Wookieepedia:Good article nominations/Kazuda Xiono's mother

< 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.

Kazuda Xiono's mother

  • Nominated by: - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 04:02, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: Resistancepedia reigns supreme!
  • WookieeProject (optional): WP:Resistance

(3 ACs/2 Users/5 Total)

(Votes required: No additional votes required to pass, please consider reviewing another article.)

Support

  1. ACvote Commander Code-8 Hello There! 04:32, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
  2. Samonic Signatureicon (Talk) 19:30, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
  3. —spookywillowwtalk 06:14, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
  4. ACvote Imperators II(Talk) 07:49, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
  5. ACvote JediMasterMacaroni(Talk) 21:49, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Object

CC-8
  • IMOs are unnecessary on conjectural articles
  • Seeing as we know Kazuda's birth year it's definitely worth mentioning
    • Added. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 08:48, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
  • The body should establish that the destruction of Hosnian Prime also took place in 34 ABY Commander Code-8 Hello There! 06:27, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
    • Added. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 08:48, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
Thrawn
  • Birth date needed (by 14 bby based on the fact that she gave birth, and therefore she herself must have been born in 14 aby). -ThrawnChiss7 (talk) 04:34, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
    • It would be unnecessary to state that she was born by 14 ABY; that would leave far to much assumptive legroom. I'm going to assume she didn't give birth to Kaz when she was a child or an infant, but past that we don't know how old she was. There's only so far we can stipulate a birth year. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 18:10, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
      • It is completely necessary. She exisited by that year, therefore she was born by it. I don't understand what is assumptive about saying she was born by 14 ABY. -ThrawnChiss7 (talk) 19:25, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
        • It's simply too far of a range to be necessary. It's not incorrect that she was born by 14 ABY, but given the fact we don't know her age and the fact that she was definitely not an infant or child when Kaz was born, it would be weird to denote that she was born by 14 ABY when she was 100% born quite some time before that. It's just overkill. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 20:18, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
          • Hey there, I'm jumping in to clarify some things. Thannus is right here. "She exisited by that year, therefore she was born by it" — just because this is true doesn't mean the relevant infobox should be filled in. The point of the infobox isn't to be as comprehensive as possible; it simply is to provide readers key details about the article subject. The reader gains nothing by being provided the fact that the character in question was born by the date she was mentioned in the infobox. The reader can come to that supplementary conclusion themself going through the article prose. OOM 224 20:51, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
            • I have a different opinion about infoboxes, but Thannus's point below clarifies some assumtions I made. -ThrawnChiss7 (talk) 22:25, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
            • We are also not 100% certain she's the one who gave birth to him. Kaz could have been a surrogate baby or adopted. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 21:20, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
              • Okay, it is a little redundant. On a related note you say that Kaz was "born to" his mother. If you're not sure Kaz's mother gave birth to Kaz, you shouldn't say Kaz was "born to" her. -ThrawnChiss7 (talk) 22:25, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Samonic
  • Isn't the title of senator capitalized when it precedes a name? Samonic Signatureicon (Talk) 18:16, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
    • Wording is a bit confusing but it's being used in an occupational context in the article rather than as a title. Reworded. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 18:47, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Spooky
  • In Appearances, I see that "The Recruit" is currently noted as 1stm Mo. Was the second meant to be Imo?
    • It would have been an Imo but discussion on Discord dictated that those are redundant on conjecturally titled pages. Irregardless, it's also redundant as just an Mo so I'll remove it. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 06:43, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
  • The current sourcing for the mother's homeworld is to Kaz's Databank. However, I'm not really seeing mention of the mother specifically in that, or that her homeworld was definitively Hosnian—only that it can be established that Kaz's family resided there by the time/while he was growing up (she could've moved from elsewhere, unless there's another source).
    • Removed from infobox. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 06:43, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
  • The bit about her and Hamato raising him is currently sourced to his birth year cite—should that be swapped to perhaps one of the sources that talks about him being raised on Hosnian?
    • Fixed. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 06:43, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
  • The part linking to Xiono family in the biography is not sourced to the same reference that lists her infobox affiliation to the family, which should be made consistent.
    • Fixed. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 06:43, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
      • Re-fixed, actually. The sentence refers to Xiono being raised as part of the family, not her membership in it. The source used was adequate for this purpose. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 06:47, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
  • A few references can be combined for tidiness as well, which will also help with the breakage of the sentences. Firstly, USW's New Edition also has that Hosnian Prime was both the NR's capital and a planet. Secondly, the part referenced to Hamato's context as a NR senator is found in Kaz's own databank. And lastly, both episode release dates can be found here, a commonly used one for Resistance nominations seems like.
    • Fixed. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 23:21, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
  • Usually I'd copy-edit this out but since it seems to be a few: in Sources, if something is only mentioned, there is no need to use (Mentioned only), as everything in that section is automatically only a mention. The only ones used in that section are (Indirect mention only) and (Picture only) + all the other assorted one like holograms/flashbacks etc.
    • Removed. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 06:43, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
  • I do believe Hamato's DB entry may count as an indirect mention for Sources, as it's referring to the family.—spookywillowwtalk 01:26, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
    • Per a discussion on Discord and precedent I do not personally agree with, the fact that her identity is conjecture apparently makes every mention of her inherently indirect. I still believe that it should at least be necessary to clarify it for instances where she is not referred to as a specific individual, but I already made my case for it on Discord and that was just an exchange of opinions, not an actual push for a change. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 06:43, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
      • Wasn't aware of an ongoing discussion, will keep in mind.—spookywillowwtalk 03:55, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
  • Just one last thing. "In 34 ABY, while Kazuda was operating as a spy on the planet Castilon..." would it more suitable to say he was operating on the supertanker fuel depot Colossus, rather than on the planet itself? Was something I'd been eyeing from a few other Resistance SANs.—spookywillowwtalk 03:55, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
    • Changed. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 04:43, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Imp
  • I can't help but feel that it'd actually be more relevant to first introduce Kaz as a NR pilot. There's a possibility his mother was present for when he became/was that, and he only became a Resistance spy quite suddenly and some time after last seeing his mother.
    • Changed. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 18:11, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
  • A perspective issue: the bit about the parents being off-world should be moved up to where you're first mentioning their survival, otherwise it reads like it's more from Kaz's perspective. Imperators II(Talk) 11:09, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
    • Changed. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 18:11, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
      • That's good, but not what I meant. I was referring to moving the "as they had been off-world during the attack" bit upward. Imperators II(Talk) 18:52, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
        • Should be good now. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 00:05, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Comments

Approved as a Good article by AgriCorps 21:49, 8 December 2022 (UTC)