Wookieepedia:Good article nominations/Z-95 Headhunter

< 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.

Z-95 Headhunter

  • Nominated by: AV-6R7Crew Pit 18:34, June 29, 2016 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: Awkward namespace issues forced me to list this as a "second nomination," even though this is the first time this version of the article has been nominated. Thanks to everyone who help piece this article together.

(3 ACs/3 Users/6 Total)

Support

  1. Awesome job. Geek'ari Talk 02:48, July 15, 2016 (UTC)
    An excellent article. No pressure now Talk 02:48, July 18, 2016 (UTC) (Vote struck, reason: Per policy: Fewer than 50 mainspace edits -- Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 00:54, July 19, 2016 (UTC))
  2. Great stuff --Lewisr (talk) 22:00, July 18, 2016 (UTC)
  3. ACvote Imperators II(Talk) 09:21, July 27, 2016 (UTC)
  4. Cevan IMPpress (talk) 15:42, July 27, 2016 (UTC)
  5. ACvote 1358 (Talk) 15:25, August 24, 2016 (UTC)
  6. ACvote Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 04:04, September 1, 2016 (UTC)

Object

Imperators II
  • Is "missles" in the lead quote your mistake or the source's?
    • Mine.
  • Seems to me that "snub-fighter" is a Star Wars-specific term, so you should create a canon article for it.
    • Done.
  • The fact that the fighter requires a crew of only a single pilot should be incorporated in the article body, as well, especially considering the body already uses the plural "pilots". Imperators II(Talk) 08:55, July 27, 2016 (UTC)
Ecks Dee
  • While this might be just a cosmetic objection, I feel like the article's readability could be improved if some information was reordered. There are some instances of "foo[1] bar[2] baz[1] qux[2]" that could be "foo baz[1] bar qux[2]". See if you can do something about it. 1358 (Talk) 20:30, August 22, 2016 (UTC)
    • I've clean up a few of them, but I feel like those that remain read stronger in their current form. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 03:17, August 23, 2016 (UTC)
Toprawa
  • Since I see you cropped the infobox image, is there no way to re-crop it to at least 250px, if not the full 400px being proposed by the currently ongoing CT? Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 18:19, August 24, 2016 (UTC)
    • Unfortunately, no. The image used in the infobox was cropped from a small box little more wide than the current image is and a larger crop would expose parts of the in-game UI. We could remove the background and blow it up, but I've found that the thinness of the cannons make it difficult to not accidentally delete part of the ship. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 02:09, August 25, 2016 (UTC)
      • No, it's always better to keep the original version intact. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 18:12, August 25, 2016 (UTC)
        • Brules was able to properly remove the background and make it 250px in width. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 04:44, August 29, 2016 (UTC)
  • General writing tip, avoid beginning sentences with "it" when possible, since the reader will not always know what "it" is. In this case, it's not entirely clear whether the sentence is saying the Z-95 or the clone variant was the forerunner of the X-wing. Please clarify: "It was the forerunner of Incom's popular T-65B X-wing starfighter."
  • I'm unclear why the Characteristics section states that the Z-95 "could" mount concussion missile launchers and an ion cannon, as if these were optional, since the infobox presents them as if they were standard.
    • According to Commander, Z-95s were equipped with an ion canon, while BTFA says they had concussion missile launchers; neither source references the other. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 16:49, August 27, 2016 (UTC)
      • Then you should simply collate sources if neither contradicts the other and present both of them as fact together. Just change the wording to say "It also boasted..." Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 17:30, August 27, 2016 (UTC)
        • Thanks for the wording; its been changed. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 17:34, August 27, 2016 (UTC)
  • "Testbedded" is not a word in any dictionary I can see, nor does it appear to be used in the original source: "...which implemented technologies and designs testbedded in the Z-95."
  • It would be better to use Tarkin's quote at the top of the History section and then paraphrase him in the article body rather than burning the quote like the article is currently doing.
    • Turns out it wasn't Tarkin who said this; fixed attribution. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 16:49, August 27, 2016 (UTC)
      • Once you use a quote at the top of a section, it becomes terribly redundant to re-quote the same thing in the article text. The article should instead paraphrase the referenced quote. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 17:30, August 27, 2016 (UTC)
  • In Reference 7, I added a final bit to clarify that Endor is the conclusion of the Galactic Civil War. Since this is not self-sourcing, please verify whether that information can be supported by the aforementioned TFA Visual Dictionary; otherwise, it will need to be cited to something. For example, "the endpoint of the GCW, according to [Source]."
    • Actually, Jakku was the endpoint; I'll fix it. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 18:42, August 25, 2016 (UTC)
      • So the Visual Dictionary can be used a source for Jakku being the endpoint of the war? You didn't address this in your response. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 17:30, August 27, 2016 (UTC)
        • Yes, it can be sourced to the Visual Dictionary. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 17:51, August 27, 2016 (UTC)
          • Ok, but there's still a certain disconnect between the article text and the reference's wording. The text states that Z-95s were used "over thirty years" after the war, but the reference only explains that the film takes place 29 years after Jakku, the war's end. If Before the Awakening precedes the film, I don't understand how you're arriving at 30+ years after. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 18:24, August 27, 2016 (UTC)
            • An oversight on my part; fixed. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 18:28, August 27, 2016 (UTC)
  • I would recommend seeing about using an image of the clone Z-95 in the History section.
  • Some notes for the BTS:
    • Firstly, I've restructured it to present the article subject's Canon information first. I realize the other method intends to present the information in a strictly chronological fashion, but this way the reader gets the most relevant information first, rather than the less-important Star Wars Legends bit, which is almost an afterthought.
    • Be careful with your wording on how you introduce the idea of an article subject first "becoming canon." The way the BTS was originally worded ("It became canon when it was referenced...") isn't entirely accurate, since Lucasfilm previously considered the Z-95's Legends history part of its official canon. It's more accurate to say that the Z-95 "entered Lucasfilm's new canon" or some variation thereof. I realize this may sound like the biased ramblings of a Legends fan, but my concern here is that the wording be presented in a fully accurate manner, particularly considering the BTS does reference the subject's original Legends creation.
    • As policy, the article needs to employ Citeweb for all external link references that do not otherwise have a specific citation template. I've covered this for you this time. (The external link title wasn't correct regardless.) Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 18:12, August 25, 2016 (UTC)
  • After seeing your latest changes, I have new concerns regarding a potential lack of detail from the article. The fact that many Z-95s (as I'm gathering) participated in a rebel attack on Sentinel Base, for example, should absolutely be detailed in the article body. If there are other similar specific historical events that the Z-95 participated in not listed in the article, those should be included too. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 17:30, August 27, 2016 (UTC)
    • I've checked my ebook of Tarkin; there is still some info on specfic battles to be added. Also, a battle with them is mentioned in "Last Call at the Zero Angle," which I don't own. I will try an acquire it immediately. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 17:51, August 27, 2016 (UTC)
      • As you work on adding this info in, I would recommend considering subsectioning as your paragraphs expand in both size and number. That will allow you to use additional quotes and images, too, if available. And don't be afraid to give us detail. There's nothing wrong with this article reaching 1000 words if that should happen. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 18:01, August 27, 2016 (UTC)
        • Tarkin never really gave us too much detail on the individual actions of the Z-95; the article now has a comprehensive recording of their actions in the novel. I have also added info from the Insider 156 SS, so I this objection has been addressed. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 02:29, August 28, 2016 (UTC)
          • Good job. I've inserted a paragraph break to divide the History into four paragraphs. This now gives you a logical place to insert two subsections as well as an additional quote or image if available. Please do so. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 01:07, August 29, 2016 (UTC)
            • That's a negative on additional images and quotes as far I can tell; as for the subsections, what would you recommend? I personally don't see any reason to break it up. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 00:23, September 1, 2016 (UTC)
              • Anytime you've got a four-paragraph History section, that lends itself to a natural dividing point in the middle, which makes the page more navigable for readers. In this case, there's a clear division of events: "Pre-Galactic Civil War" and "Galactic Civil War and beyond," though I leave it to you how you want to title them. I also make this objection planning for the future, because it's just a matter of time before the Z-95 appears in something else, in which case the need for subsectioning will only become greater. This starts you out on the right path. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 03:24, September 1, 2016 (UTC)
                • I've titled the sections "Prolific starfighter" and "Venerable snub-fighter" according to the eras they were used in. These could easily be changed to be more specific as more appearances are added, but I think this is a good way to break up the article. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 03:35, September 1, 2016 (UTC)
                  • Looks great. I tucked the quote into the first subsection, since it really applies exclusively to that section. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 03:42, September 1, 2016 (UTC)

Comments

Approved as a Good article by AgriCorps 04:04, September 1, 2016 (UTC)


  • In response to the naming issue you reference above for this nomination page (and which other users have encountered as well), it will be good for us to get in the practice of moving old Legends nomination pages to "Wookieepedia:Good articles nominations/Subject/Legends" to clear up space for new Canon nominations. This will require a little extra work to update links on nomination history pages, but it will allow us to avoid having to add incorrect descriptors like "(second nomination)" to pages like this that they don't apply to. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 18:34, August 24, 2016 (UTC)