- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a good article nomination that was successful. Please do not modify it.
Unidentified male Imperial Knight (Agamar corpse)
- Nominated by: Menkooroo 04:23, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
- Nomination comments: This one's a little different.
(3 ACs/2 Users/5 Total)
Support
- Kilson 02:02, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
Toprawa and Ralltiir 00:59, March 18, 2011 (UTC)- 1358 (Talk) 19:20, March 18, 2011 (UTC)
- It's a shame "Corpsey" was taken. Grand Moff Tranner
(Comlink) 16:17, March 19, 2011 (UTC) - Sorry, was out of town! ~ SavageBob 17:45, March 19, 2011 (UTC)
Object
Kilson
Give some context on Imperial Knight in the intro, similar to the way you did in the bio.- Intro isn't the best place to give a lot of context. Once you start bogging the intro down with context, the whole point of it being a brief summary of the rest of the article is lost. Especially in an article like this where the bio is already so short. I've written up a few other IK's from the same battle, and there's never been a problem with leaving out this context in the intro before.
- Understandable
- Intro isn't the best place to give a lot of context. Once you start bogging the intro down with context, the whole point of it being a brief summary of the rest of the article is lost. Especially in an article like this where the bio is already so short. I've written up a few other IK's from the same battle, and there's never been a problem with leaving out this context in the intro before.
"A brown-haired Human male was an Imperial Knight..." Say, "This brown-haired Human male blah blah blah" Also, push "in 137 ABY" into the start of the next sentence.- There's been a recent push to not use "This" in unidentified character articles, as it reads more like an OOU statement than an IU one. "A" seems to be the more accepted way these days. As for 137 ABY, it works fine in either sentence; it's really just a stylistic difference. This is additionally a good way to ensure that this article doesn't end up being written identically to the other corpse that I'm going to write up next. It's important that the articles be different; I'll push "In 137 ABY" to the next sentence for the female corpse's article.
- I guess we just have a difference in style. When I read the first sentance, it sounded a little confusing to me, but after looking at other unidentified articles that have passed in the past, I see what you mean.
- There's been a recent push to not use "This" in unidentified character articles, as it reads more like an OOU statement than an IU one. "A" seems to be the more accepted way these days. As for 137 ABY, it works fine in either sentence; it's really just a stylistic difference. This is additionally a good way to ensure that this article doesn't end up being written identically to the other corpse that I'm going to write up next. It's important that the articles be different; I'll push "In 137 ABY" to the next sentence for the female corpse's article.
Those same two objections apply to the bio too.- See above.
You need to mention that this was during the Second Imperial Civil War in both the intro and bio, and give context to the Civil War in the bio.- I'm hesitant to mention it and give context --- for the purposes of this specific character, we can only place him at a single event, and giving context on the larger picture would start to distract from what's important and would be a bit extraneous. "To the point" is always better for short articles like this, but I have added a pipelink to "Second Imperial Civil War" in the sentence about why they're making an alliance, though. Whaddya think?
- I would have preferred it to be said in the first sentence, "In 137 ABY, during the Second Imperial Civil War, a Human male with brown hair..." if you don't think it sounds right, I'll strike my objection.
- That's a good idea. I like it. Added!
- I would have preferred it to be said in the first sentence, "In 137 ABY, during the Second Imperial Civil War, a Human male with brown hair..." if you don't think it sounds right, I'll strike my objection.
- I'm hesitant to mention it and give context --- for the purposes of this specific character, we can only place him at a single event, and giving context on the larger picture would start to distract from what's important and would be a bit extraneous. "To the point" is always better for short articles like this, but I have added a pipelink to "Second Imperial Civil War" in the sentence about why they're making an alliance, though. Whaddya think?
Give context to why Fel wanted to have a peace agreement with Jedi in the bio.- Good call. I forgot to mention that the alliance was directed against Krayt's Empire. I've added it in.
Also, make a small Pts section. I know this character is very minor, but you can at least say as an Imperial Knight, he was extremely loyal to Emperor Fel and was willing to give his life for him.- We can say that about the Imperial Knights as an organization, but we can't make that assumption about this character (as an example, one of the other IK's was recently revealed to be very unloyal to Fel in an issue of Legacy: War, demonstrating why we shouldn't make assumptions). The article already mentions that the Imperial Knights are an organization that's loyal to Fel, but applying that to this character would be speculation, even if it seems like a logical enough inference.
In the Bts, you probably don't have to mention that John Ostrander wrote and Jan Duursema penciled the comic.- There's a ton of precedent for mentioning who created characters in their bts sections, as well as who illustrated them. It's useful information, for sure, and a lot of people actually object to it not being there when it's left out.
- Generally I would agree with you, but I'm concerned with the fact that the Bts is very large when compared to the main body of the article, and that having the writer and illustrator looks like fluff for such a minor character.
- That's a good point about the already pretty-long bts. After thinking about it, I agree that the author and artist aren't strictly necessary. Check out the new-and-improved shorter bts! :)
- Generally I would agree with you, but I'm concerned with the fact that the Bts is very large when compared to the main body of the article, and that having the writer and illustrator looks like fluff for such a minor character.
- There's a ton of precedent for mentioning who created characters in their bts sections, as well as who illustrated them. It's useful information, for sure, and a lot of people actually object to it not being there when it's left out.
Overall, the article needs to more info but it's not bad. Once you address these objections, I'll re-review.Kilson 05:30, March 7, 2011 (UTC)- Thanks for the review! Let me know if anything else is needed. Menkooroo 06:01, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
- No problem, even though it seemed half my objections were bad. By the way, thanks for reviewing Jollin Resbin. Kilson 01:43, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
- No, no, they weren't "bad" at all. Things like "This article is too long!" or "I don't like this character!" would be bad, but your objections had to do with context, fluff, and formatting, which are certainly good things to be concerned about. Thanks again for the suggestions, and no prob about Resbin; it's good to see you back and I look forward to reading more of your articles! :D Menkooroo 01:55, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
- No problem, even though it seemed half my objections were bad. By the way, thanks for reviewing Jollin Resbin. Kilson 01:43, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review! Let me know if anything else is needed. Menkooroo 06:01, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
Prepare to be savaged…
Is the "remembrance ceremony" the wording used in the comic? I'm curious if it's something specific to the Imperial Knight or Imperial culture; if so, it needs an article. Otherwise, I'll accept it as another term for "funeral" or somesuch. :)- Good question... it doesn't seem to be something uniquely Imperial. The only noun time it's referred to as a noun is when Marasiah asks her uncle "Will you come inside for the remembrance?" It plays out as basically a funeral mixed with a holding-hands-and-praying for Antares to come home safely. Normally I'm all for creating small articles (especially Legacy ones that I could CA :P), but I just don't think there's enough evidence to say that this is unique or notable. A good question, though! Nice catch. I've now pipelinked funeral.
Nitpicky, I know, but his light skin should be mentioned in the body of the article. If it were me, I'd mention his close-cropped hair, too.- Done! I called the hair "short." :D
Sorry to break up the party, but I think the creators of the character should be reinserted into the article. That's information I think every article should have.- Slotted it in at the end. Just a few extra unobtrusive words; Kilson, if you're reading this, give it a looksie.
- I love it that we can write articles about virtually anything. :) ~ SavageBob 07:29, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
- I call him Corpsie! Menkooroo 04:41, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
Toprawa
In the opening quote, the source de-capitalizes "force" here? "By the force..."Toprawa and Ralltiir 19:07, March 17, 2011 (UTC)- Nope, that's my mistake. Thanks for catching it. Fixed! Menkooroo 23:51, March 17, 2011 (UTC)
Comments
Approved as a Good article by AgriCorps 18:10, March 19, 2011 (UTC)
- He's not Gambit, beardy, or Vinnie Jones --- definitely a new character. Menkooroo 04:23, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
- Best. Article. Title. Ever. ~ SavageBob 06:43, March 5, 2011 (UTC)