Wookieepedia:Good article nominations/Genarra

< 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.

Genarra

  • Nominated by: Jinzler 21:57, June 7, 2011 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: A Jedi Chancellor

(3 ACs/3 Users/6 Total)

Support

  1. —Axinal Convocation Chamber 22:38, June 7, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Great article! --Talrrivanian JaingHead (Headquarters) 05:44, June 8, 2011 (UTC)
  3. ACvote Assuming Tranner's objection is addressed. Kilson(Let's have a chat) 03:27, June 9, 2011 (UTC)
  4. ACvote Grand Moff Tranner Imperial Department of Military Research (Comlink) 17:09, June 9, 2011 (UTC)
  5. Inqvote I really need to read Knight Errant. Menkooroo 02:30, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
  6. Imperators II(Talk) 08:06, June 14, 2011 (UTC)

Object

Axinal
  • "Genarra was a female Jedi Consular who lived served the Jedi Order [...]" lived served?
    • Fixed, I think that was a relic from my first draft of the article. --Jinzler 22:34, June 7, 2011 (UTC)
  • Would Category:Individuals of unidentified species apply here?
    • Added --Jinzler 22:34, June 7, 2011 (UTC)
  • As you've probably noticed, there has been some disagreement on how to document short stories in articles, and I am notorious for exacerbating the dispute. Since there is really no consensus, I won't argue against italicizing "Influx" in the appearances section, but I suggest putting it in quotes in the BTS text. I won't oppose the article's nomination if you keep it italicized, but I prefer it in quotes, as it's more adhering to the standards of American English.
    • Done. I have no preference over either form, so I've gone with the option that keeps you happy :P Jinzler 22:34, June 7, 2011 (UTC)
  • Overall, an excellent article.—Axinal Convocation Chamber 22:28, June 7, 2011 (UTC)
    • Thank you for your extremely prompt review. --Jinzler 22:34, June 7, 2011 (UTC)
Kilson
  • You should identify Genarra as the Supreme Chancellor in the Intro as that was a very important fact about her.
    • Done --Jinzler 21:54, June 8, 2011 (UTC)
  • In the Intro, "Galactic Republic and the Jedi Order, in about 1,032 BBY." You should insert "during the New Sith Wars" here as that too is a very important fact about the time period.
    • Done --Jinzler 21:54, June 8, 2011 (UTC)
  • I don't want to keep bringing up the "italicize vs. quotation" thing, but it seems inconsistent to me to put the short story in quotes in the Bts and then italicize it in the Appearance section. I would recommend just italicizing it in the Bts just to be consistent, although if you really don't want to, I won't hold up this nomination because of it.
    • I have now italicized it, which is how it was when I first nominated the article. I have no preference either way and I did not really want to enter this debate, so I wash my hands of the matter. --Jinzler 21:54, June 8, 2011 (UTC)
  • Otherwise, good job Jinzler. Kilson(Let's have a chat) 17:50, June 8, 2011 (UTC)
    • Thank you! --Jinzler 21:54, June 8, 2011 (UTC)
Moffship
  • In the intro and the bio, some context is needed on the reports that Treece/Holt sent her.
    • The source does not mention the nature of the reports, or give any suggestion as to when or why they were sent. However, I have now mentioned in the intro the report Treece sent her about his mission to the Grumani sector, which should hopefully help to compensate for the lack of context. --Jinzler 11:09, June 9, 2011 (UTC)
  • That's all. Nice job. Grand Moff Tranner Imperial Department of Military Research (Comlink) 02:23, June 9, 2011 (UTC)
Jeffers
  • How about a Supreme Chancellor succession box? All I got. Menkooroo 17:03, June 11, 2011 (UTC)
    • I've investigated this and it appears that pretty much all of our Supreme Chancellor articles do not have a Chancellor succession box and only have the Chancellor navigation box. However, this is inconsistent with our articles on New Republic/GA Chiefs of State, which do generally seem to have both a succession box and a navigation box. In light of my above finds, I would like to know what you advise; I have nothing against succession boxes, but I always like to show restraint in areas where our site policy is undefined. --Jinzler 11:14, June 13, 2011 (UTC)
      • If I may, the reason we don't use succession boxes with Chancellors seems to be that there is a lot of uncertainty about when certain Chancellors served. We have a rough timeline established, but this comes with many approximate dates and even guesses - for example, given current information, I don't think we can say for certain that Signet Mezzileen served after Vaila Pecivas, or if it was the other way around. When it comes to the Chiefs of State, however, we know for certain who preceded and who succeeded each individual to hold the office. Grand Moff Tranner Imperial Department of Military Research (Comlink) 13:01, June 13, 2011 (UTC)
        • Sounds good. Menkooroo 02:30, June 14, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Approved as a Good article by AgriCorps 01:35, June 15, 2011 (UTC)