ki-Adi-Mundi suspect the Sith of being capable of dark illusion's abilities, but the Jedi do not have actual confirmation of the Sith's power. (Note that this isn't a true mention of dark illusion in the episode, since it's only speculation on the part of the Jedi.)
  • I'll start reviewing the article in full once these preliminary objections are addressed. CC7567 (talk) 15:26, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
  • Pipelink text should include each plural and possessive s, i.e. [[Dooku/Canon|Dooku's]] instead of [[Dooku/Canon|Dooku]]'s.
  • "Tongue" is rather colloquial. I'd suggest replacing some instances of it with "language" for formality.
    • Done, there were only two instances in the intro and body which I've replaced both.Squishy Vic | message 21:48, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
  • I'm not seeing how it's relevant to mention in the infobox that Darth Sidious was a practitioner "during the Clone Wars." The infobox should only be used to organize the necessary basic information on the subject, not to concentrate as much detail as possible within the infobox. CC7567 (talk) 21:26, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
    • I'd contest that, as it goes with the notable practitioner and is covered in the intro/body a few times over. Basically, it's the only instance at all that we know of, so it was notable for Sidious to use it only during the Clone Wars. Who knows if he used it in any other instances in the past, but we don't know about them; if we did, then I agree that it'd be relevant to only say "Darth Sidious" without also listing every war/event. In this case, it's only notably used in the Clone Wars by Sidious, and no when else. Squishy Vic | message 21:48, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
      • I understand your reasoning, but I still don't find it necessary to list the time frame in the infobox, as there's no reason to emphasize the fact that Sidious's only notable use of the power was during the Clone Wars. Also, it wasn't necessarily notable for Sidious to use it "only" during the Clone Wars—it's simply that the events in "Sacrifice" are the only instance of the power that we know of, which is an OOU perspective, not the IU perspective from which the article should be focused. In addition, emphasizing the Clone Wars time frame implies that Sidious's ability to harness the power was exclusive to the Clone Wars, and he didn't have access to the power at other points in his life. I know that isn't intentional on your part, but it still poses a potential area of confusion to the reader. For that reason I'd ask that it be removed. The rest of the article already does a fine job of outlining why the Clone Wars are relevant to Sidious's particular usage of the ritual. CC7567 (talk) 22:57, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
        • Very well, that makes more sense. I'll remove it. Squishy Vic | message 05:58, June 25, 2015 (UTC)
  • "Also using the power of the ancient Sith Lord Darth Bane's tomb": the episode doesn't make it clear exactly how Sidious uses the "power" of Bane's tomb (or if he does) as part of the ritual. We know that Yoda is attacked while in Bane's tomb, but beyond that it isn't clear how the tomb or its power fits into the ritual. Please either clarify this or reword it to avoid the current wording.
    • The Priestesses say that it was a chamber of great evil because of the Jedi sacrifices that occurred there, and that because of this the Sith of Yoda's time would find him there. Squishy Vic | message 14:58, June 27, 2015 (UTC)
      • Comparing the current wording of the article with the dialogue that you've quoted, the former is a bit too much of an extrapolation of the latter. The Priestesses stating that the Sith "would find" Yoda in Bane's tomb does not offer any explicit clarification, or explanation, for how (or even if) dark illusion harnesses the power of Bane's tomb. I do agree that Bane's tomb must have played some sort of role in Sidious's ritual, but since the episode does not make that exactly clear, it's not appropriate to include this wording in its current form. CC7567 (talk) 13:48, June 29, 2015 (UTC)
  • The same goes for this phrase in the Description section: "The illusion could also be amplified using a source teeming with dark side energy." The episode doesn't make it explicitly clear (in dialogue or in the visual scenes) whether Bane's tomb actually amplifies Sidious's power.
  • Along the same lines, there are also instances of Sidious using the "power" of Bane's tomb elsewhere in the article. Please clarify or reword them.
    • Again, it is clearly indicated in the episode that it was a source of pure/ancient evil and that because of this, Sidious would find Yoda there. That all the visions Yoda had seen were conjured by the Priestesses, up to that point, where they could not follow.
      • To reiterate, I'm not seeing how the aforementioned dialogue provides a basis for the claim that the ritual actually uses the "power" of Bane's tomb. Again, I don't doubt that Bane's tomb played some sort of role in the ritual, but the episode doesn't define that role enough to support what the article says. CC7567 (talk) 13:48, June 29, 2015 (UTC)
  • I'm not seeing how dark illusion is "known only to a few Sith," based on the specified excerpt from the Sith Databank entry. "Arcane" and "ancient" don't automatically mean that knowledge of the power was limited to a few Sith.
    • Arcane by definition is "understood by few; mysterious or secret." Given that the databank already says it's ancient, arcane defines 'understood by few'.
      • Saying that it's "understood by few" (from the Databank's use of "arcane") is not the same as saying it's "known only to a few Sith" (in the article). The Databnk's use of "arcane" could refer to certain Sith, as you're saying; or it could refer to the Sith collectively as a group. In any case, the Databank does not provide enough explicit clarification to support the article's current wording. CC7567 (talk) 13:48, June 29, 2015 (UTC)
  • The first few sentences of Applications are redundant to the Description section and don't appear to be necessary. Per the Force power Layout Guide, the Applications section needs to focus on "how and why" the power is used, i.e. the fact that the setting for the ritual (ex. Coruscant) could be across the galaxy from that of the target (ex. Moraband), that the power could be used to break the target's will, and also that the ritual offered temptations to the target and attempted to seduce them with power.
    • First of all, I'd suggest removing these few sentences and merging them into the Description section: "To render its power, the blood of the bonded individual and Force lightning had to be brought together in a sacrificial altar basin. The power of the basin, rampant with dark side energy, was then amplified by the blood and lightning. If a greater source of dark side power was available, then it presented a greater opportunity to conjure a dark illusion."
    • Then, what remains in the Applications section should be trimmed to focus on the aforementioned details. I'd focus a bit less about the specifics surrounding Yoda and Sidious and save that for Users, since that's what the latter section is for. Let me know if you have any questions.
      • Well I will play around with it as you suggested, but I can't really get into specifics without mentioning them. As I had already done and you also recommended, I use other articles that have reached GAN/FAN status (i.e. Force speed) as a reference, and I don't see how it's irrelevant to the why.Squishy Vic | message 14:58, June 27, 2015 (UTC)
        • This objection is meant to ensure that the section stays on topic and does not incorporate too much information that belongs elsewhere. I'm not saying that the specifics of Yoda and Sidious are irrelevant, because they certainly aren't. All I'm saying is that Applications needs to concentrate on the general purpose and effects of the power, because that's what the section is intended for. CC7567 (talk) 13:48, June 29, 2015 (UTC)
  • The Users section can be organized more chronologically in certain places for better readability. Namely, the fact that Mundi suspected the Sith's ability to access dark illusion should be at the beginning of the section, since it's a general piece of ("history"-related) info that should precede any specific instances of the power.
    • It doesn't really fit without giving the proper context first. I give the context, then say only he suspected such a thing was possible. The article also isn't about Yoda's journey, so I wouldn't lead with info about Yoda and his trials that put him on his journey. Squishy Vic | message 14:58, June 27, 2015 (UTC)
      • I'm approaching this issue from a reader's perspective, and as a reader, I'm saying that more chronological organization would help other readers to understand the section better. If you don't want to begin the section with information about Yoda's journey, that's fine. However, the part about Mundi does stick out rather unnecessarily because it interrupts the flow of information about the instance of the ritual. It should either be at the beginning of its current paragraph to avoid interrupting it in the middle, or it should be moved earlier in the section to separate the general info from the specifics. CC7567 (talk) 13:48, June 29, 2015 (UTC)
  • "Ancient" is repetitively used throughout the article. Please vary some instances with alternate word choice.
  • "the 501st troopers were quickly killed": the episode, which this is sourced to, doesn't make this clear; they only visibly lose consciousness as far as I can tell. One zap of Force lightning usually isn't enough to kill someone.
    • I will reword this, however I will mention that's also speculation on your part, as they could have very well been killed considering it was an illusion to break Yoda's will. Everyone dying around him, they don't reappear in the vision, Sidious controlling it to make it appear that way, etc. Either way, I will give the benefit of the doubt that I, too, am speculating, and will just reword.
  • It isn't necessary to pipelink Great Jedi Purge at the end of the Users section. We know that's the Sith's eventual plan, but it doesn't have direct relevance to dark illusion and Yoda's resulting visions.
    • It does to Sidious's plan about defeating the Jedi. That is exactly what he's referring to. Squishy Vic | message 14:58, June 27, 2015 (UTC)
  • Mission to Moraband needs to be linked properly in the article where relevant.
  • The reference to the events of the Battle of Coruscant can be expanded with more detail, including the fact that Skywalker beheads Dooku with both of their lightsabers. It also wouldn't hurt to mention the battle by name at the end of Users, since it was a rather blatant reference.
  • I'm not sure it's valid to say that Yoda's Force vision explicitly foreshadowed "Skywalker's eventual fall to the dark side." Sure, Skywalker's beheading of Dooku is a component that leads to his fall to the dark side, but that's more of an implicit reference than an overt, explicit one, particularly within the events of the vision.
    • By all accounts that is still foreshadowing. "A warning or indication of a future event". It's relevant, albeit indirectly, to Sidious's grand plan. Squishy Vic | message 14:58, June 27, 2015 (UTC)
  • Everything after the first sentence of the Bts isn't directly relevant to dark illusion as a subject. The last couple sentences should be replaced with more relevant information, particularly where the name "dark illusion" comes from.
    • Since the BTS fact is specifically about the Balc speech, and it's a fact explicitly mentioned in the episode trivia gallery, I don't think it needs to be removed about who voiced the incantation. I will add info about the name. Squishy Vic | message 14:58, June 27, 2015 (UTC)
      • The article already quotes the Balc incantation in the Description section, so all the Bts note does is repeat the dialogue, which isn't necessary. Along those lines, the info about Curry is excessive and does not belong in the Bts, which needs to focus on information that is directly relevant to the power. CC7567 (talk) 13:48, June 29, 2015 (UTC)
  • In the Sources section, it's redundant to list the episode and trivia galleries for "Sacrifice." It's fine to use and cite them separately within the article for reference purposes, but the Sources should only list the episode guide, since that's the overall work which the galleries are part of.
  • I've added links to Lightsaber duel and Trooper, which are both valid articles but have not yet been created. Per GAN Rule 8, GANs are not allowed to have redlinks, so please fill them in.
    • How is lightsaber duel different from Lightsaber combat/Canon? And how is trooper different from Clone trooper/Canon? That was already in the article until it was changed in your copy edit. Squishy Vic | message 14:58, June 27, 2015 (UTC)
      • Trooper/Canon, like its Legends counterpart, is a military rank that transcends the Grand Army and also applies to other military groups like Rebel troopers and stormtroopers. Lightsaber combat/Canon is the practice/martial art of wielding a lightsaber, while Lightsaber duel/Canon is the specific instance of lightsaber combat. The Lightsaber combat article does not correctly reflect this distinction. CC7567 (talk) 13:48, June 29, 2015 (UTC)
  • I'll give this another look once the above objections have been addressed. CC7567 (talk) 19:42, June 25, 2015 (UTC)
    • Here is my revision addressing your objections. Please note my above comments as well regarding those that I did not address, including: I removed the link to Trooper/Canon and fixed the link for Lightsaber combat/Canon, I did not remove references to the tomb as that is explicitly mentioned in the episode on how Sidious "found" Yoda there with his power, and I've left the context as it were in the history regarding Ki-Adi, instead adding in a semi-colon to indicate the sentences belong together. I also reworked the BTS to make it sound more relevant and added what you asked, but again, I don't see how removing the voice actor bit is beneficial. Squishy Vic | message 15:59, June 27, 2015 (UTC)

Comments