Wookieepedia:Good article nominations/Unidentified Dark Jedi (Endar Spire)

< 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.

Unidentified Dark Jedi (Endar Spire)

(3 ACs/4 Users/7 Total)

Support

  1. Good work, and don't forget you can ask any help you need from us, especially within the project. (: –Tm_T (Talk) 05:22, June 15, 2011 (UTC)
  2. ACvote CC7567 (talk) 18:37, June 24, 2011 (UTC)
  3. ACvote Kilson(Let's have a chat) 19:28, June 24, 2011 (UTC)
  4. Cal JediInfinite Empire (Personal Comm Channel) 21:56, June 25, 2011 (UTC)
  5. Good work.--Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 17:19, July 3, 2011 (UTC)
  6. Clone Commander Lee Talk 17:46, July 5, 2011 (UTC)
  7. ACvote Toprawa and Ralltiir 01:25, July 15, 2011 (UTC)

Object

Floyd:
  • Ref tags are not needed in the intro.
  • Also, {{Ref| templates are not used in the body, only in the infobox and in succession boxes.
  • Linking issues, articles should be linked once in the intro and once in the body, nothing more, nothing less.
  • Context on Darth Malak in both the intro and body is needed.
    • I added context in the intro, but don't really know how to go about it in the body without making it seem sloppy and forced. Ruthless Xero(Comment) 19:02, June 10, 2011 (UTC)
  • Same with Darth Bandon.
  • Why were they searching for Bastila? Context please.
  • More to come. IFYLOFD (Floyd's crib) 01:26, June 10, 2011 (UTC)
    • I'll get on those first thing in the morning. Ruthless Xero(Comment) 02:27, June 10, 2011 (UTC)
      • My objections are addressed. I'll give the article another look once everyone else is satisfied with theirs. IFYLOFD (Floyd's crib) 00:57, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
Ecks Dee
  • 1st appearance / mention tag?
    • I thought it was policy that if the character has only one appearance, the first appearance tag isn't used? Ruthless Xero(Comment) 18:16, June 10, 2011 (UTC)
      • Only if there is only one appearance or source. This has both, which means first appearance / mention is needed. 1358 (Talk) 21:59, June 16, 2011 (UTC)
  • "This Human male was part of Darth Malak's Sith Empire by 3,956 BBY." Can not be sourced to the CG only.
  • In the bio, please make it clearer he is a Dark Jedi. 1358 (Talk) 13:40, June 10, 2011 (UTC)
Tm
  • I did some adjustments, replaced those "This" from the beginning of sections, and some refs, check if you're ok with it.
    • Thanks! I appreciate any help that I can get. Ruthless Xero(Comment) 20:39, June 10, 2011 (UTC)
      • I did some more, and as before, check to see if you're ok with it. –Tm_T (Talk) 05:47, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
  • The beginning of intro gives me an impression that the Dark Jedi was the former apprentice of Revan and self proclaimed yadda, try to clarify.
    • Rectified, I believe. Ruthless Xero(Comment) 20:39, June 10, 2011 (UTC)
      • Now it is rather cloumsy and has no rhythm, try something like "...a member of the Sith Empire of Darth Malak, former apprentice of Darth Revan and self-proclaimed Dark Lord of the Sith during time of the Jedi Civil War." perhaps? Also, you have less context on Malak in the Bio.
        • Thanks. I plugged that in and it seems to flow a lot better. Ruthless Xero(Comment) 18:01, June 11, 2011 (UTC)
  • The beginning of Bio, there's some things linked twice, and I think it might work better if you could try combine the first two sentences. –Tm_T (Talk) 20:04, June 10, 2011 (UTC)
    • Done. Ruthless Xero(Comment) 20:43, June 10, 2011 (UTC)
      • The first sentence is full paragraph now? Doesn't work that way I'd say. Depending on how you handle the Malak context, you should go and split up sentences and perhaps reorder bits. –Tm_T (Talk) 13:33, June 11, 2011 (UTC)
        • Added context on Malak in the bio. Should be good now, but go ahead and look it over. Ruthless Xero(Comment) 18:01, June 11, 2011 (UTC)
          • Still bugging about the Malak context, how about switching the intro context to bio and other way around? Also references are not ok there now. Aaand, "christened"? I'm sure there's IU words that suits better. (: –Tm_T (Talk) 18:32, June 11, 2011 (UTC)
  • I wonder if it would be too much context to have mention the location of the hallway aboard the ship where he met his end. –Tm_T (Talk) 18:32, June 11, 2011 (UTC)
  • Check your references and their placement in the Bio section, for example, the year.
    • Added reference for the year. Ruthless Xero(Comment) 06:39, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
      • You still didn't notice you had references placed before punctuation, not after like they should. Also, can Campaign Guide be used as a source for him being part of the fleet and fleet being commanded by Bandon? I worked in assumption that no and did do some work on referencing here, which I think reaches the needed accuracy on referencing. –Tm_T (Talk) 07:45, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
  • Hmm, is there reason why you mention canon in Bts? Considering there's no known non-canon appearances.
    • That was there before I started working on this. Fixed. Ruthless Xero(Comment) 06:36, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
  • And I think you should go and have {{1st}} placed, as there's 2 appearances and/or sources. If there would have been just one appearance or source, it wouldn't be needed.
  • Progressing well, just pay more attention with those references. –Tm_T (Talk) 05:47, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
  • This I leave to be judged by the others: should Revan be presented as amnesiac or something necessarily or not? Perhaps could make it clearer why this old Sith Lord didn't intervene the fight or something... but I don't know. –Tm_T (Talk) 05:22, June 15, 2011 (UTC)
    • IRC concensus (judged by me, ofcourse) says it would be good to have some context about his status at the moment, like amnesiac or republic trooper. We haven't been consistent about this yet so maybe we should begin now. (: –Tm_T (Talk) 05:50, June 15, 2011 (UTC)
Attack of the Clone
  • "In 3,956 BBY,[1] the Dark Jedi was part of a Sith battle fleet led by Darth Bandon,[2] Darth Malak's Sith apprentice and Shadow Hand,[1] that boarded": a fleet can't board a ship, can it? Please try to reword this one.
    • He's part of a fleet that boarded the ship. I don't see what's wrong with the wording there. Ruthless Xero(Comment) 23:37, June 23, 2011 (UTC)
      • What I meant to say is that usually a fleet of ships (which is how it's being used here, I assume) can't "board" another ship, per say. The fleet can launch its forces to board that other ship, but the ships themselves can't board another ship, which is what the wording currently claims. CC7567 (talk) 23:46, June 23, 2011 (UTC)
        • Should be good now. It's common sense that people boarded the ship and not the other ships. No one would think that. Ruthless Xero(Comment) 07:09, June 24, 2011 (UTC)
  • I'll give it another quick once-over once this objection is fixed just to make sure everything's good. Good work otherwise, but please remember that all subjects in an article must be linked once in the infobox, once in the intro, and once in the body of the article upon their first mention. CC7567 (talk) 23:24, June 23, 2011 (UTC)
Toprawa
  • Can we not upload a cropped version of the infobox image that focuses just on this character, rather than the two of them dueling? Toprawa and Ralltiir 20:22, June 28, 2011 (UTC)
    • I can go ahead and try to tweak with the game to get a decent headshot for the infobox. I'll try and do that sometime today. Ruthless Xero(Comment) 19:25, June 29, 2011 (UTC)
      • A head shot is not so important for the purposes of my objection here. I would be satisfied with simply cropping out his form in the image that's there, just so we're not highlighting the duel and his opponent, which are rather extraneous to what amounts to his profile picture. Toprawa and Ralltiir 19:28, June 29, 2011 (UTC)
Lee attacks
  • Is it really neccessary to mention the Jedi's dead in the intro? It's already a little bit to large compared to the bio. Otherwise very nice work. Clone Commander Lee Talk 17:13, July 3, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Approved as a Good article by AgriCorps 01:25, July 15, 2011 (UTC)