Wookieepedia:Good article nominations/Holdan

< 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.

Holdan

  • Nominated by: Sol PacificusFirestorm 07:22, October 18, 2016 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: My first article nomination, so pardon me if I followed the instructions incorrectly.

(0 ACs/2 Users/2 Total)

Support

  1. Pretty good.--Jace Onasi (talk) 10:41, December 4, 2016 (UTC)
  2. Cevan IMPpress (talk) 01:31, February 4, 2017 (UTC)

Object

  • Best if you remove the mention of Mission and Carth from the final body paragraph, as we don't know if they were present or not. T3-M4, Bastila or Zaalbar could have also attended.--Jace Onasi (talk) 10:03, November 29, 2016 (UTC)
    • I included that information to be more comprehensive, but you could argue that it is sufficient I already mentioned it in the BtS. Although we don't know if Mission or Carth were truly present or not, since our policy is to assume 100% game completion for our articles, I thought that in light of that, we might also assume that whoever had additional dialogue were there to voice them. However, one might counter that certain companions' dialogue might contradict one another (that is if one says it, the other would not have said it). I did not specify that T3-M4, Bastila, or Zaalbar were not there by the way, only that Mission and Carth were. (The assumption that I prefer is actually that usually everyone is there and the fact that Revan can only choose 2 companions is just gameplay mechanics). Anyways, I removed it ^_^, good catch regardless. Sol PacificusFirestorm 16:59, November 29, 2016 (UTC)
Cevan
  • Is it said in KOTOR that Holdan is actually from Taris? Cevan IMPpress (talk) 23:32, February 3, 2017 (UTC)
    • After checking through the dialogue, I don't think so. Hm, I know I've thought about this point before, wonder why I left it up. Could be that someone else had already had that there before. On a side-note, it's mandated that all em dashes be written out with the code —? Sol PacificusFirestorm 01:10, February 4, 2017 (UTC)
      • I'm not sure if it's actually mandated, but I know it's much preferred. Cevan IMPpress (talk) 01:31, February 4, 2017 (UTC)
Some things…
  • Article intros should be brief summaries of the entire biography. Please fix this, and keep this in mind for any current and future nominations. I'll have more later, I think.—Jedi Kasra ("Indeed.") 18:45, February 17, 2017 (UTC)
    • Did you mean that it's too long or too short? Because if it's too long, I think that contradicts the opinion of other reviewers I've encountered that generally want them to be more expansive. :-/ If it's too short, I'm not sure about that... I think I summarized all the important details that are in the body, such as that he was a top courier for the Exchange, he had a penchant for alcohol and womanizing, he antagonized Dia and was wounded with a vibroblade, and in retaliation he placed a bounty on her head. The only detail that is missing would be Revan's intervention in the affair, but as I noted in the Ice nomination, I'm not sure if it is our policy to have 100% completion details in the introduction as well, given that we marked these details in the body not as a header. Sol PacificusFirestorm 19:41, February 17, 2017 (UTC)
      • That's what I wanna see... Revan's intervention in the whole affair. See my notes in Ice's nom.—Jedi Kasra ("Indeed.") 15:33, February 20, 2017 (UTC)
        • Forgot to mention that I already changed the intro accordingly. Sol PacificusFirestorm 22:53, February 24, 2017 (UTC)
Imperators II
  • Holdan's hair, eye and skin color are currently infobox-exclusive, and need to be added to the article's body.
    • Done. I moved also the "human male" to the "Personality and traits" section because I really thought it was out-of-place being at the first line of the biography there. However, I wasn't sure of the best place to put this information. Adding a single sentence paragraph devoted to it felt awkward to me as well. I want to note, though, that at a single glance of one other KotOR good article, Christya, these characteristics are not included in the body. Sol PacificusFirestorm 21:15, April 23, 2017 (UTC)
  • (I don't really want this to be an objection, but... meh.) Holdan's hair color seems pretty dark to me... Are you sure "dark brown" or even just "dark" wouldn't be a better descriptor?
    • You're right. I had actually left this from what it was before I started editing on it and was skeptical about it as well, but lacked the confidence to change it without someone pointing it out, so thank you. xD Sol PacificusFirestorm 21:15, April 23, 2017 (UTC)
  • Mention of the Jedi Civil War is intro-exclusive, and needs to be added to the article's body.
  • I'd like to see KOTOR's release date added to the BTS section.
  • A few things I just want to check:
    • Can KOTOR's setting of 3956 BBY actually be sourced to the game itself?
    • Is the punctuation in Vao's quote accurate? I'm looking at the "Yeah sure" part, specifically.
      • I just double-checked. Thanks for catching this minor yet significant detail. :) Sol PacificusFirestorm 21:15, April 23, 2017 (UTC)
    • I'm not an expert in English grammar—shouldn't the comma after "comment" be consistent with the lack of commas after "remark"? (I'm talking about the last paragraph of the BTS section.)
      • Actually, after looking over it, the reason why it doesn't seem to make sense to me to put a comma after "with the remark" is because without the quote themselves, that clause or sentence would be incomplete; the object is incomplete. Since the quotes themselves are the objects, commas shouldn't segregate them, I think. However, in the case of "with her own comment", the object is complete with "her own comment". Hence, the addition of the quote after it is a bonus (I don't know the technical word for it), and hence why it needs to be separated off with a comma. I used colons for all three instead because I think grammatically, that might be fine, and it looks consistent. Sol PacificusFirestorm 21:15, April 23, 2017 (UTC)
  • These things will probably tip the article over the 1000-word limit, so let's see if it becomes eligible for FAN. :) Imperators II(Talk) 08:17, April 22, 2017 (UTC)
    • Since the article did go over the limit, I'm going to archive it so that you can take it to FAN. Imperators II(Talk) 05:50, April 24, 2017 (UTC)

Comments

I know that it appears to be the policy here to restate all information from the introduction in the body paragraphs as though they were being introduced for the first time. I really agree with this policy except on one point: renaming the character's species and gender. I strongly believe that this makes every Biography section start off awkward overall and that this crosses the line with starting every information anew in the body paragraph and to audiences, it would appear extraordinarily redundant. I think it also forces each Biography section to begin with writing that can easily be unnecessarily, again, awkward and diminishes the overall quality of the article more than we think—given how glaring it is, but if this is our current policy, than I guess it can't be helped :-/. Sol PacificusFirestorm 01:10, February 4, 2017 (UTC)

  • It could just as easily be stated in the Personality and traits section, if that'd be preferable. - Pyke syndicate AV-6R7Crew Pit 01:23, February 4, 2017 (UTC)
    • I think that'd be preferable, but if we have a policy that explicitly says it should be in the Biography section, or if that is so far the established convention, I guess we should abide by that for now. Sol PacificusFirestorm 07:35, February 4, 2017 (UTC)
      • There's definitely no policy on that, and I wouldn't even call it a convention necessarily. There are other reviewers/writers out there who agree with varying article's bodies like that, so feel free to change it up if you like. Imperators II(Talk) 08:17, April 22, 2017 (UTC)
  • And concerning adding info that has to do with game mechanics to the intro, I guess there is a kind of a convention there. At least I have added info related to completing RPG adventure seeds to the intro of my articles before, and reviewers have been OK with it. So... yeah. Imperators II(Talk) 08:17, April 22, 2017 (UTC)