Wookieepedia:Good article nominations/Peragus II (second nomination)

< 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.

Peragus II

(3 ACs/3 Users/6 Total)

Support

  1. ACvote CC7567 (talk) 19:33, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
  2. Looks good to me.--Jedi Kasra (talk) 17:56, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
  3. Is good Enochf 10:27, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
  4. —Master Jonathan(Jedi Council Chambers) 05:22, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
  5. ACvote Cavalier OneFarStar(Squadron channel) 09:37, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
  6. ACvote Grunny (Talk) 14:36, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Object

  1. Chack Attack:
    • "Following the events of 3,951 BBY, when the Peragus Mining Facility was destroyed due to the Sith Lord Darth Sion's pursuit of the Jedi Exile, and a stray blast from Sion’s ship, the Harbinger, detonating the Peragus asteroid field." Is the "when" in here by mistake, because this sentence makes little sense as is.
    • "almost destroyed by attempts at" What was almost destroyed? The mining facility or the planet?
    • "The planet was devoid of any sort of native species, with Peragus II also being devoid of any sort of Human settlements other than the Peragus Mining Facility, a facility sealed to the planets atmosphere other than when exited when wearing a space suit." This reads poorly. Plus, you already mentioned the mining facility; no need to repeat context.
    • The drift chart info seems unnecessary and can probably be removed.
    • "The first fuel mining colony established on Peragus II proved to be short of life, when an accidental blaster shot triggered an explosion of flammable substances in Peragus II's crust and mantle, so powerful that it turned a large chunk of the planet into an asteroid field, which would become the Peragus asteroid field, and exposed its core" This bit is confusing and needs to be clarified and written better.
    • Your referencing is completely unnecessary. If all the info in one paragraph comes from one source, no need to source it multiple times in that paragraph. For example: The second paragraph all comes from KOTOR II. Just have the one source at the end of it, rather than scattered throughout.
    • Context on Citadel Station.
    • "After the Jedi Civil War, Telos IV relied on this resource to keep Citadel Station in orbit, and with the most humanitarian elements of the Senate putting their careers at stake in the restoration project, any interruption of the work on the Peragus mining facility was likely to have greater repercussions throughout the Republic. If the fuel supply was somehow compromised, Citadel Station would risk falling onto the planet's surface, dooming the restoration efforts there and throughout the Outer Rim." This is written a bit poorly, and is confusing. The restoration project needs to be explained a bit more.
    • Context on Kreia.
    • Rather than having many small pargraphs in the "Skirmish" section, try combining several of them.
    • What is the Exile's standing with the Jedi?
    • Context on Goto.
    • Why did HK-50 want the Exile for himself? To claim the bounty?
    • Context on Atton Rand, please.
    • "The destruction of the mining station had a deeper impact than the Exile could imagine." I think this is unnecessary, and it seems OR. Remove it, I'd suggest.
    • The last sentence of "Aftermath" is really confusing. Who is G0-T0? What is going on?
    • You refer to it as both the "facility" and the "Facility". Please choose one and stick with it.
    • When you have an Inhabitants section, there's no need to detail the species that live there earlier. The same with repetitive descriptions of the mining facility.
    • Linking! You have things that need to be linked, and links that are repeated. I fixed some things for you, but you should do at least some of it yourself.
    • Having never played this game, I find myself confused at many things described in the article. Please go through, contextify things, and fix up the general prose. Chack Jadson (Talk) 22:10, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
  2. Attack of the Clone I
    • Please be careful about what you focus on; the article is about the planet, not about the skirmish on it. Yes, the event was one of the only major events there, but try not to excessively focus on it.
    • Also, a note for future noms: in the body, be sure to only link to something once at its first mention, even if the body of the article has multiple sections.
    • "meant that further mining projects were virtually abandoned." Can "meant" be substituted for anything else? Because "meant" is usually used for a statement or something that needs clarification, not an event or action. Perhaps "resulted" or something similar.
    • In the first paragraph of the "Description" section, the Peragus Mining Facility is mentioned twice, both times with different context. Please change.
    • "such as the Peragus Mining Facility, which contained a number of miners." The word "contained" makes it sound like the miners were being kept prisoner, or that they were somehow inactive.
    • "meaning that anyone wishing to visit such places as the Peragus Mining Facility..." See third objection.
    • Jedi Civil War, Galactic Republic, Telos IV, and Telosian Restoration Project need context. Mandalorian Wars somewhat has context, but it should be fixed up.
      • Context still needed for the Republic and the restoration project. Also, the context for the Galactic Republic should appear with the first time it is mentioned; otherwise, it seems confusing if you mention something without context. CC7567 (talk) 19:52, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
        • It looks better, but try to mention the context in the same sentence, if possible. CC7567 (talk) 07:19, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
    • "and miners such as Coorta advocated taking her to Nar Shaddaa to collect the bounty that criminal boss Goto had placed on Jedi." If the word "taking" can be changed to a noun instead of a subject verb, it would sound better.
    • "and died with the rest of the miners when the droid caused an emergency lockdown to seal off the hangar and keep Coorta from fleeing the Facility with the Exile. First of all, I changed "along" to "with". Also, this part of the sentence is a bit of a run-on; please change.
    • "Spaceworthy" should be changed to a clearer word.
    • "As they got to the ship from the docking bridge to the Harbinger, Sith assassins stalked them and Kreia had to duel Darth Sion to allow the others to escape to the hangar through the fuel line." The first part of the sentence goes from "to" to "from" and back to "to" again, which does not seem to make sense. Also, the word "stalked" is too colloquial; please change.
    • "either incapacitated or incarcerated": try not to speculate. If need be, state it in the "Behind the scenes" section.
    • For the "Locations" section: when you use "one of two points of interest", you don't mention the second one till a few paragraphs on. It's too big a gap; please change.
    • The second sentence of the Bts does not make sense; please take a look at it.
    • I'll take another look after these are addressed. CC7567 20px-Rex.png (talk) 03:43, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
  3. Attack of the Clone II
    • The article is looking good. A few of the objections above remain; please remind me if we covered them over IRC. Just a few more things:
    • "The assassin droid told the administrator that the Exile was a Jedi, meaning the administrator tried to have the Exile picked up by the Republic to stop miners such as Coorta demanding that she be taken to Nar Shaddaa, to collect the bounty crime lord Goto had placed on Jedi." Run-on, and also uses the word "meaning" in a confusing manner, as I mentioned before.
      • The run-on has been fixed, but the "meaning" hasn't. "This meant that" does not change it, and is in fact synonymous to what it replaced. Please reword it. Also, a similar objection to this one remains from my first look; please check above. CC7567 (talk) 07:19, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
    • "To allow the others to escape, Kreia dueled the Sith Lord Darth Sion." First of all, I fixed up the sentence a little. But why was Darth Sion there in the first place? Without mentioning Sion's purpose, it sounds like he was just randomly there.
    • CC7567 (talk) 19:52, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
      • Done. --Darth tom Imperial Emblem (Imperial Intelligence) 07:07, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
        • Please review my objections again; any objections that are not crossed out still remain. CC7567 (talk) 07:19, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
      • Alright, now addressed, although you seem to have missed me having closed the gap in the Locations section. :) --Darth tom Imperial Emblem (Imperial Intelligence) 07:30, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
        • Sorry for the delay; I forgot to look at the timestamps and was confused if you addressed the objections or not. A few still remain; please check the uncrossed ones above. CC7567 (talk) 06:11, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
  4. Wookieepedia:Good article nominations/Peragus II. Everything here needs to be handled. Graestan(Talk) 17:13, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
  5. Cav's watchful eye
    • Mention should be made of the establishment of the Peragus Mining Facility in the intro before mentioning its destruction.
    • Under description, you mention that the Mining Facility is on the planet; I thought it was built in the asteroid field itself?
    • In description: Located in the Peragus system in the Outer Rim Territories, Peragus II was a planet ravaged to being almost uninhabitable, except for designated stations on the planet's surface, such as the Peragus Mining Facility, a local mining facility on the planet's surface, inhabited by a number of miners. Run on sentence and repeated wording. Please rewrite for clarity.
    • First paragraph of Skirmish at Peragus II - the mention of the HK-50 droid and the Harbinger next more context. How did the Exile get from the Harbinger to the Ebon Hawk? Why was the HK-50 droid after her? - Cavalier OneFarStar(Squadron channel) 09:23, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
  6. From the Council Chambers:
    • First, a note for the future: all references inside the infobox should be placed inside the {{Ref}} template. I took care of it here, but you'll want to remember that. OK, here we go:
    • "On board were Kreia, who was—unbeknownst to them at the time—a Sith Lord": Who is "them"?
    • "this meant that a number of areas, such as the Telosian Restoration Project,": The restoration project is just that—a project, not an area. Please reword.
    • The BTS needs expansion. Start by listing all appearances/mentions (a total of two in this case) and identifying which was first. Other things worth mentioning (these are up to you, but I would highly recommend them considering how short the BTS will be even after expansion) would be release dates, publisher, context on each source, etc. Discrepancies/alternate storylines can be listed after this.
    • —Master Jonathan(Jedi Council Chambers) 21:20, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Comments

Approved as a Good article by AgriCorps 14:36, 9 July 2009 (UTC)