Wookieepedia:Good article nominations/Droideka

< 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.

Droideka

(+2)

Support

  1. Sourced everything, images sourced, expanded much of the article. Unit 8311 19:01, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
    Well detailed, well written, has enough images without going nuts, looks like a good one to me. Jedibob5 22:33, 5 November 2007 (UTC) (Vote struck per Single issue voters policy. Greyman(Paratus) 01:27, 6 November 2007 (UTC))
  2. Chack Jadson (Talk) 22:21, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
  3. —Darthtyler Scuba_Diver.gif Talk 05:57, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
  4. Kilson 07:03, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
  5. Domlith 10:13, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
  6. Stake black msg 19:36, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Just from a quick glance:
    • The "Droideka series and variants" should be expanded somewhat to discuss the main differences between the models mentioned -- right now, that section does not meet GAN rule 1(a).
    • The BtS needs to be de-triviaized, and the bullets need to be removed -- again, per rule 1(a).
    • The two pictures in the "Appearances" section need to be incorporated into the main body or removed entirely. Remember that pictures need to support text so as not to break Fair Use.
    • Still way to many pictures—article looks cramped and cluttered. See comment above this.
    • Having two pictures in the "Description" section makes it looked cluttered. The best of the two should be picked and enlarged a tiny bit to fill the space.
    • All reference links need to be linked per policy.
    Greyman(Paratus) 16:56, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
    • Done that, done that, done that, to me it doesn't look cluttered--not on my browser anyway, done that. Unit 8311 21:52, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
      • Simply moving the pictures from the Appearances section up a bit has now cluttered that section—two pictures in the "Droideka series and variants" section are not needed at all. Not every picture of a Droideka needs to be included in the article—only the ones that support the text. Likewise, I still feel that the same applies to the "Description" section, especially since I'm looking at it from three different browsers + two different computers and it still looks cramped. Also, the "Droideka series and variants" objection still has not been met: What's the main differences between the P, W, and Q series? Right now, Rule 1(a) is still not met there as those three sentences should be expanded. The Grapple model -- You say "melee", but does that mean that it was strictly a hand-to-hand fighting droid? Any information on why they were made? etc. The BtS looks good, no further concerns there, and the reference links as well. Greyman(Paratus) 22:25, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
        • Okay, done that, done that, no major differences between those series are ever specified, clarified that. Unit 8311 08:31, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
          • I've cut down slightly and rearranged the images. It doesn't look particularly cluttered any more to me. Unit 8311 18:32, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
  2. Seems a bit listy, with lots of small paragraphs. I'd like to see some of them fleshed out or merged, preferably the former. Could also be expanded a bit, I reckon; no real info from the NEGTD or Galaxies. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 19:42, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
    • Doesn't seem listy to me. In any case, I've added in a bit more info from galaxies. Most information from the NEGTVV is recycled from previous sources to the best of my knowledge, and in any case I don't own it. Unit 8311 20:04, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
      • There are many two or three line paragraphs. I'm sure more info could be added from Galaxies, though consider that part of my objection null. Per above, if you can categorically state that no info can be added from the NEGTV&V, then I'll strike it. Otherwise, it stays. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 20:26, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
  3. Toprawa says:
    • The intro needs to be expanded.
    • There are too many pictures given the limited amount of article text. Remove some so that the pictures alternate from left to right down the body of the page.
    • I severely dislike the way you incorporated the origin of the word into parentheses. Shorten what you have in parentheses to just the alternative names, and include the description of how the name came to be in the article.
    • Clean up this quote caption: "Obi-Wan Kenobi, upon seeing a droideka upon Saak'ak"
    • What is this hiding in the "Editing" view of the article? "<Droidekas also had a hard time climbing up stairs. In their rolling configuration, they would have to go back quite a bit and then speed up, launching themselves up the stairs. They could also try to transverse stairs in walking configuration, although it was extremely hard for them to coordinate their three legs on stairs.>" Seems important enough to incorporate into the article.
    • Bullet points in the article? Unnecessary, especially in this case. Incorporate the bulleted items into prose.
    • Expand the BTS, including notable appearances, etc.
    • The "Description" section is poorly written in general, specifically:
    • The section is in need of a better written introductory sentence.
    • You kind of jump into the idea that droidekas were produced as a sort of improved alternative to B1's. Expand on and clarify this.
    • Rephrase, clarify this: "These shield generators were somewhat powerful"
    • Clean up this phrase; it is confusing and rather POVish: "light-based trickery"
    • Move their origin and creators to the beginning of the section, then rename the section to correspond with this restructuring
    • Avoid this one sentence paragraph: "Droideka dispensers were sometimes used as transport and dispense for these droids." Expand on what a droideka dispenser is.
    • Granted this is not a FAN, but it still seems like there is much too little information considering the length of the appearance list. A much more expansive history section is needed.
    • Move the Databank source entry to the bottom of that list. Toprawa and Ralltiir 02:07, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
      • Yay, another list of complaints. Okay, sorted most of that, but I have some things to say: clean up this phrase; it is confusing, etc, etc...how is that confusing and POV-ish? And as for the history section, as I said below, I can add some more if I delve deep enough, but bearing in mind that lots of droideka appearances are essentially background decoration, I feel it would simply clutter it up. Nonetheless, I will expand it by a bit. Also, regarding your complaint about the name origin in the intro, I disagree, and I feel that there is nothing wrong with it. Unit 8311 18:37, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
        • Unstricken objections remain. When someone says clean up or rephrase something, that's a nice way of saying it's written poorly, and needs to be rewritten for purposes of greater prose. All in all, you've still got a long way to go on this one. You've got large, glaring sections of poorly written material, POV issues, reference issues, your pics are still poorly aligned, you haven't even begun to address some of the issues that I've listed already. As far as the name origin in the intro, that's fine that it sits there, what's wrong with it is that it's new, unsourced material, and I will not vote for a GAN that has referencing in the intro when it could so easily be incorporated into the body. Frankly, this article isn't even close to GA standards. Toprawa and Ralltiir 18:45, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
  4. A few thoughts from the Family-sized pasta bowl of Fiolli:
    • As one who sometimes permits the use of parenthetical statements, I too do not like the etymology in parentheses.
    • Also, the etymology is not mentioned anywhere else in the article and not sourced when mentioned.
    • "After the Clone Wars, remaining droidekas would fall into the hands of a variety of factions, such as smugglers and criminals." "Would" is not advisable here - eludes to a non-past-tense setting.
    • The droidekas were not just made by the Colicoid species. I believe they were made by the Colicoid Creation Nest. This needs to be mentioned and cited. The Databank, I know, only mentions the species, but there are other sources that mention the company specifically. This should be in the Description paragraph and the Infobox.
    • The second paragraph should not begin with "They." Too many sentences begin with or have the subject as "they" in this paragraph.
    • First paragraph/sentence of Pre-Clone Wars: Should be split; it does not need to be one large sentence.
    • Pre-Clone Wars seems listy, as Ackbar mentioned. I think this and the entire history section can be expanded.
    • "At the end of the Clone Wars, the droidekas were de-activated after Darth Vader's execution of the Separatist Council under Emperor Palpatine's orders." I could be wrong, but this seems a bit suspicious. I don't remember this explicitly happening this way in the movie.
    • "Droidekas also had a hard time climbing up stairs. In their rolling configuration, they would have to go back quite a bit and then speed up, launching themselves up the stairs. They could also try to transverse stairs in walking configuration, although it was extremely hard for them to coordinate their three legs on stairs." I removed the hiding codes from around the statements, but they need to be sourced if this is true.
    • Series and variants: The entire section could be expanded. Separate into two subtopics under that heading and briefly mention something unique about each one that made it different.
    • "however, this can be attributed to the typical exaggeration in the cartoon." Woah. Umm, that is very PoV and probably not needed in this case at all.
    • There is an error in the reference list with the first citation. It is missing the full reference at the beginning.
    • Hope this helps. Just a thought: You might want to pull the nom down for a bit and check up on some more things about the droideka. Then, come back fresh and touch it up. There is a lot of information that seems to be missing from the article. If you need help, always feel free to ask in the Knowledge Bank or on the IRC. There are plenty of users who are willing to help. Good luck! Master Aban Fiolli {Alpheridies University ComNet} 01:01, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Comments

Considering the number of appearances and sources, I think the Clone Wars section should be expanded. Stake black msg 12:19, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
    • Sorry, but I don't own every single EU piece involving the Clone Wars. Most of those appearances are probably just background ones anyway, and mentioning every single one would turn the Clone Wars section into a long list of battles droidekas appeared in. Unit 8311 13:37, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
      • Well, that makes sense :) Stake black msg 19:36, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
    • The standard is every known source. You can always ask around either on the irc or in the Knowledge Bank for help with this. I've had to do it and there's no shame in asking. Master Aban Fiolli {Alpheridies University ComNet} 18:59, 29 January 2008 (UTC)