Wikia

Memory Alpha

Changes: Memory Alpha:Featured article nominations

View source

Back to page

(archived unresolved articles exceeding two weeks)
Line 17: Line 17:
 
*** I've removed the last picture -- despite the poor quality, it ''was'' the best image of [[Todd Bryant]]'s character from ST6, which is mentioned in the article. Additionally, I still think the 2nd picture of Klaa at the scope balances the article out -- as in: the article ''is'' long enough to support a second picture of Klaa placed in it to balance the article out from being too "top heavy". The fact that Klaa is sitting at the weapons scope goes along quite well with the theme that he was "thirsting for a target that would fight back." But I do have an alternative in mind as well to put in it's place. --[[User:Gvsualan|Gvsualan]] 06:47, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
 
*** I've removed the last picture -- despite the poor quality, it ''was'' the best image of [[Todd Bryant]]'s character from ST6, which is mentioned in the article. Additionally, I still think the 2nd picture of Klaa at the scope balances the article out -- as in: the article ''is'' long enough to support a second picture of Klaa placed in it to balance the article out from being too "top heavy". The fact that Klaa is sitting at the weapons scope goes along quite well with the theme that he was "thirsting for a target that would fight back." But I do have an alternative in mind as well to put in it's place. --[[User:Gvsualan|Gvsualan]] 06:47, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
 
:::*Re: Tyrant -- Frankly, I agree. But then again, I've made no personal attacks here. All I've done is simply state that the "oppose" is ''purely'' based on a ''personal'' nature and that there are '''no''' spelling errors, nor any ''glaring'' grammarical errors to warrant an obviously ''biased'' vote. In reality, that alone should void the vote. --[[User:Gvsualan|Gvsualan]] 06:47, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
 
:::*Re: Tyrant -- Frankly, I agree. But then again, I've made no personal attacks here. All I've done is simply state that the "oppose" is ''purely'' based on a ''personal'' nature and that there are '''no''' spelling errors, nor any ''glaring'' grammarical errors to warrant an obviously ''biased'' vote. In reality, that alone should void the vote. --[[User:Gvsualan|Gvsualan]] 06:47, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
 
*[[Starfleet uniform]] -- I read this article a few days ago and I think that it covers all of the bases very well without waffling on. A lot of the minor alterations made to uniforms as well as the variants are included as well. Pictures are appropriately used as well giving a visual of what the uniforms look like too.--[[User:Scimitar|Scimitar]] 22:10, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
 
** '''Support''' I've done a fair degree of work on the uniforms and ranks articles, I find a lot of them are finally coming into their own (after many were long-term PNAs due to the large amount of disorganized or inappropriately added information). This would be great recognition to all the work on them -- since it involves a synthesis of registered archivists (like myself and a few co-conspirators) and cleaned up information from many, many, of our non-registered friends -- [[User:Captainmike|Captain Mike K. Bartel]]<sup>[[User talk:Captainmike|talk]]</sup> 22:26, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
 
** '''Support''', I '''love''' this article. I did a lot of work on it that, while removed, spurned a very nice change in formatting for the article. — [[User:Pd THOR|THOR]] 23:29, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
 
** '''Support''' [[User:Ottens|Ottens]] 21:04, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
 
** '''Support.''' Great work and very comprehensive. -- [[User:SmokeDetector47|SmokeDetector47]] // [[User_talk:SmokeDetector47|''talk'']] 23:17, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
 
**'''Mild oppose''' - needs more detail on the dress uniforms (23rd century examples are missing entirely) and field uniforms (ST5, DS9 and VOY all feature these). There are several variants and types brought up on the talk page that should really be included. -- [[User:DarkHorizon|Michael Warren]] | [[User talk:DarkHorizon|''Talk'']] 23:27, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
 
**'''Support'''04:57, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
 
 
*[[Defiant class]] -- I'm frankly surprised that this isn't a featured article. Plenty of information, beautifully laid out and appropriate use of pictures. Just as well written as the featured [[Sovereign class]], [[Galaxy class]] and [[Intrepid class]] articles, IMHO.--[[User:Scimitar|Scimitar]] 18:20, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 
**'''Support''', I agree this is at least as good as the Intrepid-class article. All the major parts of the ship are well represented. [[User:Zsingaya|zsingaya]] 08:11, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 
*** After having re-read the sections on the tactical information, its become obvious that hardly any of it has actually come from on-screen information. I know inclusion of information from the technical manuals is accepted, but I thought it should be in italics, and it shouldn't make up the majority of an article. [[User:Zsingaya|zsingaya]] 16:43, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
 
**'''Neutral'''. Considering I wrote the bulk of the article, it wouldnt be really fair to vote. The main reason of objection at the time was that the article did not include in-line references, if I recall correctly... Anyhow, nice to see it featured now. [[User:Ottens|Ottens]] 15:39, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 
**'''Support''', could use a bit more fleshing out but otherwise as good as the other class articles listed. -- [[User:Dmsdbo|Dmsdbo]] 00:07, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
 
**'''Opposed'''. I gave this a wiki markup, I think that should be a required part of final acceptance/completion. --[[User:Gvsualan|Gvsualan]] 10:52, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 
*** Actually, on second thoughts I'm going to have to agree with Ottens below, there is a LOT of DS9 Tech Manual stuff in there and that needs to be more clearly pointed out. --[[User:Gvsualan|Gvsualan]] 23:11, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 
**** I last voted on this a week ago, and I still see no one has clarified which information came from the DS9 Tech Manual and so on. Since I did not add the info, nor do I have the DS9 tech manual, I cannot make such a contribution. --[[User:Gvsualan|Gvsualan]] 14:01, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
 
**** I also don't have a DS9 techical manual, but I'm sure that all the information that isn't followed up by a reference to an episode, must come from the manual. Most of this is pure conjecture, but worthy of noting on the page because it fills in the gaps. [[User:Zsingaya|zsingaya]] 06:40, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
 
****Most is based on on-screen evidence. The part on the Warhead is, of course, from the Tech Manual, since its usage was never seen on the show. The rest is all either mentioned on the show or based upon on-screen observation.
 
****"I gave this a wiki markup, I think that should be a required part of final acceptance/completion." Well, now that you gave it a wiki markup, it's part of the article... I dont really see your point of objection there. [[User:Ottens|Ottens]] 11:41, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
 
** Because you are not reading the right objection. Try the 2 comments below that. My concerns are were in partial agreement with your comment about the significant amount of DS9 Tech Man contributions, etc, that are not referenced. --[[User:Gvsualan|Gvsualan]] 15:00, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
 
**I agree with [[User:Gvsualan|Gvsualan]]. The section with the technical data should be followed up with references to specific episodes, or a reference to the manual, or not be included at all. [[User:Zsingaya|zsingaya]] 08:38, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
 
**Whenever the Tech. Manual was used, a reference is included. I added a reference to "physical arrangment", since apparently I forget to add it there. For the rest, referenced are included whenever possible. As I pointed out before, for some paragraphs, I have no reference, since I do not remember from heart in which episode such detail was mentioned. [[User:Ottens|Ottens]] 09:10, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
 
**'''Support''' [[User:Jaz|Jaz]] 04:57, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
 
* I'm trying to help get this shaped up and I've added a few references to a few sections, but there still seem to be some that could use reference. Question: What might be a good way to indicate that some of the content is based on observations? Clearly it needs to be cited in some way, but how do you site observations? Also, I'm beginning to wonder if the inclusion of ablative armor is accurate for this article? This question comes to mind after it was pointed out by [[Erika Benteen]] that, "We've been unable to stop the ''Defiant''. Someone's equipped her with ablative armor and neglected to inform [[Starfleet Operations]]." This seems to indicate that the armor was not standard ''Defiant''-class issue, and seemed to be an add-on, ''exclusively'' to the USS ''Defiant''. I think that means that blanketing the whole class with this feature is a bit presumptious. The same can be said about the cloaking device. Afterall, this article is about the '''class''' as a whole and not [[USS Defiant (NX-74205)|a single ship]] -- one that is not exactly a typical "representative sample" of the class as a whole. Additionally, the USS ''Defiant'' seems to be prominenently featured, as I mentioned before, but perhaps adding the USS ''Valiant'' to the mix might not make it appear so biased. The section that comes to mind is the one on the Dominion War. --[[User:Gvsualan|Gvsualan]] 06:47, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
 

Revision as of 06:55, May 30, 2005

Template:FeatNom

Nominations without objections

  • Tal Celes -- Great content for a minor character AmdrBoltz 01:51, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
    • Ah, this was an old article of mine. A lot of nice community work added since then, I certainly support. Tyrant 03:06, 23 May 2005 (UTC)Tyrant
    • SupportTHOR 03:29, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
    • Support, with the condition that the "Caretaker" datapoint be removed (Tal wasn't mentioned or established that far back and the info about Voyager being lost can be condensed into a sentence in the opening paragraph) and the "Endgame" datapoint removed (we don't know 100% for sure she survived). -- SmokeDetector47 // talk 04:43, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

Nominations with objections

  • Klaa. Minor charcter, self nomination. Written in five edits or less (!!), several months ago; upon recent review, the quality still seems to stand. --Gvsualan 20:16, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
    • Oppose -- due to several spelling and grammatical errors. --Defiant | Talk 08:37, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
      • Why did I not see this coming? This is just petty. There are no spelling errors, much less "several" and the grammar is better than a lot of other stuff that has successfully passed through here. In fact, the more I look at this, it almost seems to be something of a personal attack, which I do believe is uncalled for in M/A. --Gvsualan 08:56, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
    • I support this article, but if the two of you could stop throwing mud it would make me happy. Tyrant 12:54, 29 May 2005 (UTC)Tyrant
    • Support, but I'm not sure why the second or third images of Klaa are needed (with respect to the image use policy)... the third one in particular is not very clear and they really don't show anything new that can't be seen in the first image. -- SmokeDetector47 // talk 04:43, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
      • I've removed the last picture -- despite the poor quality, it was the best image of Todd Bryant's character from ST6, which is mentioned in the article. Additionally, I still think the 2nd picture of Klaa at the scope balances the article out -- as in: the article is long enough to support a second picture of Klaa placed in it to balance the article out from being too "top heavy". The fact that Klaa is sitting at the weapons scope goes along quite well with the theme that he was "thirsting for a target that would fight back." But I do have an alternative in mind as well to put in it's place. --Gvsualan 06:47, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Re: Tyrant -- Frankly, I agree. But then again, I've made no personal attacks here. All I've done is simply state that the "oppose" is purely based on a personal nature and that there are no spelling errors, nor any glaring grammarical errors to warrant an obviously biased vote. In reality, that alone should void the vote. --Gvsualan 06:47, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki