- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a good article nomination that was successful. Please do not modify it.
Contents
Kuna's Eye system
- Nominated by: —TK-999
(Rise of the Empire) 12:42, June 29, 2011 (UTC) - Nomination comments: As requested by Kilson and Imperators II.
(4 ACs/1 Users/5 Total)
Support
Kilson(Let's have a chat) 20:33, July 4, 2011 (UTC)- Imperators II(Talk) 20:35, July 4, 2011 (UTC)
IFYLOFD (Floyd's crib) 02:03, July 9, 2011 (UTC)
Grand Moff Tranner (Comlink) 17:33, July 9, 2011 (UTC)
Menkooroo 02:14, July 11, 2011 (UTC)
Object
Kilson
"The Kuna's Eye system was a star system in the thin disk, inside Outer Rim Territories' Zuma sector, within the Inner Zuma Region and the Moddell subsector, less than 1,000 light-years above the galactic plane." The phrasing of the this sentence is awkward. Maybe you should split this into two sentences to make it sounds better.- Sliced.—TK-999
(Rise of the Empire) 20:07, June 29, 2011 (UTC)
- Sliced.—TK-999
"It contained the young blue giant Kuna's Eye and a protoplanetary disk, which contained minerals, metals and alloys." The repetition of "contained" is odd, change one of them to a synonym.- Rephrased.—TK-999
(Rise of the Empire) 20:07, June 29, 2011 (UTC)
- Rephrased.—TK-999
I just realized something. In the Description, "The system's primary star was Kuna's Eye, a blue giant which, along with the other Kuna worlds, formed part of the Kuna constellation visible from the planet Maya Kovel." Kuna's Eye is a star, yet you say it and the other Kuna worlds made up the constellation. Isn't it supposed to be, "it and the other Kuna stars"?- This objection was brought up by Bob during the star's nomination. Oddly, The Essential Atlas states on p. 192 that the Kuna worlds from the constellation.—TK-999
(Rise of the Empire) 20:07, June 29, 2011 (UTC)
- This objection was brought up by Bob during the star's nomination. Oddly, The Essential Atlas states on p. 192 that the Kuna worlds from the constellation.—TK-999
Doesn't the rest of the second paragraph of the Description section belong in the History section?- Moved.—TK-999
(Rise of the Empire) 20:07, June 29, 2011 (UTC)
- Moved.—TK-999
- Otherwise, well done. Kilson(Let's have a chat) 19:29, June 29, 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review!—TK-999
(Rise of the Empire) 20:07, June 29, 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review!—TK-999
Imperators II
Second paragraph of the Description section is unsourced.Imperators II(Talk) 21:28, June 29, 2011 (UTC)- Oops… left over from paragraph moving :P.—TK-999
(Rise of the Empire) 09:37, June 30, 2011 (UTC)
- Oops… left over from paragraph moving :P.—TK-999
Ecks Dee
"The system is also mentioned in[2][3] the Del Rey reference book[1] The Essential Atlas,[2][3] written by Fry and Wallace and released on August 18, 2009.[1]" Something relatively minor: I think the text here could be better ordered to reduce the amount of references. Something like "The system is also mentioned in The Essential Atlas,[2][3] a Del Rey reference book written by Fry and Wallace and released on August 18, 2009.[1]"1358 (Talk) 22:48, June 30, 2011 (UTC)- Thanks for pointing this out. Done.—TK-999
(Rise of the Empire) 08:13, July 1, 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for pointing this out. Done.—TK-999
Comments
Approved as a Good article by AgriCorps 02:17, July 11, 2011 (UTC)