Star Wars Fanon:Good articles/Nominations

 This is the voting and review page for good article nominations. Good articles are articles on the Star Wars Fanon Wiki that are meant to represent the norm of what the wiki has to offer in the way of standards of quality, but the standards are not as high as those of featured articles. Out of on this wiki, less than one hundred (100) are currently of good status. Articles that no longer meet the criteria can and will be proposed for improvement or removal by the Council of Seers, the eight (8) member good and featured article review board.

In order for an article to become a good article, it must meet a set of requirements. After it is nominated on this page, members of the Council of Seers and users will then review and vote on it to determine whether it is of good article quality based on the requirements.

An article must&hellip;


 * 1) &hellip; be identified with proper era icons.
 * 2) &hellip; be well written, comprehensive and detailed; however, not to the extent of the requirement for a Featured Article.
 * 3) To be well written, the article must have a prose that is engaging and of a professional standard.
 * 4) To be detailed, an article must be written in an encyclopedic format with no point of view in the detail, though that detail is not excess nor irrelevant; instead, the detail must also contact all relevant major facts and plot points.
 * 5) The article must acknowledge and explore all aspects of the subject and cover every encyclopedic angle.
 * 6) The article does not need to have a finished storyline.
 * 7) The article must be clear, using a logical structure written in plain language.
 * 8) The article must follow standard writing conventions of modern English (ie, correct grammar, punctuation and spelling).
 * 9) All grammar and spelling must be one hundred percent accurate. The Council of Seers and voting members of the community will inspect all of it to make proper edits.
 * 10) &hellip; have an introduction of at least one-hundred (100) words that summarizes the entire topic and prepares the reader for the greater detail in the following sections.
 * 11) &hellip; follow the Manual of Style, Layout Guide, categorization policy, as well as all other policies.
 * 12) &hellip; contain enough images where appropriate, but the page is not cluttered or overstocked.
 * 13) &hellip; ensure that all images in said article follow the standards of sourcing in the Image policy.
 * 14) &hellip; not be tagged with improvement tags at the time of nomination.
 * 15) &hellip; have absolutely no red links, as they must be filled with at least stubs or not be linked to at all.
 * 16) &hellip; have no links in section titles, as this looks messy.
 * 17) &hellip; have a brief "Personality and traits" section that generalizes the character's said personality
 * 18) &hellip; be stable, meaning that it is not the subject of any edit wars and that the content does not change significantly from day to day, reversions of vandalism and improvements based on suggestions not applying.

How to nominate:
 * 1) First, nominate an article you find to be worthy of good article status by putting it at the bottom of the list below and add GAnom to the nominated article. If you are unsure as to how to set up the accompanying review page, feel free to check out the example review page we have provided for you. Please nominate in this format:
 * === Article name ===
 * Objections and discussion – (0 Seers/0 users/0 total)
 * 1) Others will object to the nomination if they do not believe that the article is good enough at Article name, which is the review page for the nominated article. They will then supply reasons for doing so and ways to improve the article (errors, style, organization, images, notability, sources)
 * 2) Supporters will adjust the article until the objectors are satisfied and vote support beneath the article's nomination

How to vote:
 * 1) Remember, you can only vote if you meet the requirements of the voting policy, which is at least one hundred (100) mainspace edits.
 * 2) Before doing anything, be sure to read the article completely and keep a sharp eye out for mistakes
 * 3) Afterward, either support the article on this page, or visit the nominee's review page to state your objections
 * 4) If you object the nomination, you must supply concrete reasons for doing so, as well as your suggestions as to how the article can be improved. If you do not provide a valid opposition, your vote will be removed.
 * 5) As stated above, any objections will be looked upon by the nominator, supporters and anyone willing to improve the article. Action will be taken to please the objectors.
 * 6) To be a good article on Star Wars Fanon, a nomination must have at least eight (8) votes, of which at least four (4) must be contributed by Council of Seers. Articles will remain on the nominations track until they receive the required amount of votes or until the author pulls the nomination, but they need to be on the nominations track for at least one week even if they receive the required number of votes before then.
 * 7) No article may become a good article if there are still active legitimate objections on its review page. If a majority of Seers deem any objections to be nonsensical and/or of personal preference, and these objections are holding up the passing of a nomination, the objections will be struck out. This will only be done if the nonsensical and/or personal preference objections are holding up the nomination. Because of this, it is required that all users strike out their objections using once the nominator has sufficiently corrected them.

The Council of Seers may change a good article nominee into a featured article nominee instead, or vice-a-versa. However, if an author prefers to instead keep his/her article a good or featured nominee, he/she may do so and reject the change. This may not occur, though, if the article is a featured nominee that has been rejected.

In addition, put the number sign, #, next to your name so the votes can be counted. Please sign your posts as well!

Council of Seers, please be sure to place CoS before each of your votes, to identify all Council of Seers votes. A small blue check in the top right corner of an article's page indicates that the article is a good article.

Joe Tylars
Objections and discussion – (1 Seers/2 users/3 total)
 * 1) Has a few problems, but none are too glaring.
 * 2) *Irrelevant. When it comes to the GAN and FAN pages, there is no such thing as a problem that's "not too glaring." Problems are problems. If you see any problems then they need to be pointed out. Thanks. =) - Brandon Rhea Alliance Starbird.svg (talk) 00:05, January 10, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) ---Ping(JediCommando) 23:01, February 23, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) *I'd appreciate it if someone would cross out some of the fixed objections on this page. Ty294  {Talk}  21:38, March 18, 2010 (UTC)

Dark Crusaders
Objections and discussion – (1 Seers/1 users/2 total)
 * 1) ---Ping(JediCommando) 01:37, January 23, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) Well deserving of the GA title. - Bluethunder Contact 23:21, March 21, 2010 (UTC)

Keese Somar
Objections and discussion – (2 Seers/4 users/6 total)
 * 1) --Wylindsig.png  (Conference Room)  02:54, December 25, 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) Well done.--Bluethunder Talk 21:58, January 10, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) I like this! -- LordDeathRay  (The Sith Archives)  [[File:sabersmilyredd.jpg]] 23:08, January 10, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) Shepard, I mean Somar. -- Wrex Josh Bender Talk 23:10, January 10, 2010 (UTC)
 * 5) Looks good enough to me. ---Ping(JediCommando) 23:27, February 17, 2010 (UTC)

Maynus
Objections and discussion – (1 Seers/2 users/3 total)
 * 1) Huh.  I forgot to vote on this.  Well, since my objections have long been addressed, and seeing as others have been too, I'm gonna not forget this time and add my vote.  Now to go on a typo hunt...  Trak Nar  Ramble on 03:33, March 19, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) Good to go.- Chosen One So the Prophecy says... 23:28, March 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) -- Josh Bender Talk 23:43, March 21, 2010 (UTC)

Magnum Rockwater
Objections and discussion - (1 Seers/2 users/3 total)
 * 1) --Wylindsig.png  (Conference Room)  19:45, March 18, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) Good job!- Bluethunder Contact 21:10, March 18, 2010 (UTC)

Kalar Orazio
Objections and discussion - (2 Seers/3 users/5 total)
 * 1) It's an overall good article.-- Bluethunder Contact 21:35, March 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) No objections here. Well done. ---Ping(JediCommando) 23:14, March 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) Very good. --Wylindsig.png  (Conference Room)  19:45, March 18, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) Nice.-- Josh Bender Talk 19:49, March 18, 2010 (UTC)

Nute Gunray
Objections and discussion - (0 Seers/0 users/ 0 total)