Wookieepedia > Wookieepedia:Inquisitorius > Inq/Zsinj (third review)
Zsinj
Things to do
- Update needed.
- Honestly, there didn't seem to be a whole lot that I missed, just minor details. I'm pretty sure I got everything from the listed pages, but I'll let someone else remove the update tag. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 14:42, December 30, 2018 (UTC)
- Ref 2 should be fully linked. Plus, the Imperial Warlords article doesn't provide dates for the Clone Wars, so a source for that should be added, as well. Imperators II(Talk) 15:11, January 16, 2019 (UTC)
- Done. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 23:37, February 8, 2019 (UTC)
- Can we get a backup link for the External link? Imperators II(Talk) 15:11, January 16, 2019 (UTC)
- Done -- Darth Culator (Talk) 23:37, February 8, 2019 (UTC)
- Ref 12 should implement {{CSWECite}}. Imperators II(Talk) 15:11, January 16, 2019 (UTC)
- Very done. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 23:37, February 8, 2019 (UTC)
- Uh... Despite what Category:Fondorians says, our article on Fondorians specify they are a Near-Human race, to which Zsinj doesn't belong, I believe. Imperators II(Talk) 15:11, January 16, 2019 (UTC)
- If his father was a member of a Fondorian caste following Fondorian traditions, then I'm pretty sure he must be at least half-Fondorian, though I don't believe the actual biochemistry was ever specified. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 23:37, February 8, 2019 (UTC)
- BTS must be fully sourced. Imperators II(Talk) 15:11, January 16, 2019 (UTC)
You know, now that I'm getting into the guts of it, I think I need to rewrite this whole damn section. That is not gonna be done for the upcoming meeting, so I throw myself on the mercy of the Inquisitorius. (I'm doomed.) -- Darth Culator (Talk) 23:37, February 8, 2019 (UTC)- Overhauled the BTS, sourcing all the way. That was fun. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 21:57, March 30, 2019 (UTC)
- The thing we added to the Manual of Style regarding redundant linking in quote attribution and image captions. Imperators II(Talk) 15:11, January 16, 2019 (UTC)
- De-redundantized. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 23:37, February 8, 2019 (UTC)
- Overly long paragraphs and sections, look into splitting and further subsectioning for the Oasis skin. Ample room for more images, as well, and the existing image thumbnails seem to be sized for Monobook. Imperators II(Talk) 15:11, January 16, 2019 (UTC)
Image thumbnails are all default-sized. It's not my fault if the default is too small. As for subsectioning, I don't know if I'm really qualified to do that. I LIKE big paragraphs. I suppose I'll need this to be extended so I can get one of the local proofreaders to slice-and-dice it for me -- Darth Culator (Talk) 23:37, February 8, 2019 (UTC)- Okay, I broke up some of the paragraphs (EDIT: now including the intro), but I honestly don't see the need for further sectioning. Also, I added a BUNCH more pictures, and increased all but the really tall ones to somewhat larger than the default size. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 19:19, March 29, 2019 (UTC)
- You have at least one instance of identical consecutive references, in the first paragraph of "After the fall of Coruscant". Should either of them be referencing some other media? 1358 (Talk) 22:00, March 30, 2019 (UTC)
- It was just redundant. But every time people point out corrections, I end up adding more detail. I think masochism must be a mandatory quality for article writers around here. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 22:37, March 30, 2019 (UTC)
Removal of FA status
- Article put on probation at Meeting 98. Supreme Emperor (talk) 19:49, December 18, 2018 (UTC)
- Probation extended at Meeting 99. Imperators II(Talk) 14:40, January 26, 2019 (UTC)
- Probation extended at Meeting 100. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 00:55, March 4, 2019 (UTC)
- Probation extended at Meeting 101. Supreme Emperor (talk) 00:15, April 8, 2019 (UTC)
- Why? If you guys aren't going to give me feedback, how can I FIX things? I responded to every item listed here, NO further feedback was provided, and now here it sits on extended probation with only a WEEK until the next meeting. Obviously, there isn't a reasonable amount of time for me to fix anything new you might come up with in that week, so it will likely be extended AGAIN, unless you've just decided to AXE the article regardless of my efforts. The Inquisitorius is starting to feel less like an organization out of Star Wars and more like one out of the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 21:12, April 21, 2019 (UTC)
- First of all, chill out. No one is out to get you or make things unfair for you. Quite the contrary, since you will remember that you explicitly stated back on February 8 (...so I throw myself on the mercy of the Inquisitorius. (I'm doomed.)) that you were willing to accept the article's removal of status if it came to that. We debated at that following meeting whether or not to do so and ultimately decided to give you more time to work on everything, so gratitude would be more appropriate here than over-the-top emotionalism and insults, which aren't going to get you anywhere. The article was extended at the March 30 meeting because A) not all of the issues on this page were stated as being finished yet. You didn't strike this statement until after the meeting was already finished, so we were operating on your statement that you were still working on things, and you will see from the log that we decided to kick the can down the road one more time to give you an opportunity to do so. If anything, this looks like a case of miscommunication partly of your own making. And B) ecks did add another issue for probation extension here, which you quickly responded to later that same day, so it appears you fixed all of the issues before that meeting's paperwork (which includes updating this review page) was even finished. If the Inq is guilty of anything here, it's being slow to finish the paperwork, not failing to give you enough time or information to fix this article. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 21:48, April 21, 2019 (UTC)
- You're right, of course, and I apologize. Unfortunately, I still tend to be prone to "over-the-top emotionalism" at times, so I should have exercised a bit more discretion when I saw the next Inq meeting had been announced and this article's status was still unresolved. I shall endeavor to respond somewhat more judiciously to any further issues. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 01:32, April 22, 2019 (UTC)
- First of all, chill out. No one is out to get you or make things unfair for you. Quite the contrary, since you will remember that you explicitly stated back on February 8 (...so I throw myself on the mercy of the Inquisitorius. (I'm doomed.)) that you were willing to accept the article's removal of status if it came to that. We debated at that following meeting whether or not to do so and ultimately decided to give you more time to work on everything, so gratitude would be more appropriate here than over-the-top emotionalism and insults, which aren't going to get you anywhere. The article was extended at the March 30 meeting because A) not all of the issues on this page were stated as being finished yet. You didn't strike this statement until after the meeting was already finished, so we were operating on your statement that you were still working on things, and you will see from the log that we decided to kick the can down the road one more time to give you an opportunity to do so. If anything, this looks like a case of miscommunication partly of your own making. And B) ecks did add another issue for probation extension here, which you quickly responded to later that same day, so it appears you fixed all of the issues before that meeting's paperwork (which includes updating this review page) was even finished. If the Inq is guilty of anything here, it's being slow to finish the paperwork, not failing to give you enough time or information to fix this article. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 21:48, April 21, 2019 (UTC)
- Why? If you guys aren't going to give me feedback, how can I FIX things? I responded to every item listed here, NO further feedback was provided, and now here it sits on extended probation with only a WEEK until the next meeting. Obviously, there isn't a reasonable amount of time for me to fix anything new you might come up with in that week, so it will likely be extended AGAIN, unless you've just decided to AXE the article regardless of my efforts. The Inquisitorius is starting to feel less like an organization out of Star Wars and more like one out of the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 21:12, April 21, 2019 (UTC)
- Article sent to Redux at Meeting 102. Supreme Emperor (talk) 14:46, May 5, 2019 (UTC)
- Status removed on April 21, 2021. Tommy-Macaroni 15:57, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Redux review
Comments
Okay, seriously, guys, none of this stuff was added until the very last minute. I'm going to have to ask for an extension here. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 00:04, January 20, 2019 (UTC)- Okay, if anyone comes up with more stuff NOW, imma be real annoyed. 😝 -- Darth Culator (Talk) 21:57, March 30, 2019 (UTC)