Brickipedia:Featured Article Nominations/10195 Republic Dropship with AT-OT

From Brickipedia, the LEGO Wiki
This page is an archive. Please do not modify it.

  • Nominated by:Jurassic park787 Vittoria per gli Assassini! 22:01, September 5, 2012 (UTC)
  • Nomination comments: I wonder how it has not won FA. It is argueably the best Class 1 non-FA out there. It has a very well written description, a lot of good grammer and spelling, and quite a bit of high quality photos. (Sorry for ANOTHER Star Wars FA nomination)
Support
  1. Crown Knights.png I'm willing to give this one a go. It's got a decent description and background and (without actually reading it- I'll get to that later :P) looks like quite a good article. User:Cligra/Sig
    • Wow... Cligra supports an article..... without even reading it..... that's a first. o_o -User:Power Jim/sigcode 07:24, September 8, 2012 (UTC)
  2. FA quality for sure. User:Darth henry/Sig 13:35, September 12, 2012 (UTC)
  3. Yes, I think it deserves this. User:Agent Fuse/sig 06:56, October 2, 2012 (UTC)
  4. Imperial guards.png Honestly, looks good. BTW just using the old template because I love the Imperial Guards theme so much :-D User:Ajraddatz/sig 12:30, October 11, 2012 (UTC)
  5. Crown Knights.png Jeyo Lord VladekTalk The Forge
Object
Technical MoS check (QCG members only)

* Minifigure gallery needs to be cleaned up- two of the clone troopers are depicted with incorrect accessories- two should have rifles. NovaHawk 10:31, September 8, 2012 (UTC)

  • Uncaptioned images
  • Unecessary images in gallery, which already appear in the article
  • Bolding in background
Crown Knights.png NovaHawk 10:31, September 8, 2012 (UTC)
    • Minifigures in gallery replaced with accessory-neutral ones Brickset and Bricklink use.
    • Images captioned and removed
    • I have no idea what you mean by "bolding in background, sorry :S
    • I'm taking your word for this, but See Also section removed.

Crown Knights.png User:Cligra/Sig

Comments

* Also a bit unsure as to why there's a "see also" for LAAT's- this set contains an LAAT/c, not an LAAT/i. It would be like having a "see also" list on the Z-95 set page listing all of the X-wing sets. NovaHawk 10:31, September 8, 2012 (UTC)

  • Posting this here, as the other section's formatting has me confused: We don't generally list minifigures with complete accessory ensemble in the minifiguregallery, we just use whatever images are the most convenient/show off the minifigure best. It isn't the "accessory gallery", after all. User:Cligra/Sig
    • Yeah, I put the strike in the wrong place, sorry about that :P It's only when they're depicted with accessories they don't have in the set that I have a problem with it, seems like false advertising. Also, was there a rule about no redlinks in FA's or not? I remember a forum about it ages ago, but I don't remember the result :S NovaHawk 23:15, September 8, 2012 (UTC)
      • I don't think that it's a rule, but who knows. :P User:Cligra/Sig
        • Probably another thing that got voted on, but noone remembered to add :D NovaHawk 23:20, September 8, 2012 (UTC)
          • I think it was that they couldn't have the RedBrick template, which was either 5 or 10 redlinks. (Oh no... another thing we decided but nobody added... :P) User:Captain Jag/sig1 03:52, September 11, 2012 (UTC)
  • Neutral. I guess it's just when you compare this to 7675 AT-TE Walker and 7676 Republic Attack Gunship, sets similar to the AT-OT and LAAT/c respectively and look at the amount of detail on those pages, you would assume that you'd have about the same amount of detail as the two pages put together for 10195. Instead, it's about the same amount of description as for 7675 on its own. Crown Knights.png NovaHawk 23:20, September 8, 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.brickimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Brickipedia:Featured_Article_Nominations/10195_Republic_Dropship_with_AT-OT&oldid=955397"