Wikia

Memory Alpha

Changes: Memory Alpha:Featured article reviews

View source

Back to page

(Battle of Cardassia: re)
m (- 3 successful, 1 failed)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
{{FARecons}}[[Category:Memory Alpha maintenance|{{PAGENAME}}]]
 
{{FARecons}}[[Category:Memory Alpha maintenance|{{PAGENAME}}]]
 
==Reconfirmations without objections==
 
==Reconfirmations without objections==
=== [[Battle of Cardassia]] ===
 
{{blurb|Battle of Cardassia}}
 
Nominated en mass in 2004 with the rest of the other five Dominion War battles at the time. This article would require a blurb if reconfirmed, and I have no opinion either as of yet on if it should. - {{User:Archduk3/Sig/nature}} 18:02, April 7, 2012 (UTC)
 
*'''Support'''. I've done a once over on this and I think it's still FA material. - {{User:Archduk3/Sig/nature}} 16:49, April 9, 2012 (UTC)
 
*'''Support'''. Still an excellent article. [[User:31dot|31dot]] 10:03, April 10, 2012 (UTC)
 
*'''Support'''. I removed a red link ("civilian") because I don't think we need this link. My only concern is about the huge portion of free space after the first paragraph ("Prelude"). The image on the right looks lost, IMO. [[User:ThomasHL|Tom]] 19:16, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 
:'''Comments''' - I have a few concerns which prevent me from supporting this article.
 
:# Neither "The Battle" nor the "Aftermath" sections have any [[MA:CYS|citations]].
 
:# The second and third paragraphs of "Aftermath" seem speculative and opinionated - was this alternative scenario ever mentioned in canon?
 
:# I think some of the language needs to be toned down, as it is too emotive for an encyclopedia article. Examples such as "despite having already lost an astounding 33% of their forces during the battle" and "As it was, the battle was nothing short of a disaster for Cardassia" could probably be written in a more neutral tone.
 
:&ndash;[[User:Cleanse|Cleanse]] <small><sup>( [[User talk:Cleanse|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Cleanse|contribs]] )</sup></small> 09:38, April 17, 2012 (UTC)
 
 
I've done the cites, assuming everything in those sections are from the last episode, but I'll need to rewatch this to do the rest, since I do seem to remember the Female Changeling boasting about the amount of casualties an invasion would lead to. - {{User:Archduk3/Sig/nature}} 10:02, April 17, 2012 (UTC)
 
 
I've attempted to address the concerns, though I would say a few bits of "more colorful language" shouldn't be too much of an issue, as the result of the war can certainly be considered a disaster for Cardassia. That said, if anything else needs to be adjusted, I don't have an issue with it being toned down further. - {{User:Archduk3/Sig/nature}} 00:04, April 20, 2012 (UTC)
 
 
=== [[First Battle of Chin'toka]] ===
 
{{blurb|First Battle of Chin'toka}}
 
A FA from back in 2004. I haven't had the time to take a look at it yet. - {{User:Archduk3/Sig/nature}} 18:02, April 7, 2012 (UTC)
 
*'''Support''', though I don't recall where resistance from Cardie and Dominion soldiers in the ground assault was mentioned. [[User:31dot|31dot]] 10:09, April 10, 2012 (UTC)
 
*'''Support'''. I removed the resistance sentence, since I wasn't able to find any mention of it in {{e|Tears of the Prophets}} or {{e|The Siege of AR-558}}. - {{User:Archduk3/Sig/nature}} 16:57, April 10, 2012 (UTC)
 
*'''Support'''. My only concern is again the huge portion of free space following the prelude. Is there any way to fix this? [[User:ThomasHL|Tom]] 19:16, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 
I'm not seeing this free space, assuming I understand what you're talking about. Could it be a browser or skin based issue? - {{User:Archduk3/Sig/nature}} 19:28, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 
:I am talking about the portion between "Prelude" and "The Battle" caused by the sidebar. It is possible that this is skin based. The same for me as mentioned above in [[Battle of Cardassia]]. [[User:ThomasHL|Tom]] 19:34, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 
That's your skin, in the standard oasis skin there isn't any problem. You could remove the <nowiki>{{clear}}</nowiki> template at the end of that section if you want, that should solve the issue. - {{User:Archduk3/Sig/nature}} 10:02, April 17, 2012 (UTC)
 
 
=== [[Patricia Tallman]] ===
 
{{blurb|Patricia Tallman}}
 
A FA from 2005. It still seems well written and comprehensive to me, and I think its status should continue. [[User:31dot|31dot]] 10:24, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 
*'''Support'''. - {{User:Archduk3/Sig/nature}} 17:25, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 
*'''Support'''. As a main contributor to this article I would be delighted about a reconfirmation as featured article. I am updating the article frequently. [[User:ThomasHL|Tom]] 19:16, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
 
   
 
==Reconfirmations with objections==
 
==Reconfirmations with objections==
=== [[Second Battle of Chin'toka]] ===
 
{{blurb|Second Battle of Chin'toka}}
 
Nominated en mass in 2004 with the other Dominion War battles at the time. This article would require a blurb if reconfirmed, and I have no opinion either as of yet on if it should. - {{User:Archduk3/Sig/nature}} 06:18, April 15, 2012 (UTC)
 
*I've done a once over on this, and while I've attempted to address most of the problems I found, the battle and aftermath parts of the article still come off as predominantly hyperbole IMO. I can't find references to some of the assertions that were made before I removed them, such as the existence of a Allied reserve force, so I'm forced to '''oppose''' the reconfirmation. Considering that the problem is most of the article, a full five supports would seem to be called for. - {{User:Archduk3/Sig/nature}} 07:57, April 16, 2012 (UTC)
 
*I'll also '''oppose''' reconfirmation, give the lack of citations for some references.[[User:31dot|31dot]] 09:43, April 17, 2012 (UTC)
 
   
 
== Early reconfirmations ==
 
== Early reconfirmations ==

Revision as of 18:42, May 1, 2012

Template:FARecons

Reconfirmations without objections

Reconfirmations with objections

Early reconfirmations

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki