Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Darth Vader/archive2

Darth Vader

It is a very good article, or at least I think so. It has several images, plenty of words, and lots of information. GangstaEB (sliding logs~dive logs) 13:55, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

• Support I am the nominator. GangstaEB (sliding logs~dive logs) 13:55, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
• Comment it has some {{fact}} templates as well as a {{in-universe}} and a {{Unreferenced}} at the bottom of the page. -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 14:02, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Why are unreferenced and cleanup tags at the end of the article: aren't they supposed to be at the top? Kind of hard to support an article with tags. Sandy 14:19, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

That is the reason I didn't see those... GangstaEB (sliding logs~dive logs) 14:53, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

• Oppose. Lacks references. The Wookieepedian 14:44, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
• Object due to the lack of references. -- Underneath-it-All 17:28, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
• Object due to an extensive amount of fancruft.Dan 18:55, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
  • This comment is not particularly helpful. Raul654 06:13, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
    • The entire "Talents and powers" section is wholly unencyclopedic. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:29, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose due to lack of references and excess in-universe details that need to be compressed, trimmed, and reworded. — Deckiller 19:11, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Object. I concur with the above. Moreover, the article contains possible OR in such speculative lines as "Judging by the origin of the other Sith names, Vader may also possibly be a derivative of the word 'invader,'" and "Darth Vader also resembles an inverted King Arthur in relationship with Luke Skywalker as an inverted Mordred." I'm unsure if this is objectionable, but I also dislike the biography's structure: shouldn't the prequel and its developments precede discussion of the original triology?--Monocrat 04:40, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  • No, because it isn't a biography; it's a plot summary. Putting the prequels first moves the emphasis away from how the character developed in real life (from fearsome blackguard to conflicted villain to fallen hero) to how the character developed in a fictional universe. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:29, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose the writing could be much cleaner, the references are lacking and are mostly cruftic in nature. Surely there have been numerous commentaries on Darth Vader from scholars which are independent of the Star Wars fan club and their work should be cited. The cultural figure section is not very good, focusing on a list of examples (some of which are shall we say... marginal...) rather than commentary. The talents and powers section is crufty beyond belief. No effort is made towards conciseness, especially in the plot sections (also crufty, e.g. "Vader turns on his master and throws him into a deep shaft, where he explodes in a fury of dark energies."). Pascal.Tesson 03:58, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose misplaced spoiler warning disrupts flow of article. Hipocrite - «Talk» 14:34, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  • How is it misplaced? Where should it go? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 14:41, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

• • • "the Death Star is destroyed moments later," should be removed, a paragraph break and a spoiler tag should be inserted before "Vader then reveals his true identity...", all mentions of "father" should be excised from Return of the jedi, paragraph break and spoiler tag before "Unable to bear the sight of his son in pain," remove vast majority of "Prequel trilogy," as it is better explained in the Anakin Skywalker (seperate issue), except for stub describing the transition and reasons for, which requires no spoiler tags. Spoilers should only be provided for plot details that would severly detract from an individuals ability to enjoy the movie - only the father in empire and the ending of return do so. Hipocrite - «Talk» 14:48, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose: Try and find a few more references :)... --Skully Collins 07:13, 26 July 2006 (UTC)