Wookieepedia:Good article nominations/Wampa/Legends

< 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.

Wampa

(+7)

Support

  1. As nominator. Toprawa and Ralltiir 22:17, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
  2. Nice work tweaking the article, T&R. I'll give it my vote. Master Aban Fiolli {Alpheridies University ComNet} 03:00, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
  3. Bah, take this to FA ;) Greyman(Paratus) 17:06, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
  4. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 20:01, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
  5. Great job, T&R. This article looks great. Zakor1138 18:47, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
  6. Bravo on the objections. This article's been so thoroughly critiqued that I won't hesitate to support once it hits FAN. Hobbes(Tiger's Lair) 15:52, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
  7. Graestan(This party's over) 05:25, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. From the squalid cubicle of Graestan:
    • Round One:
    • Intro desperately needs expansion.
    • Article is rife with point of view and original research issues.
      • While still maintaining the same view point in the history section, I've reworded some things to try and make it more neutral overall; renamed section for greater neutrality; Sourced, reworded some things to try and remove original research items. Let me know. Toprawa and Ralltiir 04:19, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
    • Quotes appearing in places besides the beginning of sections should be moved, or the sections could be sub-sectioned.
      • Quotes removed from article body. Toprawa and Ralltiir 06:46, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
        • Excellent. We can talk about finding more quotes and/or more appropriate ones to head the rest of the sections after this round is complete.—Graestan(This party's over) 05:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
    • Gallery = bad. Additionally, fewer and larger images would be preferable.
      • Gallery removed, relocated to its own page. Images reduced/replaced with better ones. As noted in the comments section, the wampa attack in Echo Base image is unsourced. It's too freaking cool looking to get rid of. I'm determined to source it eventually. Toprawa and Ralltiir 05:16, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
        • Good job; the article's images are much better placed. Do your homework on the attack image; users in the IRC, which you can visit without even a chat program, typically have this type of information at their disposal. I'm in there a lot, too. Also, Eyrezer is pretty handy with images.—Graestan(This party's over) 05:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
    • "Behind the scenes" needs to be cleaned up and restructured, with all trivial or speculative information removed. See WP:TRIVIA in particular.
      • Removed what I believe to be the most trivial of information. Cleaned up and restructured. Toprawa and Ralltiir 06:42, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
    • My Advice: Consultation of the Manual of Style would be a good idea. Don't think of these issues as a brick wall; instead see the opportunity to create a great article (this one could easily become a featured article) and learn the ropes of article writing and editing on the wiki at the same time. You're a good writer, T&R. Welcome to the Big Leagues. Yours, —Graestan(This party's over) 05:19, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
    • Round Two:
    • Era tags for an animal?
      • Removed. Wasn't sure about this, though, like planets, for ex, it makes sense. Toprawa and Ralltiir 18:00, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
        • I have asked around, and there is strong consensus against such a notion. Graestan(This party's over) 06:14, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
    • Find some more quotes to head up sections.
    • Move around/resize images for aesthetics. Line them up on alternating sides.
      • Resized, moved first article image to left side for alternating effect. Let me know how you think this looks. Toprawa and Ralltiir 18:31, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
    • More basic information regarding appearance, etc. should be added to the BtS.
      • Added to the BTS. Even found validation to insert a quote I had found earlier but felt uncomfortable using until now. Toprawa and Ralltiir 06:39, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
    • Try to make sure that information from every source listed it represented and cited somehow. (Good enough!)
      • Does this also go for all of these ridiculous video game appearances where (in my opinion, at least) the canonicity is questionable at best? Toprawa and Ralltiir 02:13, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
        • Oh yes, unfortunately. Heck, at the least it should be in the BtS info outlined above. Graestan(This party's over) 06:14, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
          • As far as listing Databank entries in the Source list, is there any precedent as far as placing them at the beginning of end of the list, since it's pretty difficult to determine when they were published? Toprawa and Ralltiir 17:07, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
            • Here are some answers I got from a prolific writer and a prolific editor:
              "There's no set rule for Source lists. Personally, I think Databank should be at the end. Because they get updated."—Thefourdotelipsis
              "Um, it's not really a rule. I usually see them at the end."—Atarumaster88
            • Graestan(This party's over) 00:58, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
      • I'm a little confused on where two appearances should be placed: 1) Star Wars: Adventures in Colors and Shapes - appearances? sources? canon? 2) The Empire Strikes Back (video game). According to the description, Luke can choose between alternative endings. Canon? Toprawa and Ralltiir 03:51, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
        • Colors and Shapes is an appearance. The video game is S-canon, that is, it's canon except where it has been stated not to be. In terms of chronology, it's concurrent with ESB, so see my below preference in chronology. Graestan(This party's over) 03:39, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
      • Another appearances Q: should I arrange appearances chronologically in regard to the story itself, or in regard to when the wampas appear in the story? Toprawa and Ralltiir 01:07, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
        • I'd say to arrange them in regards to story first, and save the second for when there is no clear choice. Graestan(This party's over) 03:39, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
    • Kill the Wikipedia link. We are better.
    • My Conclusion: There is not far to go before GA on this one. I'd really consider nominating it for featured status sometime soon, also. I'm really liking what I see; more than one Inq has asked why it isn't a FAN.—Graestan(This party's over) 18:27, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
  1. From the Family-sized Pasta Bowl of Fiolli:
    • Just some thoughts; hope they help.
    • Not to beat a dead tauntaun, but the Intro needs to cover the substance of the article as an overview or abstract.
    • The bold-facing of the subspecies is not really a common-practice thing, in my experience. I would remove them. In fact, I would actually make a subsection under Physiological dedicated to them. It's important enough.
    • The section headings should be "Biology and appearance" first, then "Behavior and intelligence" second. This is parallel to the treatment of sentient species and confirmed with Inqs.
    • Fifth paragraph of section 1: "…enabling them to attack their prey completely unawares."
    • "The wampa attack on Luke Skywalker in 3 ABY suggested a sort of pair bonding between male and female wampas, and that their lives may have been far from exclusively solitary. While Skywalker was attacked by a male wampa, he regained consciousness in the den of a female." Woah, ok. Where does this come from? Should be referenced.
    • History, paragraph 4: "Although he had only knowingly seen one of the beasts, where there was one, there had to be more." Had to be or suspected there was?
    • History, overall doesn't seem to fall into the NPoV category - though I know that it can be hard as in a case like this. It's really key words that do that, in this case.
    • The last three "paragraphs" of Other Encounters could be consolidated. The entire section, though is kind-of listy.
      • Restructured History section; added "Wampas in the galaxy" section in an effort to break up the list. Toprawa and Ralltiir 04:19, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
    • I say take two or three pictures from the gallery and use them in the article, else, I'd rid the gallery altogether.
    • The BTS is not really in a chronological-like order. The different ideas for the scenes in Episode V possibly could go first, that way it flows better through the section.
    • Well researched. I am looking forward to seeing the final product! Good luck. Hope this helps. Master Aban Fiolli {Alpheridies University ComNet} 06:09, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
      • I'd like to thank you, Fiolli, for the assist in the tweaking and shaping of this article.—Graestan(This party's over) 05:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
  1. Some things I noticed:
    • If tauntauns were so plentiful than why did wampas have to travel so far? Please clarify.
      • The word "relatively" acts as a modifier of the entire phrase to indicate a relation to the wampas themselves. They weren't necessarily plentiful on Hoth, but were in relation to the wampas. I could add a little bit to this sentence, such as, "in relation to the wampas," or, "in comparison," though I feel that would be adding an unnecessary redundancy. But let me know how you feel about this. Toprawa and Ralltiir 18:58, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
    • Remove the line about how the caves reflected light.
    • "After mating, female wampas would birth up to three cubs per litter. If, however, a cub wandered out of the den and made its first kill, other wampas would commonly give extreme attention to that cub." So did they treat them the same otherwise? If so, please add such a line.
      • Ok, finally addressed this. I added another line to try and differentiate. Sorry about the delay. Toprawa and Ralltiir 05:38, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
    • I'd suggest making the last two sentences of the section "Society and culture" separate paragraphs (though they may be small).
      • Agreed - meant to address this earlier, but forgot. Good catch. Toprawa and Ralltiir 18:41, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
    • File:Wampa Echo Base.jpg needs a source.
    • Rewrite the third, fifth and sixth paragraphs of "Attack on Echo Base".
      • Paragraphs tweaked and cleaned up; repetative phrasing reworded. Other than that, I contend that these paragraphs maintain good, clean, active-voice prose, while staying within the MOS/NPOV guidelines. Toprawa and Ralltiir 04:29, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
    • I think the two quotes should be switched. Chack Jadson (Talk) 20:18, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
  2. The appearance of wampas in Jedi Knight: Jedi Academy isn't mentioned in the BTS section of video games in which the wampas appear. If there's some reason for leaving it out that I'm ignorant of, feel free to tell me, but if not, I'd like to see it in there. Other than that, great article, and a very good job on the objections, T&R. Hobbes(Tiger's Lair) 03:48, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
    • The BTS Video Games section is relegated for either non-canon appearances, or canon appearances that really have little significance not worthy of inclusion into the main article. Jedi Academy, like Shadows of the Empire, for ex, is noteworthy and both are included in the article. Edited slightly to make the section more specific to its purpose. Toprawa and Ralltiir 06:26, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
      • Ah, I see. Thanks for explaining that, then. Hobbes(Tiger's Lair) 15:52, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Comments

  • The only appearance not included in which the wampa isn't simply mentioned is The Bounty Hunters: Aurra Sing (according to App list). Also, the pic of the wampa attacking two Rebel soldiers in Echo Base in the gallery is not sourced. Toprawa and Ralltiir 22:17, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
    • In response to Round One BTS concerns, while I can see that much of the BTS info is trivial and worth removing, I fear that even after reading the WP:TRIVIA page I do not fully understand what is considered "good" BTS material. It would seem to me, at least in this case, almost all of the BTS information there is trivial, except for probaby the most basic, hard information. What would you recommend removing? Toprawa and Ralltiir 06:59, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
    • Honestly? Check my contribs, then page down to where most of the edits were "1.4 Wookifications." These were mostly BtS massacres. It's what I call my Wookification Crusade, and it's a pretty clear example of the types of things that should stay or should go. Don't be afraid to trim the fat.—Graestan(This party's over) 05:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC)