- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a good article nomination that was successful. Please do not modify it.
Hallowe'en
- Nominated by: ~ SavageBob 17:17, February 24, 2011 (UTC)
- Nomination comments: Oh, Marvel Ewoks.
(3 ACs/2 Users/5 Total)
Support
- I am the Ewok with the tearaway face. Menkooroo 08:11, February 27, 2011 (UTC)
Easy read. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 20:09, March 6, 2011 (UTC)- How is this stuff canon? Kilson 21:18, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
- 1358 (Talk) 21:44, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
- Toprawa and Ralltiir 23:08, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
Object
Menkooroo
Can you source the last statement of the bts to dictionary.com or something? That's all, baby!Menkooroo 07:05, February 27, 2011 (UTC)- Done! Boo. ~ SavageBob 07:44, February 27, 2011 (UTC)
Jujiggum
Just a couple things: much of the BTS is self-sourcing, but because you had to source the last statement to the dictionary, I'd suggest sourcing the rest; otherwise it looks like you're sourcing the whole thing to the dictionary.Also, the dictionary itself isn't reference for the Ewoks Hallowe'en being the same as ours, since it doesn't say anything about the Ewok version. What I would suggest doing is using the current ref in conjunction with a "Chief Chirpa Kidnapped!" ref, or else making a new ref note stating that the dictionary's definition indicates many similarities with the Ewok's as shown in the "Chief Chirpa Kidnapped!" source.- Good work. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 06:12, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks! Any better? ~ SavageBob 18:07, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
Kilson
In the second paragraph of the History, "That same year, a group of Duloks took advantage of the...." wouldn't it be better to say "During that same Hallowe'en." Right now, it could sound like the Duloks raided the store houses not during the day of the festival, but maybe soon after in that same year. Other than that, it sound and looks good. Good job Bob.Kilson 01:58, March 8, 2011 (UTC)- Good point. Thanks for the suggestion! ~ SavageBob 06:46, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
Toprawa
I hate to make this a formal objection, since this is more of a technical thing, but can we adjust the infobox template to place the title of the article below the main image? None of our other 50+ infobox templates, to my knowledge, are formatted this way, and I really don't see why this one should deviate from the standard. I would do it myself, but I don't really know what I'm doing and don't want to mess up any coding.Toprawa and Ralltiir 18:08, March 9, 2011 (UTC)Just one in the review. Leland Chee's comments place the Ewoks stuff "technically" in 3.5 ABY. Can we reflect this more specific dating in the article?Toprawa and Ralltiir 22:49, March 9, 2011 (UTC)- I've always found the "x.5" style of dating non-intuitive, and I wasn't sure it was official. Your comment seems to suggest it is, so I will change it. ~ SavageBob 23:00, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
- Actually, scratch that. I'm not sure that saying "the Hallowe'en of 3.5 ABY" would be correct. The holiday may have taken place specifically then, but can we really take Chee's comment to mean that all Ewoks stuff takes place at exactly six months into 3 ABY? I'd rather leave it, in other words. ~ SavageBob 23:03, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
- Very well. You have a point there. We wouldn't say "the Halloween of 1985.5," as it were. Toprawa and Ralltiir 23:08, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
Comments
Approved as a Good article by AgriCorps 23:08, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
Should there be an infobox? Please weigh in! ~ SavageBob 17:17, February 24, 2011 (UTC)- OK, so there's an infobox. Should there not be? ~ SavageBob 07:44, February 27, 2011 (UTC)
- It looks good to me. Kilson 01:58, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
- OK, so there's an infobox. Should there not be? ~ SavageBob 07:44, February 27, 2011 (UTC)
- I'm unsure it has a large enough word-count. Karohalva 03:44, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
- It's only here because it got too long for CAN. It's 403 words. ~ SavageBob 03:47, March 9, 2011 (UTC)