Wookieepedia:Good article nominations/Unidentified false Jedi

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a good article nomination that was unsuccessful. Please do not modify it.

Unidentified false Jedi

Nominated by: Cevan (talk) 20:55, February 4, 2017 (UTC)
Nomination comments: Here's hoping we get to see this full story someday.

(2 ACs/5 Users/7 Total)

Support

AnilSerifoglu (talk) 01:13, February 6, 2017 (UTC)
Nice work; it can be difficult working with cut info. - AV-6R7^{Crew Pit} 00:46, February 9, 2017 (UTC)
—Jedi Kasra ("Indeed.") 15:32, February 20, 2017 (UTC)
--Lewisr (talk) 15:32, February 20, 2017 (UTC)
Sol Pacificus^Firestorm 21:00, April 12, 2017 (UTC)
Two-sentence GAs, woo-hoo...! Seriously, nice work though. Imperators II^(Talk) 05:56, May 30, 2017 (UTC)
1358 ^(Talk) 22:51, August 13, 2017 (UTC)

Object

AnilSerifoglu

~~You can briefly mention the flashback scene in The Gathering, which was a nod to this story as Filoni said during the panel.~~ AnilSerifoglu (talk) 01:39, February 5, 2017 (UTC)
- Added. Cevan (talk) 20:26, February 5, 2017 (UTC)

AV

~~IIRC, Dave Filoni talks about Latrans in The Complete S3s Zygerria featurette. Could you check that?~~ - AV-6R7^{Crew Pit} 01:16, February 6, 2017 (UTC)
- Just checked, and he does indeed make mention of Latrans (not directly by name) in that featurette. Thanks for catching that, AV! I should have the information from there up a little later tonight. Cevan (talk) 21:22, February 6, 2017 (UTC)
  - Sorry for the delay; I've added the featurette information into the article. Cevan (talk) 22:20, February 7, 2017 (UTC)

Sol Pacificus

"Tano was no longer able to feel the Jedi as a whole through the Force, something she had been able to do since she was very young and credited with saving her life in her encounter with the false Jedi."

I actually found this sentence really hard to understand, especially coming from someone who is entirely unfamiliar with this character and the story. What is being credited? Ahsoka's ability to feel the Jedi through the Force? Her ability to sense the false Jedi? The false Jedi herself? I think the syntax might actually be a tiny bit off. Actually after reading it several more times, I think I understand it better; you mean to say that her ability to sense the Jedi had saved her life from this false Jedi, and this is perhaps the only reference to this character in the novel? I think it might help if you also clarified how feeling the Jedi as a whole through the Force helped save her life from this character or what it means to sense the Jedi as a whole, though I understand the information is probably very scarce. Anyways, is it possible for you to tweak this sentence a little bit to improve clarity? Sol Pacificus^Firestorm 08:02, April 4, 2017 (UTC)

Here's the full quote from the novel: "Even the sense of the Jedi as a whole was gone, and she'd been able to feel that since she was too small to articulate what it was that she felt. The feeling had saved her life once, when she was very young and a false Jedi came to Shili to enslave her."

This is the only mention of the false Jedi in Ahsoka (or any canon material for that matter), and we unfortunately do not know how Ahsoka sensing the Jedi as a whole saved her life here—I imagine she was able to sense that the false Jedi was merely posing as a Jedi, but adding that into the article would be speculative. If you'd still like me to do so, I can try and see about clearing that passage up in the article as best I can. Cevan

(talk) 20:46, April 7, 2017 (UTC)

I think I fixed the sentence. However, it might make more sense to write it from the false Jedi's perspective. That is, to state that the false Jedi had threatened Ahsoka's life, but that Ahsoka's ability to sense the Jedi as a whole had saved her life. That might help the confusion, but then again it might not because rewording it like that make the "sensing Jedi as a whole" sound even weirder. What do you think? Sol Pacificus^Firestorm 06:25, April 8, 2017 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and rewritten that part—how is it now? Cevan

(talk) 19:25, April 11, 2017 (UTC)

It's good. :) Sol Pacificus^Firestorm 21:00, April 12, 2017 (UTC)

Ecks Dee

~~Check your image caption punctuation. Only full sentences should have a full stop.~~ 1358 ^(Talk) 21:39, April 27, 2017 (UTC)
- Fixed. Cevan (talk) 21:41, April 28, 2017 (UTC)
~~According to the MoS, the bolded name in the intro should not contain links. You should instead link the subjects at the next possible opportunity.~~
- Fixed. Cevan (talk) 16:58, May 11, 2017 (UTC)
~~The Amazon and IMDb references both lack a backup link. Both templates should support adding them.~~
- Added. Cevan (talk) 16:58, May 11, 2017 (UTC)
~~Using {{1stm}} {{Imo}} in the Sources would be better than a custom text.~~ 1358 ^(Talk) 14:54, May 11, 2017 (UTC)
- Done. Cevan (talk) 16:58, May 11, 2017 (UTC)
~~Plo Koon finding Ahsoka and taking her to be trained is Canon, right? That's probably worth mentioning in the intro.~~
- Added that in. Cevan (talk) 20:11, August 13, 2017 (UTC)
"however, the young Togruta's ability to sense the Jedi as a whole through the Force managed to save her." Who is "the Jedi" referring to here? Are we still talking about the impostor? This should be reworded for clarity.
- "The Jedi" here just refers to all the Jedi in general. Here's the relevant passage from Ahsoka: "Even the sense of the Jedi as a whole was gone, and she'd been able to feel that since she was too small to articulate what it was that she felt. The feeling had saved her life once, when she was very young and a false Jedi came to Shili to enslave her." Do you think saying "Jedi Order" as opposed to just "Jedi" here give it greater clarity? Cevan (talk) 20:11, August 13, 2017 (UTC)
  - Might I suggest something like "however, the young Togruta's ability to sense Jedi through the Force saved her."? Removing "the" from "the Jedi" makes it clear that it's referring to Jedi in general rather than a specific individual. 1358 ^(Talk) 22:21, August 13, 2017 (UTC)
    - That works. Cevan (talk) 22:27, August 13, 2017 (UTC)
~~Just wondering: Is there really no source that places Ahsoka's birth in 36 BBY? Or is the math necessary? I'd expect a major character like her would have an established birth year but who knows.~~
- As far as I'm aware no canon source thus far has explicitly stated what year Ahsoka was born in. Cevan (talk) 20:11, August 13, 2017 (UTC)
On a side note, I made some minor rewording for better flow. See if it's okay with you. 1358 ^(Talk) 21:52, August 12, 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks, looks good! Cevan (talk) 20:11, August 13, 2017 (UTC)

Imperators II

I'd like to see some indicator of the timeframe worked into the body, i.e., the false Jedi must've come to Shili at some point between the year of Tano's birth and the year of her joining the Order, right?
- So sorry for the hold-up—I've been away without computer access for a bit. I've gone ahead and added this in now. Cevan (talk) 21:45, May 29, 2017 (UTC)
~~So the link in ref 3 doesn't work.~~
- Fixed. Cevan (talk) 21:45, May 29, 2017 (UTC)
"Filoni presumed that, due to the rarity of Force-sensitives in the galaxy, they would be highly sought after and some may attempt to kidnap them. The residents of Tano's town, having never met a Jedi before, would be none the wiser to Latrans's ruse." - could you reword this so that the IU parts are in past tense? Imperators II^(Talk) 09:20, May 23, 2017 (UTC)
- How's that? Cevan (talk) 21:45, May 29, 2017 (UTC)

Toprawa

Preliminary question: Would we not be remiss in just naming this character Latrans? I haven't looked through any of the BTS source material other than what the BTS itself explains, but if Lucasfilm is intending for this character to be the same from Filoni's developments, it seems ok to me to just use the name. Am I missing something? Maybe you could even ask Pablo or Leland if they consider this character to be Latrans. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 00:35, August 24, 2017 (UTC)
- I had been under the impression that this sort of confirmation fell into the same category as the canonicity of the currently-unreleased The Clone Wars arcs, being that until the information is given in a firmly canon story it cannot be used in the bodies of canon articles. To me, it just seems a little strange to essentially pick and choose a piece of information from that Celebration panel to consider canon, while leaving the rest in the behind the scenes section. What do you think, though? Cevan (talk) 17:29, August 27, 2017 (UTC)
  - I should say, firstly, that I'm not entirely sure what unreleased TCW arcs you're referring to. Can you link me to something? To answer the rest of your comment, maybe that raises a larger question: Are we meant to take what they say in that Celebration panel as canon? I'm not sure myself. I haven't really been following any of this stuff, so I pretty much rely on you guys who work with Canon to know what to do with it. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 17:46, August 27, 2017 (UTC)
    - Here's a quote from CC7567 on the talk page for The Clone Wars Legacy: "The Clone Wars Legacy incorporates only stories that have been officially released in near-completed form, whether through the episodic story reels or adaptations into other mediums—in other words, only what is listed on the Legacy section of StarWars.com. Unreleased stories do not qualify. In regards to the quote from Pablo Hidalgo, the stories are only canon once they're released as stated previously." Cevan (talk) 18:09, August 27, 2017 (UTC)
      - And can you link me to what Pablo Hidalgo quote he's referring to? Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 18:47, August 27, 2017 (UTC)
        I believe he's referring to Pablo's quote used at the top of that page, taken from The Clone Wars Legacy announcement video. I've been trying to see if I could find a more definite statement on Wookieepedia stating this position on how the unfinished content is being handled, but so far I've had no luck. Cevan (talk) 19:11, August 27, 2017 (UTC)
        That fact that there doesn't appear to be anything at all really to support what CC is saying is what's making me skeptical. In fact, I would say Pablo's quote at the top of the article is suggesting the exact opposite. It's probably not coincidental that this is the only sentence in that entire article that isn't referenced to anything: "Although scripts for these stories exist, they're not canon unless an official release is made, even if other media refers to these events." I think maybe the best thing to do is try asking Pablo or Leland if they consider canon a) the thirteen unfinished story arcs, b) the name Latrans for this character, and c) the developmental background history of this article's character explained at that Celebration panel, as documented in this article's BTS. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 20:37, August 27, 2017 (UTC)
        I can try if you'd like, although I doubt Pablo or Leland (particularly Pablo) will respond as I don't believe they're too keen on "is this canon?" questions. In my opinion, it may not be a bad idea to open up a Senate Hall thread discussing this, as this concerns far more than just the unidentified false Jedi article. Cevan (talk) 14:49, September 7, 2017 (UTC)
        You should definitely try and ask Pablo or Leland -- not for my liking, but to save your nomination. Because it doesn't really matter what the outcome of the SH thread is, the Wookieepedia community doesn't determine canonicity. We have a fairly major issue here lying at our feet in the unresolved canon status of deleted scenes (both from the films and TCW) and unreleased content from TCW, all of which, correct me if I'm wrong, the Story Group has given little indication about. Either way, we need to get some kind of official ruling on this. But if you're going to ask one or both of them, frame your question specifically for the purpose of this article subject, namely Latrans and Filoni's background development, as we discussed above. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 16:53, September 7, 2017 (UTC)
        
        It's been a week since I last replied to this objection with no response, so I wanted to see where you stand on its progress. Keep in mind that this nomination will be subject to removal one week from now if no response is made. If you are unable to resolve this objection, removing the nomination until you can might be the best course of action. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 17:52, September 14, 2017 (UTC)
        Sorry Tope, been grappling with Irma and its aftermath. I've gone ahead and reached out via Twitter and am currently awaiting a reply. Cevan (talk) 16:57, September 15, 2017 (UTC)
        And here is Pablo's reply. He says: "I'd rather give Dave the opportunity to more fully tell the story rather than hold him to something discussed in a behind-the-scenes context." In that case, I suppose I should just leave things as they are now? Cevan (talk) 17:09, September 15, 2017 (UTC)
        The BTS content should stay where it is, but I'm still wondering if Leland has this character listed as "Latrans" in the Holocron. Pablo didn't exactly dismiss that possibility. I definitely think you should follow up with this and ask that question, but I won't hold this nomination up over it. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 18:56, September 28, 2017 (UTC)
Reference 5 should implement the {{TCWCite}} template to specify the specific featurette. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 18:56, September 28, 2017 (UTC)

Comments

That's not an objection, but I have a minor suggestion. Maybe you can name Plo Koon's species, Kel Dor, somewhere in the article, considering the emphasis on his "creepy" and "sinister" appearance. AnilSerifoglu (talk) 01:39, February 5, 2017 (UTC)
- I'm not sure if that's where you wanted it placed, but I've gone ahead and mentioned that Plo Koon is a Kel Dor. Cevan (talk) 20:26, February 5, 2017 (UTC)
  - I would recommend somewhere in the line "creepy" and "sinister" appearance of Plo Koon, the story's hero. But it's just my personal preference, I'm fine with it anyway. The article looks great! AnilSerifoglu (talk) 01:13, February 6, 2017 (UTC)
    - Thanks! I'll try and mess around with it later and see if I can fit it in down there. If it doesn't work out, I'll leave it as is. Cevan (talk) 21:22, February 6, 2017 (UTC)

Vote to remove nomination (AC only)

Idle objection over two weeks old. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 19:37, October 12, 2017 (UTC)
1358 ^(Talk) 19:38, October 12, 2017 (UTC)
Imperators II^(Talk) 20:37, October 12, 2017 (UTC)
Exiled Jedi (talk) 02:13, October 13, 2017 (UTC)