Wookieepedia:Good article nominations/Space Battle at Carida (second nomination)

< 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.

Space Battle at Carida

(0 ACs/0 Users/0 Total)

Support

ACvoteI enjoyed this.—Tommy 9281 Monday, February 7, 2011, 02:09 UTC See comments.—Tommy 9281 Monday, February 7, 2011, 17:33 UTC

Object

Objection! Sustained!
  1. The date still needs to be sourced. My suggestion, find something in the game which indicates whether it takes place in 3 or 4 ABY, or find out which source establishes Xizor's death, as this mission takes place afterwards. Corellian PremierAll along the watchtower 21:59, January 4, 2011 (UTC)
  • Xizor's death takes place in 3.5 ABY so the battle must be after that. I will fix it.User:Grand Moff Hopkins
  • The intro needs a lot of work. The introduction to the article is treated as a summary of the article as a whole. As a reminder, everything needs to be linked once in the infobox, once in the intro, and once in the body of the article.
  • If there is a link to the battle of Bespin (where the evidence was planted), please include it. It will help complete the article.
  • Another note on links. Try to avoid redirects. I will leave a note on your talk page explaining how you can highlight redirects.
  • Possibly more to come.Corellian PremierAll along the watchtower 22:26, January 4, 2011 (UTC)
  • Oh, and could you provide a Behind the scenes note specifying that the Imperial fleet's composition is based on game mechanics, and that the Zann fleet's composition is variable depending on what the player builds?
    • Fixed. But at the top of the page it says that the nomination page doesn't exist I don't know whats going on there.User:Grand Moff Hopkins
  • During my copy-edit, I noticed there was a lot of underlinking (planet, shipyard), and some overlinking. Make sure you keep an eye on it. Corellian PremierAll along the watchtower 21:41, January 6, 2011 (UTC)
  • Could you identify the freighter Zann was traveling in during the beginning of the battle? Corellian PremierAll along the watchtower 21:41, January 6, 2011 (UTC)
  • The intro still needs work. If A1, A2, and A3 happened during the battle, followed by B1, B2, and C, then you need to write the intro like "A happened, then B, and finally C." Does that make sense or did my metaphor fall flat? Corellian PremierAll along the watchtower 21:41, January 6, 2011 (UTC)
  • In the prelude, could you identify where Zann first acquired the Sith Holocron? It helps the continuity flow. Also, please add some context on Xizor (ie, that he was the head of Black Sun). This seems like a lot of work; it is. I've been through Battle good article nominations myself. Corellian PremierAll along the watchtower 21:41, January 6, 2011 (UTC)
  • What exactly are the mission objectives? Is it necessary to destroy the Imp fleet entirely or does the mission end at a certain point? If it is the former, we may have to use the "Gamemechanics" template. Corellian PremierAll along the watchtower 21:41, January 6, 2011 (UTC)
  • Since destroying the Imp fleet is part of the storyline and not a player's choice, I don't think we have to use the template. Corellian PremierAll along the watchtower 18:47, January 14, 2011 (UTC)
  • Great work so far, and congrats for taking on such an interesting topic. Corellian PremierAll along the watchtower 21:41, January 6, 2011 (UTC)

Round three:

  • In the first Battle paragraph, you say Zann left hyperspace. Where did he launch from?
  • For the "Bossk quote," I think troop should be changed to soldier.
  • Can you expand on the role of the starfighters during the battle?
  • If it is necessary to destroy the entire fleet, then the infobox should probably be changed to just "Entire fleet except Admonitor" or something similar.
  • What happens to Carida after the battle? Does it remain in the Empire's control or is it automatically conquered for the Consortium? Corellian PremierAll along the watchtower 21:18, January 27, 2011 (UTC)
  • The location the consortium launched from could vary, cardia remains under imperial control and as for the starfighters they didn't do any thing special. Other than these 3 every thing else is fixed. User:Grand Moff Hopkins
    • Excellent; although I still see redirects in the article. Corellian PremierAll along the watchtower 20:10, January 29, 2011 (UTC)
      • I don't know what a redirect is. Could you tell me?User:Grand Moff Hopkins
        • A redirect is a link, it will take you to the correct article but is a different name. For instance, linking "Darth Vader" will redirect you to "Anakin Skywalker," but the proper format is to link "Anakin Skywalker" and pipe-link ( | ) "Darth Vader." Does that make sense? You can highlight redirects using the method I provided on your talkpage.
  • Ok it's fixed.User:Grand Moff Hopkins
A couple of things
  • Introduction needs rewritten. It made up of an incredibly long run-on sentence.
  • Caption of the Merciless picture should be its, not it's I believe.
  • second paragraph of the Battle section needs to be rewritten, it's clunky. Split it up instead of having a long run-on sentence.<-Omicron 22:25, January 4, 2011 (UTC)
Xd1358
  • Everything needs to be linked once upon first instance—one time in the infobox, one time in the introduction and one time in the article body.
  • Everything in the infobox needs to be mentioned in the article.
  • Infobox items do not need bullets if there is only one item in the field.
  • No other quotes?
    • Nothing for the remaining sections? 1358 (Talk) 14:49, January 30, 2011 (UTC)
  • Image should be moved to left side and probably a bit higher, too.
  • "took place" is said twice in the intro; please remove one.
    • Now that sentence makes no sense. 1358 (Talk) 14:49, January 30, 2011 (UTC)
  • Both the Admonitor and the Merciless probably need context in the intro.
  • Bossk needs contest in the intro. 1358 (Talk) 16:52, January 17, 2011 (UTC)
  • Several items in the article body need context. 1358 (Talk) 14:49, January 30, 2011 (UTC)
  • Who is "Uari Fen", mentioned in the Prelude quote? He needs a mention in the article proper, too. 1358 (Talk) 17:18, February 7, 2011 (UTC)
As Children Playing with Toys Compared to the Prowess of the Old Masters...
  • Context on the Sith holocron in the "Prelude." "Seeking to sell the Sith holocron..."

*Context on Tyber Zann in the "Prelude." "which Tyber Zann stole..."

    • Now you need context on the Consortium. "which Consortium leader Tyber Zann..."
  • Context on Xizor upon his first mention in the "Prelude." You give him context in the very next sentence, but it needs to be upon first mention.
  • Context on Darth Vader in the "Prelude." "As part of the deal Xizor set up the meeting; however Darth Vader was convinced that Black Sun..."
  • And I'm only three sentences in. Fix these and I'll continue.—Tommy 9281 Thursday, February 3, 2011, 13:52 UTC
  • The entire "Prelude" is messy. You talk about Zann's agreement to steal Tibanna, agreement with whom? You go on to say that Zaan planned to frame Xizor, but then you say, "As part of the deal Xizor set up the meeting..." Huh? This makes no sense. How can Xizor be apart of the aforementioned deal/agreement, if Zann is planning to frame him?
  • Is there no name for Interceptor IV frigate?
  • Context on the Admonitor in "The battle." "it was met by the Admonitor..."
  • Context on Thrawn in "The battle." "...all under the command of Thrawn."
  • I'm stopping here, and am going to strongly suggest you solicit a copy edit. You might want to contact Master Jonathan in that regard. I'll give you a few days to take care of that, but in all honesty, this thing, while small in size, is not GAN ready whatsoever. It might benefit from being removed until which time it is. I will make that determination by this coming Sunday's end.—Tommy 9281 Thursday, February 3, 2011, 17:51 UTC
  • All set, and not a bad article overall. Context was a big issue here, and one easily rectified by one or two words in each instance. Keep this in mind, it's relatively easy. Also keep in mind you don't source intros, unless somehow it has exclusive information, which this does not. It would be prudent in the future to do as I suggested and solicit a copyedit, as many of the issues found could have been cleaned up that way. And we as ACs aren't only here to "preside" over the GAN, if you will, but also to lend a helping hand. Don't hesitate to ask one of us to give your hard work a looksee beforehand; we want to help you do your best here, and will expect it as you grow in experience.—Tommy 9281 Monday, February 7, 2011, 02:08 UTC
Jinzler
  • The Prima Guide details a number of advisory tactics that the player can use during the battle, so it is probably worth mentioning these in the "Behind the Scenes" section. --Jinzler 21:51, February 6, 2011 (UTC)
    • I don't have the guide so I can't do any thing with it. ~~User:Grand Moff Hopkins~~
      • Well, you better find it somewhere or ask someone who has it because GAs have to contain information from all sources. 1358 (Talk) 17:40, February 15, 2011 (UTC)
        • Do you have it or know some one who has it? ~~User:Grand Moff Hopkins~~
          • You're perfectly welcome to ask around and try to seek someone out who has this information and who is willing to provide it to you, but as the nominator of this article or any article, the responsibility rests solely on yourself to make sure you have access to and can provide information from all pertinent source material. In other words, it's no one's problem but your own if you find you're missing source material. I fully expect the AC to uphold the "two-week clause" for idle objections if you cannot demonstrate having made some sort of legitimate progress in acquiring this information by 2/20. Toprawa and Ralltiir 19:43, February 15, 2011 (UTC)
    • Fixed. ~~User:Grand Moff Hopkins~~
      • You appear to have just copy-and-pasted the information I left on your talk page. You need to put it in prose form, rather than bullet points, and the information also needs general rewording, to bring it up to GAN standards. I didn't intend for you to directly copy what I put, I was just giving you information, not trying to write GAN-quality material. --Jinzler 21:42, February 15, 2011 (UTC)
QGJ
  • Context on the Merciless in the intro.
  • Is "hyperspacing" a word? Can it be substituted for something else?
  • How can a death be "somewhat" honorable? It's either honorable or not.
  • This set the stage for the Theft on Coruscant. Can you elaborate on this a bit? It feels kinda lacking.
  • Fix the tense shift in the Bts. QuiGonJinn Senate seal(Talk) 19:24, February 12, 2011 (UTC)
    • What do you mean? ~~User:Grand Moff Hopkins~~
      • The first couple of sentences in "Behind the scenes" were written in the past tense, while the rest was in the present tense. More specifically, the shift occurred between these two sentences: The Zann Consortium fleet composition was decided by the player; the Imperial fleet first appeared in a cutscene and its composition attributed to game mechanics. After Thrawn gets the holocron and flees, the player must destroy the rest of the Imperial fleet. It is always preferable, however, to always stick to one tense in writing unless there is a good reason to do otherwise. So, while the first two sentences were OK as they described events in the past, there was no reason to change the tense between the following two. I've fixed the issue, but be mindful of that in the future. QuiGonJinn Senate seal(Talk) 21:53, February 19, 2011 (UTC)
Jujiggum's first look
  • Intro: if Zann wanted to sell the holocron to the Empire, then why would he be fighting the Empire over it? Why didn't the sale go through?
    • Fixed. ~~User:Grand Moff Hopkins~~
      • This is still sort of confusing. Do you mean that Thrawn demanded that Zann give the holocron to the Empire without payment? If so, why would he do that? Surely the Empire had plenty of funding to pay whatever Zann was asking. Did Thrawn receive orders to try to take it from Zann? His motive for attacking Zann isn't clear. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 19:58, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
        • I'm not sure what to say for this one because Thrawn just demands the holocron and says he will kill Tyber after he gets it. It doesn't say why he does so. ~~User:Grand Moff Hopkins~~
  • If Bossk worked for Zann, then why did he deliver the holocron to Thrawn? Did he betray Zann, or was it simply a plan of Zann's all along? This isn't clear.
    • It was already there that Zann predicted Bossk's betrayal. ~~User:Grand Moff Hopkins~~
      • You didn't say that anywhere in the intro before. The bit that you've added now fixes this issue, but it was not there before. Also, please see the grammar adjustment I made. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 19:58, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
        • Not in the intro but it was in the aftermath section. ~~User:Grand Moff Hopkins~~
          • This was requested for the intro. My review thus far has only been through the intro; I have not yet looked at the rest of the article. I said I would continue my review once these objections are fixed. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 21:21, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
  • Did the Consortium fleet win because Thrawn left after receiving the holocron? If so, please make this connection.
    • Not quite shure what you mean. ~~User:Grand Moff Hopkins~~
      • "…and brought it to Thrawn, who fled afterward. The Consortium fleet eventually emerged victorious." I am talking about this passage. You say here that Thrawn fled, and then the Consortium won. Was there a connection here? Did the Consortium win becase Thrawn fled? Did Thrawn leave his ships behind to continue the fight, or did he intend for his entire fleet to withdraw since he had the holocron? I want you to clarify this. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 19:58, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
        • He left and his fleet kept fighting. ~~User:Grand Moff Hopkins~~
          • Please specify this in the intro, which was what I have asked you to do from the beginning. Also, please fix your grammar where you made this change in the body. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 21:21, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
            • Fixed. ~~User:Grand Moff Hopkins~~
              • This even still remains in the intro; as I've stated numerous times now, my review thus far has only been through the intro, so all of my objections thus far have been referring to the intro. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 01:57, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
                • Fixed. ~~User:Grand Moff Hopkins~~
                  • Better connection, but you still have not specified outright that Thrawn left his fleet to die. To the reader, it's still confusing that Thrawn left, but his ships kept fighting. If he retreated, why didn't his fleet retreat with him? Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 21:44, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
  • I'm assuming that Zann put the homing beacon on the device intentionally, but could you please specify as much?
  • The Carbonite Sith Army holocron page says the title is conjectural: if that is the case, then you should not call it that directly in the article; you currently imply that that is its proper title.
  • More to come once these are fixed. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 06:00, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
  • There are myriad grammatical errors throughout the article.
  • You have some infobox-exclusive information.
  • The aftermath section has some poor wording and poor connecting points that make it pretty hard to follow.
  • Also, you tag on a mention of the Space Battle of Kuat at the end of the aftermath with absolutely no context for it. What is it? Who fought in it? Why and how is it significantly attached to the Space Battle at Carida? Is it solely connected because the Star Destroyers produced at the Consortium shipyards took place in it? This is a surprise to the reader, because now it sounds like the Agressor-class was experimental in the battle at Carida; but you don't specify this anywhere else in the article.
  • More to come. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 15:29, March 25, 2011 (UTC)
Toprawa
  • Two things I immediately notice. Firstly, "Space Battle at Carida" is the conflict's formal canonical title. The article's intro, for all intents and purposes according to how we handle battle articles, is treating this title as an informal conjectural title. The intro should literally refer to this conflict as the "Space Battle at Carida" in bold, not the general "a space battle," since that is its literal name.
  • I'm not sure where you got the date of 4 ABY from, but it's not necessarily correct. All we know for this battle's timeline placement is that it takes place after Xizor's death, which happens in late 3 ABY. Not every single thing that follows Xizor's death automatically takes place in 4 ABY. The closest we can pin this battle down to is circa late 3 ABY-early 4 ABY. The article should be revised to reflect this. Toprawa and Ralltiir 21:18, March 14, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

  • Grand Moff Hopkins, I did a copy-edit of the article, making a few adjustments to the BTS. Corellian PremierAll along the watchtower 21:41, January 6, 2011 (UTC)
  • Hey Tommy, when you did your copy-edit, I noticed you split up the title. Its not conjectural, its from the Prima Guide, if you weren't aware. Corellian PremierAll along the watchtower 17:21, February 3, 2011 (UTC)
    • I am aware, I did it that way so as to allow smoother flow of the prose.—Tommy 9281 Thursday, February 3, 2011, 17:30 UTC
  • I supported this in haste (and generosity) but it has become apparent that there are still several things missing, according to several other reviews. Once these issues have been satisfactorily resolved, I will re-review.—Tommy 9281 Monday, February 7, 2011, 17:33 UTC

Vote to remove nomination (AC only)

  1. ACvote Unaddressed objections for over 2 weeks. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 21:01, April 8, 2011 (UTC)
  2. ACvote Toprawa and Ralltiir 21:07, April 8, 2011 (UTC)
  3. ACvote 1358 (Talk) 21:09, April 8, 2011 (UTC)