Wookieepedia:Good article nominations/Wanted Poster: Princess Leia Organa

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

Wanted Poster: Princess Leia Organa

• Nominated by: OLIOSTER ^(talk) 00:46, July 19, 2012 (UTC)
• Nomination comments: Reached the CAN word limit so here it is, should be short and sweet.

(3 ACs/2 Users/5 Total)

Support

1. Cavalier One^{(Squadron channel)} 20:34, July 22, 2012 (UTC)
2. —Cal Jedi ^{(Personal Comm Channel)} 04:09, July 27, 2012 (UTC)
3. Winchester 327 ^Comlink » 07:30, August 5, 2012 (UTC)
4. Exiled Jedi (Greetings) 18:24, August 8, 2012 (UTC)
5. CC7567 ^(talk) 00:40, August 11, 2012 (UTC)

Object

• Rebel is linked in the body but not in the lead.
  • Pretty lazy of me not to just do that myself...
• The wording in the lead and the description is way too similar, and the sentences run on.
  • Maybe if you cut "...in the space above the moon Yavin 4" out of the lead? It wouldn't be as repetitive, the sentence wouldn't be as much of a run-on, you'd still be over 250 words, and that information isn't necessary anyway—not in a lead, certainly.
    • Done. OLIOSTER ^(talk) 17:04, July 30, 2012 (UTC)
• The word "photos" probably shouldn't be in there. (Probably.) At the very least it should be redlinked if you know there's such a thing in-universe, but maybe it's best to change it to "images" or something equally generic. —Winchester 327 ^Comlink » 17:53, July 27, 2012 (UTC)
  • FWIW, we usually don't create an article for something like "photo" unless there's something noticeably special or different from the real life one. In this case, I don't think that applies.—Cal Jedi ^{(Personal Comm Channel)} 17:59, July 27, 2012 (UTC)
    • So you're saying it's generic enough as-is? Winchester 327 ^Comlink » 18:02, July 27, 2012 (UTC)
      • It could be changed to image, but IMO, its fine as is. You and Oli can work that out, though. I was only referring to the necessity, or lack thereof, for a "photo" article.—Cal Jedi ^{(Personal Comm Channel)} 18:06, July 27, 2012 (UTC)
        • Understood, thanks. I'll see what he says. I'm just wracking my brain for the words photo or photograph ever cropping up in-universe... could just be really uncommon. Winchester 327 ^Comlink » 18:10, July 27, 2012 (UTC)
          • Images just doesn't sound right, photo sounds more natural IMO, but as said, I can't think of any source that describes a photo in the GFFA being different from ours. OLIOSTER ^(talk) 17:04, July 30, 2012 (UTC)
            • What about picture? OLIOSTER ^(talk) 21:13, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
              • 1. I respectfully disagree with Cal Jedi on this. He's made the assumption that "photo" is a common word in Star Wars vernacular. If it were common, like "bed," then he'd be right. It isn't, and he isn't.
              • 2. Ideally, you or someone else has a source that mentions photographs, and you can leave the page the way it is (with an article link and/or reference to the source added), which reads great. Ideally, you don't have to read the rest of this way-too-long comment, where I've had to clarify a few things.
              • 3. If no one can recall seeing the word (all I've got is "photo booth" where Gann died and Tru Veld's "photographic memory," which are damn close, both from CSWE) then we would be dealing in conjecture. Having "photos" in your article already sticks out to experienced Star Wars readers: At best, there's a link to a "photograph" article, and those readers see it is not a mistake and learn something new in the process; at worst, we made Wookieepedia look unprofessional to knowledgeable readers by letting this slip into a Good article.
              • 4. "...depicted two pictures" would be repetitive language, so not the best writing. "Images" sounds great, IMO, and absolutely fits with Star Wars—one of the very few sources I combed over for my GAN uses it, and you can bet that "images" occurs at least hundreds of times more than "photos" in all Star Wars media. That said, if you really don't like how it sounds, it is a matter of opinion and I understand.
              • 5. IMO, photos sounds more natural in general, and I 100% agree with you there. But, for any non–Behind the Scenes section of an in-universe article, photos does not sound more natural; not "in my opinion," but "in fact." This is because Star Wars rarely (if ever) has used the word, as far as I've ever noticed, and it would stick out like a sore thumb if it actually were used (making it sound unnatural). If you somehow find one reference to a phone call in canon material (as opposed to a comm transmission or the like) then that is precisely the kind of thing we would create a short article out of—or at least make a Behind the Scenes mention about the strange wording. Because it is strange. Ditto that for photos (as opposed to holos, holographs or holo images, all of which are the norm in Star Wars, even if they just "don't sound right" to us). It's rare, if it's ever happened at all, and the article would be made, in part, to keep a list of sources and appearances for it. You had a challenging article to write—it was easy enough for the Sony developers to place wanted posters in-game and not have to ask, "Are we allowed to call these 'photos'?" But it's considerably harder to write about those posters when you yourself don't know if photos exist in-universe—or if those even were photographs of Leia Organa, and not, say, digital renderings the Empire made, or paintings. Because I don't think SWG clarifies any of that, but at least we know they're images/pictures. Winchester 327 ^Comlink » 19:33, August 3, 2012 (UTC)
                • Changed. OLIOSTER ^(talk) 16:02, August 4, 2012 (UTC)
                  • Hope you understand that the distinction is important and I don't just enjoy splitting hairs over this stuff. Great article. Winchester 327 ^Comlink » 07:30, August 5, 2012 (UTC)

Comments

Approved as a Good article by AgriCorps 00:40, August 11, 2012 (UTC)