Wookieepedia:Good article nominations/Eodon

< 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.

Eodon

  • Nominated by: ~ SavageBob 18:24, December 29, 2009 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: The only species who hate going to the dentist more than you do. ~ SavageBob 18:24, December 29, 2009 (UTC)

(3 ACs/2 Users/5 Total)

Support

  1. I've never watched an episode of Ewoks before... SoresuMakashi(Everything I tell you is a lie) 21:35, January 4, 2010 (UTC)
  2. Inqvote --Eyrezer 22:39, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
  3. Any objections I would have would be to replace "sough-after" with "coveted," but that's more of personal preference and certainly doesn't make an objection. Prose looks fine, the article looks solid with what information was available, so it snags my vote. Trak Nar Ramble on 06:19, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
  4. ACvote Grunny (Talk) 09:49, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
  5. ACvote Toprawa and Ralltiir 06:00, January 22, 2010 (UTC)

Object

  1. Soresu
    • Missing an infobox ref
    • There seems to be a slight contradiction between the intro and history. The intro makes it seem as if the Ewoks won the tusks and gave them back, while the body makes it seem as the Eodon came in before the ewoks obtained the tusk, and took it back for himself.
    • Maybe mention their similarity to elephants and the parallels with the demand for their tusks? SoresuMakashi(Everything I tell you is the truth) 10:27, January 1, 2010 (UTC)
      • Thanks for your comments. I've tried to address your first two objections. As for the third, it seems that that's the intent of the writers and animators, but without a source actually saying so, I'm worried it will be original research. Any thoughts? ~ SavageBob 01:26, January 4, 2010 (UTC)
        • Well, you should probably consult an AC, but IMO, there really is no doubt that Eodons are based on elephants. If I were writing it, I'd mention their similarity, but avoid flat-out stating that it was the artist's intentions. In my spelunker probe droid GA for instance, in the BTS, I mention that spelunker is a real word, but don't actually make any real connection. SoresuMakashi(Everything I tell you is the truth) 03:10, January 4, 2010 (UTC)
          • If I may, I agree with Bob. Mentioning the stupidly-obvious similarity to real-life elephants is just pointless. If an author had stated that they purposely used elephants as the inspiration, then that would be fair game, but otherwise, it's just unnecessary. Toprawa and Ralltiir 03:14, January 4, 2010 (UTC)
  2. Can you get a pic of the Eodon that shows its body? --Eyrezer 06:25, January 4, 2010 (UTC)
    • Unfortunately, the image in the article is the only one available. It appears on screen for about two seconds, I think! ~ SavageBob 16:51, January 4, 2010 (UTC)
  3. Toprawa:
    • I formatted the article's two-speaker quotes per Wookieepedia style. You may need to revise the "History" section quote's attribution line.
    • The article's reference note states that the Eodon's gender is not known, yet you refer to the individual as a male here: "The Eodon to whom the tusks had once belonged arrived, however, and reclaimed the tusks for himself."
    • Not an objection, but I've removed the last sentence from the BTS. The rest of the paragraph is fine, since you reference the text to actual canon info, but be careful about adding what is ultimately your own speculation into articles. Toprawa and Ralltiir 03:23, January 22, 2010 (UTC)
      • I've addressed your objections, and while I disagree that the line you deleted was speculation, it essentially said nothing, so its absence doesn't hurt the article. Thanks for the review, ~ SavageBob 04:07, January 22, 2010 (UTC)

Comments

Approved as a Good article by AgriCorps 06:00, January 22, 2010 (UTC)