Wookieepedia:Good article nominations/Yavin (deity)

< 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.

Yavin (deity)

  • Nominated by: LelalMekha 20:04, May 28, 2012 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: I was just trying to make it a CA, but it's more than 250 words, so here it is.

(3 ACs/6 Users/9 Total)

Support

  1. I rewrote certain sentences, and fixed some other stuff. I also changed the image to one that better exhibits the gas giant. See these edits. Cade Calrayn GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit 20:23, May 28, 2012 (UTC)
  2. Well done. Plagueis327 20:25, May 28, 2012 (UTC)
  3. —Jedi Kasra (comlink) 20:40, May 28, 2012 (UTC)
  4. ACvote Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 14:55, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
  5. ~SavageBOB sig 15:40, May 30, 2012 (UTC)
  6. Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 21:44, June 8, 2012 (UTC)
  7. Hanzo Hasashi 14:07, June 12, 2012 (UTC)
  8. ACvote Cavalier OneFarStar(Squadron channel) 21:10, June 18, 2012 (UTC)
  9. ACvote—Cal JediInfinite Empire (Personal Comm Channel) 23:31, June 18, 2012 (UTC)

Object

Jujiggum
  • You have some missing links and some overlinking. Remember that a subject should be linked once upon its first mention in the infobox, once upon its first mention in the intro, and once upon its first mention in the main body. Also, remember that people should only be linked in quote attributions if they do not appear anywhere in the article's text.
    • With my edits and your, I guess it's all right by now? --LelalMekha 14:42, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
  • The intro could use a little expansion.
    • I tried to expanded, let me know if you think I should add some more.--LelalMekha 01:18, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
      • It's probably worth mentioning that Yavin was mentioned in the Books of Massassi. Also, the intro currently makes it sound like it was the Massassi's sole choice to build the temples, while the body says that Sadow ordered them to do it, and then they found their own purpose, as well. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 14:05, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
        • Issue addressed. Hope it works.--LelalMekha 14:42, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
  • "In the eyes of the rough Sith warriors…" The "rough" seems rather POV-ish. Also, you haven't established that the Massassi were Sith warriors, so the reader might not know that you're still referring to them.
    • Issue addressed. Suppressed "rough" and added a bit of context ("the Massassi, the warrior caste of the Sith species").--LelalMekha 01:18, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
  • "…because of its overwhelming power." What was the gas giant's "overwhelming power?" Also, since this is not mentioned anywhere in the main body, it is currently unsourced.
    • I meant "his all-dominating presence" (as now edited). Is that okay?--LelalMekha 01:18, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
      • As the reader, I'm still not quite sure how his presence was all-dominating. (Also, see the next as-yet unstricken objection below; it's somewhat related to this one.) Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 14:05, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
        • "because of his all-dominating presence in the firmament" → Simply, Yavin's orb looks huge as seen from Yavin 4's ground.--LelalMekha 14:42, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
  • You have a bit of missing context throughout the article
    • Sounds silly but... Would you help me find it? I'm so into it that I'm not sure I can see what's missing. --LelalMekha 01:18, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
      • Hah looks like you inadvertently took care of these instances while making other fixes. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 14:05, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
  • The first paragraph of the History section could probably be condensed a little; that much background info so spread out isn't entirely necessary for the article's purposes.
    • Suppressed the mention of the Korbos fleet, which wasn't necessary indeed.--LelalMekha 01:18, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
  • "Yavin was a beautiful but terrible god to them, drawing their attention to the heavens but making the warriors feel small and fearful." This is almost verbatim taken from the source's original wording. Please restructure and use some synonyms here.
    • Tried to reword it, and I hope the meaning is still the same—I'm not a native speaker of English, so I feel unsure. --LelalMekha 01:18, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
      • No worries; for a non-native speaker you're writing quite well. I'd suggest taking the "fascinating and terrifying" wording from the intro and putting that in the body; and in the intro you can just say something like "awe-inspiring." Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 14:05, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
      • Fixed.--LelalMekha 14:42, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
  • "The ambiguous religious experience of the Massassi…" Who considered it to be ambiguous?
    • Obviously, I. So I just removed "ambiguous". --LelalMekha 01:18, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
  • Do we know who engraved the Books of Massassi?
    • Luke thinks they have a single author while "some people" say they may have been recorded orally by educated slaves. --LelalMekha 01:18, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
  • The second paragraph of the BTS sounds pretty OR-ish.
    • As a theologian, I saw the similarity, but I admit the general public wouldn't know. Still, I'm not saying the author knew of this and intended to reference Otto's theory, I'm only saying this is similar—which is a fact anyone can verify. On the other hand, if you really wish me to suppress this paragraph, I will.--LelalMekha 01:18, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
      • Okay, that's alright; but you need to be extremely clear about what the precise similarity is, and be careful not to suggest that it was an intended similarity (basically, just clarify that the "awe-inspiring and fascinating" feeling is the similarity you're talking about, and state a little more clearly that per the "Idea of Holy" source and Before the Storm, it is shared by both theories/religions) Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 14:05, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
        • Issue addressed. I hope I made thing clear enough. Otherwise, just let me know.--LelalMekha 14:42, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
  • That's all from me. Interesting topic. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 00:18, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
Savaged…
  • The article is great. I just have one reservation: why single out Otto in the BTS? There are other thinkers who have postulated about the awe-inspiring nature of religion, and it seems odd to single this one out. For instance, why not talk about Bronislaw Malinowski's functionalist view of religion? Or Émile Durkheim's? In short, I wonder if the paragraph is better removed. ~SavageBOB sig 15:58, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
    • Well, the awe-inspiring nature of religion has been postulated by many thinkers, it's true. But Otto's specificity is the ambiguity of awe AND fascination, with a desire of fusion. Otto's work on theology predates the other scholars you're citing here. At least in Belgian universities, Otto is cited as the first to clearly define this dual concept known as the "numinous". But as I already said before, if we are to cut it, I'll cut it. --LelalMekha 16:05, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
      • That's a good point, and I've thought about this some more. I would still suggest removal, though, because I think the comment strays too far from the subject at hand. There are a number of articles about deities on the wiki, and it's probably not worthwhile to go into theology and philosophy in their BTS sections in my opinion. The exception would be if the authors or creators of the Yavin deity said in an interview somewhere that they were inspired by Otto's writings. But without that confirmation, noting the similarities between Streen's statements and Otto's just seems a bit tangential in my opinion. Sorry to be a spoilsport. :( ~SavageBOB sig 15:21, May 30, 2012 (UTC)
        • Now, don't be sorry. Sometimes, I feel like I'm being overly educational. ;-) I shall remove it this instant (but I hope the word number will still be okay for a GA). --LelalMekha 15:37, May 30, 2012 (UTC)
          • By my count, you're at 330 words, so no worries! :) ~SavageBOB sig 15:40, May 30, 2012 (UTC)
Cav
  • The infobox image - as Yavin is represented by the planet, I have no problems with it being used. However, I do feel that a caption should be added to explain the use of it so people are not confused. Something like "The native Massassi regarded the gas giant Yavin as a deity", or something similar. - Cavalier OneFarStar(Squadron channel) 13:26, June 18, 2012 (UTC)
    • You mean something like what has been done on the TK8252 article? Isn't it a bit...bad-looking? --LelalMekha 13:32, June 18, 2012 (UTC)

Comments

Approved as a Good article by AgriCorps 23:31, June 18, 2012 (UTC)


  • Given the infobox image is not actually of the deity himself, perhaps write a note on the image saying something like "The Sith species viewed Yavin Prime as their deity?" Hanzo Hasashi 16:07, June 11, 2012 (UTC)
    • Well I could do that, yes. But I don't now which infobox field would be used for such a note.--LelalMekha 18:10, June 11, 2012 (UTC)
      • I saw that done in the TK8252 article. Hanzo Hasashi 18:22, June 11, 2012 (UTC)
        • It's only needed in the TK8252 article because we don't know which trooper is which. Since the Massassi technically worshipped the planet itself, that's not necesssary here. The infobox image depicts precisely what they considered to be their deity (the only change I'd consider is replacing it with an image of Yavin without a ship in the foreground). Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 00:24, June 12, 2012 (UTC)
          • Good pictures of Yavin Prime are hard to come by. All the pictures that have no ship in the foreground don't show the full orb—at least the ones I've seen.--LelalMekha 09:00, June 12, 2012 (UTC)