Wookieepedia:Good article nominations/Gormak/Legends

< 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.

Gormak

  • Nominated by: —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 02:46, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: My first species nom. Looking forward to addressing your objections. Thanks in advance for your reviews!
    • I have just finished updating the article from the new information given in the Creating Worlds developer blog. There was less in it about the Gormak than I had thought. Please let me know if I missed anything. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 18:01, May 14, 2010 (UTC)

(4 ACs/6 Users/10 Total)

Support

  1. Good job. --Imperialles 13:01, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
  2. Good to see project progress. Darth Trayus(Trayus Academy) 22:48, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
  3. Inqvote Looks good. --Eyrezer 08:48, May 12, 2010 (UTC)
  4. Jedi Kasra (comlink) 01:59, May 14, 2010 (UTC)
  5. Good to see project progress. --Skippy Farlstendoiro 14:21, May 17, 2010 (UTC)
  6. Hopefully a sign of more TOR aliens to come. ~ SavageBob 14:49, May 18, 2010 (UTC)
  7. Good to see project progress. :P -- 1358 (Talk) 18:44, May 18, 2010 (UTC)
  8. Inqvote IFYLOFD (Floyd's crib) 01:23, May 20, 2010 (UTC)
  9. ACvote Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 02:23, May 20, 2010 (UTC)
  10. ACvote Toprawa and Ralltiir 17:02, May 21, 2010 (UTC)

Object

  1. Few things:
    • Gormak in the galaxy: "For this reason, Gormak are generally considered to be mysterious." First of all, wrong tense. Secondly, considered mysterious by who? Clarify, or it could come off as a little POV.
      • Source text: A MYSTERIOUS SPECIES ON A MYSTERIOUS WORLD, LITTLE IS KNOWN IN THE GREATER GALAXY ABOUT THE GORMAK (sorry about caps, that's what it came in). I changed the article text to: For this reason, Gormak were considered to be mysterious to off-worlders. This fixes the tense issue and clarifies who holds the opinion without adding another use of "the galaxy". —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 12:57, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
    • Gormak in the galaxy: "As the Gormak began constructing space-craft based on scavenged and stolen technology, it is possible that they expanded to planets other than Voss at a later time." Speculation.
      • Removed. Seemed obvious enough to include it, but then again if it's so obvious it does not need to be included. Also fixed the sourcing tags since that source only appears once after edit. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 12:57, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
    • Image captions: Remember to use periods when writing full sentences.
      • Darn, thought I had that covered. Made some changes to throw verbs in the captions, making it more obvious they were sentences and safer to add periods all around. Should be fixed. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 12:57, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
    • Wikipedia links: No hard rules on this, and this is not a proper objection, but it might not be a bad idea to cut down on these a bit. In the intro, flight could link to starship instead of being an interwiki link.
      • I originally had that but was concerned that they might not have atmospheric flight too. Did a double link to airspeeders and spacecraft there. Also removed some of the obvious links in the description: hair, fur, nose, claw. No reason why those should be linked when terms like "face" and "eyes" aren't. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 12:57, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
    • Other than that, nice work. Just keep in mind that this article's going to need a ton of care in the months leading up to the release of TOR, and then likely a huge update once it's out. --Imperialles 05:14, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
      • Thanks! And thanks for the review! I'm aware that many articles in the project are going to need big work when the game is released, but I'm happy to do that. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 12:57, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
  2. Trayus Academy:
    • I would change the main quote source to the actual HoloNet article instead of ours, so as to be more specific as to where in the HoloNet it came from.
      • Done! —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 12:57, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
      • Err, not done. My edit didn't actually work as it required an in-house article. Changed back. If you know a way to get a more accurate link without creating an article for each section of the holonet or entry in the holonet, please let me know. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 13:45, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
        • I've taken care of it for you. Give it a look so you can see how to do Quoteurl's in the future.
          • Okay, that makes sense, but where is the [src] link? Does the "quoteurl" template not give a link for the source? —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 00:57, May 6, 2010 (UTC)
          • Nm. I looked up the template and you were just missing the "url=" portion. Added, and thanks for pointing the template out. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 01:00, May 6, 2010 (UTC)
    • Slightly reduce some of the details on the Imperial/Republic invasion in the intro. One sentence should do it. It's specifics are somewhat unimportant to the Gormak.
      • I cut out some details of the Voss and I inserted the Gormak into another clause to make it more relevant to them: When the planet Voss was first discovered not long after the Treaty of Coruscant in 3653 BBY, the Sith Empire attempted to conquer the planet, which it thought was only populated by Gormak. The Voss revealed themselves and the planet remained independent. Embassies were established by the Empire and the Galactic Republic in an attempt to curry favor with the Voss, angering the Gormak. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 12:57, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
        • Good. I made a slight alteration, but feel free to undo it if you don't like it.
    • "The Gormak were extremely hostile toward the other natives of the planet Voss, the Voss." - Although I understand what's being said here, others who have not read the original source may be a bit confused if you name the Voss without providing a better distinction between their name and the planet's.
      • I altered the text in that sentence to: toward the other natives of the planet, the Voss species. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 12:57, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
        • Perfect
    • The final sentence of "Gormak in the galaxy" is speculation at this point.
      • Removed, as per Imp's objection. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 12:57, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
    • Other than that and Imp's objections, it looks pretty good. Like he said, it'll require a lot of updating, but it seems GA-worthy as it stands. And I'm glad you're taking on projects that you know will need updates, as it's best to get a head-start on them now instead of starting from scratch when a litany of information is released. Darth Trayus(Trayus Academy) 05:48, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
      • I'm aware that there's going to be updates and eventually a big flood of new information once the game is released. I'm up for that as long as it's not expected for all articles all at once. :) As you said, the more that's done now, the easier it will be later. Thanks for the review! —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 12:57, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
  3. IFYLOFD:
  4. *"the planet Voss, which resided in the Voss system of the Allied Tion sector in the Outer Rim Territories." Better word choice could be used here; the verb "to reside" is usually used in regards to a person.
      • Somebody beat me to the punch in a copy-edit, and the word "reside" no longer appears. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) |
    • "Original Gormak technology was visually unique and fundamentally different from common technology of the galaxy." How so?
      • I've removed this text as it was taken from an OoU perspective when they were describing art design. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) |
    • "The Gormak possessed an impressive innate comprehension for technology, though they had not developed flight capability prior to contact with off-worlders." Which type of flight? Sub-atmospheric flight or space flight? Clarify.
      • Can't. Just says flight. Originally linked to Wikipedia:flight and was told to instead link to starship in a previous objection. I compromised by including both links. I've just altered the link to flight, which includes the following sentence: The term "flight" also referred to the general concept of flying, be it in a starfighter, an airspeeder, or by utilizing a personal jetpack. Best I can do. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) |
      • I altered the text of the flight article to say: "Flight" also referred to flight-related technology—such as starships, airspeeders, or jetpacks—or to the general concept of flight—such as piloting or with natural wings as Geonosians and Toydarians., which I think provides a better picture and makes the article more serviceable to link to for this purpose. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 14:06, May 17, 2010 (UTC)
    • That's all. IFYLOFD (Floyd's crib) 02:35, May 15, 2010 (UTC)
      • Thanks for the review! I appreciate it! —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 22:31, May 16, 2010 (UTC)
  5. Prepare to be savaged...
    • "an impressive innate comprehension..." Impressive is slightly POV here. Can you say who found it impressive?
    • Again, please reword the "discovery" of Voss, since its native species discovered it first. :)
      • Changed to: When the planet Voss was discovered by non-natives —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) |
    • Again, please provide context for the Treaty of Coruscant.
    • "hairless, furless..." I'd say both words are not necessary; hair and fur mean virtually the same thing.
      • I disagree. Would you describe a Human, Zabrak, or Falleen as "furry"? Would you describe a Wookiee as "hairy"? this guy is hairy, but he's not fur-covered like a dog. However, I dug around some other species articles who could be described similarly for precedent and none of the hairless, furless species in FA status mentioned the lack of either, so I've struck both words from the sentence. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) |
        • Biologically, they're the same thing, though. See here. It's just colloquial to call a lot of hair "fur". I'd suggest putting it back if the OS mentions their lack of body hair/fur. ~ SavageBob 00:52, May 18, 2010 (UTC)
          • It doesn't though. I'm pretty sure I was trying to bulk up the paragraph. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 13:40, May 18, 2010 (UTC)
    • That's it. Please keep up the aliens! ~ SavageBob 05:52, May 16, 2010 (UTC)
      • Thanks for the review, much appreciated! —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 22:31, May 16, 2010 (UTC)
  6. Two small things: Voss' (planet) context is in the History section, but it is mentioned before that. Please move the context to the first mention. | The Holonet is not a website, but a web feature. Other than that, good work. -- 1358 (Talk) 18:34, May 18, 2010 (UTC)
    • Context moved and wording altered, thanks for your review! —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 18:39, May 18, 2010 (UTC)
  7. The Grand Master
    • Do "flight capability" (in the intro) and "pre-flight technology" (in the History section) refer to any type of flight, i.e. even things like speeders, or just space flight?
      • As stated in similar previous objections, it is not specified. I wish I could clarify it more. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) |
    • "They were by far the dominant sentient population on the planet, although they actively avoided the forest known as The Nightmare Lands." Unless you say why they avoided that forest, this is a confusing non sequitur.
      • Split into two sentences and offered the forest's "mysterious corruptive influence" as the why. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) |
    • "partially due to its sleek aesthetic" Unless I'm reading this wrong, I'm not sure that "aesthetic" is the right word here.
      • Oh for crying. That shouldn't be there. I thought I'd removed that as it was OoU discussion about visuals in-game. Removed that whole sentence and did some sourcing cleanup while I was at it. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) |
    • "Embassies to the Voss were established in Voss-Ka for both the Empire and the Republic, providing additional motivation for Gormak hostility toward the offworlders." Why did this provide additional motivation for Gormak hostility? Also, you haven't yet stated that they were hostile toward the off-worlders at all; you can't state that this is additional motivation until you've provided some initial motivation.
      • Cleaned up so that it says it angered the gormak who were already hostile toward the offworlders to begin with. —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) |
    • You use both "offworlders" and "off-worlders" throughout the article. Please stick with one or the other, for sake of consistency.
    • I don't think the "Gormak in the Galaxy" section is really necessary. Typically, "Species in the Galaxy" sections are used to give some examples of the impact of certain members of the species on the galaxy: for an example, check out that section in some other species GAs, like Mikoan or Covallon. I think the information you have right now could easily be merged into the rest of the article body.
    • Keep up the good work. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 00:11, May 20, 2010 (UTC)

Comments

Approved as a Good article by AgriCorps 17:02, May 21, 2010 (UTC)


  • Not an objection, but it's generally best practice to put a full-body image in the infobox whenever possible. I noticed there was one such image on the Voss (species) page; might that be used in the infobox? It's possible it won't be good enough quality once it's cropped, but I figured I'd ask. ~ SavageBob 20:05, May 7, 2010 (UTC)
    • Sorry, this is the image I'm talking about, and it seems that it would work in the infobox just fine (except for the right-orientation, but you can't win 'em all!). ~ SavageBob 20:06, May 7, 2010 (UTC)
      • Sounds good to me. I'll just swap those images so that there's no double images between the Gormak and Voss (species) articles. Thanks! —fodigg BlackRebelStarbird (talk) | 20:12, May 7, 2010 (UTC)