Talk: GenralHux

RE: Thanks

You're very welcome; I'm always glad to offer assistance when I am able! It would be absolutely fantastic if you could elevate the article to FA status, and I trust in your ability to do so. If you require any support or have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask. --Lewisr (talk) 22:15, October 26, 2017 (UTC)

RE:Krennic

Greetings. My apologies for any misunderstanding. I took out the tweet as a reference because Forum:CT:Social media posts as canon sources was recently approved, which means that, generally, we are no longer permitted to use tweets as sources. --Vitus InfinitusTalk 13:41, January 23, 2018 (UTC)

RE: Thank you!

Hello! As I mentioned on the nomination page, converting it to a GAN isn't really feasible. However, I can arrange for the nomination to be withdrawn through Discord. Thank you! Lewisr (talk) 14:08, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

You're most welcome! As I previously stated, I hope you can eventually get it back up there, perhaps after achieving a GA. Lewisr ( talk ) 14:18, 19 September 2023 (UTC) Great job! I'll have a look at some point and give you feedback on the nomination. Lewisr (talk) 04:12, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

GA nom

Hi! Not yet, but the page is still on my radar. Rest assured, it hasn't been forgotten! However, I do want to point out that it's generally discouraged to pose such inquiries to reviewers or potential reviewers. Since you're relatively new to the entire process, don't worry about it; just keep it in mind for future reference. Lewisr (talk) 18:27, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

I understand there was no ill intent, so it's alright! However, sometimes that's simply the way things are. We want these pages to be the best they can be, so it may take some time, especially considering the numerous other pages that need attention as well. Lewisr ( talk ) 15:58, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Endor arachnid

Greetings! I'm writing to inform you that there is an objection from Uber that, as of today, has remained unaddressed for 10 days. Please take a look at it when you have the opportunity. Thank you! Lewisr (talk) 22:53, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

I don't believe we prohibit their creation. If someone wished to create a page for a sentient species, they would be welcome to do so. Regarding the objection itself, we (the AC board for the good article nominations) are aware of Uber's objection and concur with it, which is why no one has intervened. Therefore, we need you to create it (you don't have to fully write it; it can be created as a stub or something), or we will have no choice but to consider it a timed-out objection. Considering all the effort put into the page, it would be a shame to see the nomination fail, so we would appreciate it if you would create the link. Lewisr ( talk ) 17:34, 21 December 2023 (UTC) After discussing with other board members, and also with Uber, we've arrived at the idea that it might be preferable if you transformed the page into one for a character instead of a species/type of creature. See, for example, Unidentified swamp creature and Unidentified umbrella-like creature. Even though it's not a sentient species per the notability policy, it seems to be in line with this creature to follow 'the character's physical appearance should be described in the individual's article' for example in an individual page. Does that idea work for you? Sorry to suggest such potentially significant changes, but it seems to be an alternative to the current issue. Lewisr (talk) 19:47, 21 December 2023 (UTC) Thanks for your understanding! I also see your point regarding the species issue, but we maintain a strict approach that creatures must be specifically referred to as a species before we can label them as such. It's not quite the same as a sentient species, which is quite clearly definable as a species, if that makes sense. But thanks for your addressing of the changes later, will keep an eye out for them Lewisr (talk) 20:15, 21 December 2023 (UTC) I'm afraid I'm not sure how to properly articulate it; it's simply a precedent/procedure we've adhered to for some time. I apologize for not being able to do so, as I would if I knew how to explain it in a way that would make sense to you. Lewisr (talk) 05:21, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
Hello! I'm just giving you a heads-up to address the discussed changes as soon as possible, please. Lewisr ( talk ) 20:00, 26 December 2023 (UTC) My skepticism is not really a major concern as you might be thinking, I wouldn't really go as far as calling it that to be honest. Does it sound like you want me to remove the nomination, if I'm understanding correctly? It would be sad to see if that's the case, but we'd be excited to see other contributions from you if you're interested! Lewisr (talk) 04:54, 27 December 2023 (UTC) I'll take care of that then, thank you. And it wasn't wasted time at all; I appreciate that you submitted it and took the time to address the objections we raised! I'm happy to be of assistance, and I'll be looking forward to whatever you come up with next. Lewisr (talk) 05:01, 27 December 2023 (UTC) Hi. I simply want to reinforce what Lew is saying: no one's time was wasted. The experience of participating in the nomination process is valuable in itself. I'm eager to see what you decide to work on next, whether it's within the Good article nomination system or elsewhere! OOM 224 (he/him) 08:26, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Wookieepedia SAN Awards 2023

NBDani (they/them)Yeager's Repairs 19:22, 13 March 2024 (UTC)