This article is within the scope of WikiProject Star Wars, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Star Wars saga on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Star WarsWikipedia:WikiProject Star WarsTemplate:WikiProject Star WarsStar Wars articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles
A fact from Bib Fortuna appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the Did you know column on 26 May 2020 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that it took more than eight hours to apply makeup for the first time to the actor playing the character Bib Fortuna in Return of the Jedi?
What's the source for the extra data such as Bib Fortuna's origin and life after the events of the movie? I'm assuming one book or another but it needs to be cited.
Euchrid 02:19, 20 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Redirect
This is entirely in-universe plot summary, with not citations to third-party sources to establish notability. I am redirecting this to
List of Star Wars characters. --
EEMIV (
talk) 14:14, 13 October 2008 (UTC)reply
Sorry to see this languishing for so long - I'm happy to take a look, but, as it's a longer article, m review may be a little bitty!
Josh Milburn (
talk) 12:41, 10 April 2020 (UTC)reply
It strikes me as a bit odd to talk about applying the Fortuna outfit before you've specified who portrays him - honestly, I'd expect actors to be named in the opening paragraph!
I've seen it this way in other fictional character articles so I may have based it on that. It's basically because I thought of the creation of the costume as part of the "Conception and creation" of the character, which it seems to me goes before the portrayals. Also, the costume was designed chronologically before the actor played the character, so it made sense to me in that regard too. That being said, I can move the portrayal up if you feel strongly, and if you don't think it will mess up the structure of the article? —
HunterKahn 15:39, 10 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Sorry, I should have been clearer. I absolutely agree with your structuring of the article; I am talking specifically about the lead. Compare
Luke Skywalker - Hamill's name appears in the second sentence.
Josh Milburn (
talk) 13:36, 24 April 2020 (UTC)reply
I personally think it makes more sense to have Hamill's name that high in that article because the actor is so synonymous with the character, whereas with Bib Fortuna that's not really the case. However, I did rework the lead a bit so that the creators and actors are now in the second paragraph, which I think gets the info higher up without disrupting the flow of the lead. Does this work for you? —
HunterKahn 13:42, 5 May 2020 (UTC)reply
I think there are some issues with tenses in the article. My understanding is the fictional events should be presented in the present tense (unless they happen before or after the actual appearances of the character). I made some changes in the lead, but haven't touched the biography section; could you take a look at this?
"Fortuna had the monks remove Secura's brain before his body can be thrown to the rancor" I've not changed this as I suspect this will all need to be changed (per above), but this doesn't work!
I tried rewriting, let me know if it's any better. The gist of what I'm trying to convey is: Fortuna had the guy's brain taken out, and then later Jabba threw his brainless body into the rancor, which ate it. lol —
HunterKahn 15:39, 10 April 2020 (UTC)reply
"Carter wore lifts on his feet to make himself taller, as well as arm extensions,[53] and as claw-like finger extensions,[66][53] which were fit through fingerless gloves that Tippett said gave Fortuna "a spidery reach".[65]" Needs revisiting.
I took a shot at rewriting. —
HunterKahn 15:39, 10 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Yes - I think that looks much better!
Josh Milburn (
talk) 13:36, 24 April 2020 (UTC)reply
"and actor Rainn Wilson jokingly tweeted that he would like to play Fortuna in a stand-alone Star Wars spinoff film.[115]" Fun, but if we don't have a secondary source, I don't think it warrants inclusion.
The closest I've found to a reliable secondary source is
this. Do you think this is enough of an RS to cite? If so I'll add the ref; if not I'll remove the Rainn Wilson sentence. —
HunterKahn 15:39, 10 April 2020 (UTC)reply
I don't think that crosses the bar - I'd just drop it.
Josh Milburn (
talk) 13:36, 24 April 2020 (UTC)reply
"which was available only as an exclusive at FAO Schwarz." Ref?
I can't seem to find what source I had previously identified for that information. It's not a super crucial detail anuyway, so I've removed it. —
HunterKahn 15:39, 10 April 2020 (UTC)reply
"A rare encapsulated Bib Fortuna action figure that will be included in an auction in Pennsylvania in November 2019 is expected to seek between $10,000 and $75,000.[147]" Update?
Unfortunately I don't think there have been any follow-up stories about how much it actually fetched. :( I did change the tenses to past rather than present though, now that this date has passed. —
HunterKahn 15:39, 10 April 2020 (UTC)reply
A few more (free!) images wouldn't go amiss.
I'll take a look at what else can be added. —
HunterKahn 15:39, 10 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Other than that, it reads very well - please double-check my edits.
A first quick very look at the references:
Something is going on with the Looper reference. Check the external link.
Hey
J Milburn, just wanted to check where this one stood? —
HunterKahn 21:15, 21 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Yes, sorry; I've just not found as much time for Wikipedia as I sometimes do recently. I've got some free time this weekend, so I'll hopefully get to this then.
Josh Milburn (
talk) 07:29, 22 April 2020 (UTC)reply
A few quick replies above - looking now at images and sources.
Josh Milburn (
talk) 13:36, 24 April 2020 (UTC)reply
I'm leaning toward excluding them, since I don't discuss those orders in any depth in the article... —
HunterKahn 21:06, 4 May 2020 (UTC)reply
And sources:
The Chris Fuller source... I don't think student newspapers really cross the line in terms of reliability. It's not sourcing anything controversial, though, so if you want it there...
I removed it, since it wasn't sourcing anything that wasn't already cited by other reliable sources. —
HunterKahn 21:06, 4 May 2020 (UTC)reply
Dark Horse Comics is a publisher, not a publication - it should not be italicised.
Bah, I am having trouble locating my copy now. Damn it. LOL I will try to find it and add the page number. —
HunterKahn 21:06, 4 May 2020 (UTC)reply
"Reid, Georgina (January 11, 2001). "I was a monster hit but it's so good to be a human again". The Sun. p. 6." Ah, bad news - The Sun is out. (See
WP:THESUN.) I think that's all going to have to go unless other sources can be identified.
Fortunately the majority of information that came from that source was also attributable to other sources. I've removed the citation tags, as well as whatever info came solely from the Sun source... —
HunterKahn 21:06, 4 May 2020 (UTC)reply
Page numbers for the Kingsport Times-News source?
I got that article from NewsBank. Most NewsBank entries have the page number as well as the publication and date it ran, but some do not, and this one didn't. So I don't have a page number to add, unfortunately. —
HunterKahn 21:06, 4 May 2020 (UTC)reply
(I know some editors get concerned about extensive quotation in references... But I can't see there being too much of an issue here.)
Page numbers for the Tim Martin source?
Like the above, the NewsBank entry had no page number. —
HunterKahn 21:06, 4 May 2020 (UTC)reply
"Note: The Daily Telegraph has released multiple versions of its list of the best Star Wars character, and the rankings are different each time. To avoid confusion, this article simply states that Bib Fortuna was included on the newspaper's list, without including a ranking." I don't really like this
self reference. Could you not just list them separately?
I think I can just remove this note altogether without negatively affecting anything (which I've done). —
HunterKahn 21:06, 4 May 2020 (UTC)reply
The Swardson source: You don't italicise StarWars.com, but you do elsewhere.
Like the above, the NewsBank entry had no page number. —
HunterKahn 21:06, 4 May 2020 (UTC)reply
I think there are a few borderline sources that might create a headache at FAC - Bleeding Cool, Fox News, some very small local newspapers. But don't worry about them now.
Other than The Sun and the the tweet, none of these sourcing comments are anything like deal-breakers - they're more just things to help along the way to FAC, where I hope this is headed. If you do not want to make any of these changes, the only things that need to be looked at are the replies above, The Sun, and the non-free image rationale.
Josh Milburn (
talk) 14:33, 24 April 2020 (UTC)reply
@
Hunter Kahn: Pinging in case this was missed. I am still a little oversubscribed on Wikipedia, so definitely no rush from my end.
Josh Milburn (
talk) 16:21, 2 May 2020 (UTC)reply
Oops, sorry
J Milburn, I did indeed miss this! lol I will get to it either today or tomorrow at the latest. Thanks! —
HunterKahn 18:30, 2 May 2020 (UTC)reply
I think I got it all,
J Milburn, but let me know if you have anything more. Thanks! —
HunterKahn 21:06, 4 May 2020 (UTC)reply
@
Hunter Kahn: Great, thanks - there are a couple of replies above that you may have missed.
Josh Milburn (
talk) 07:12, 5 May 2020 (UTC)reply
I think I got them all now, but let me know if I missed any. Thanks
J Milburn! —
HunterKahn 13:42, 5 May 2020 (UTC)reply
Great; promoting now. Really fantastic work on this. I do hope you'll pursue FA status.
Josh Milburn (
talk) 16:17, 5 May 2020 (UTC)reply
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as
this nomination's talk page,
the article's talk page or
Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by
Cwmhiraeth (
talk) 05:38, 21 May 2020 (UTC)reply
Improved to Good Article status by
Hunter Kahn (
talk). Self-nominated at 19:45, 8 May 2020 (UTC).reply
Long enough/new enough (just promoted to GA a few days ago). No obvious policy violations. Hooks are sufficiently "hooky" and have inline citations in the article. Presumably Star Wars Insider is considered a reliable source? Shows how much I edit fictional elements articles -- I wouldn't have thought "official" sources would be desirable? Suppose it's more about weight than reliability, and I'm fine to defer to the editor and GA reviewer on that front. I have a weak preference for the first hook, but both are supported, so happy to defer to the promoter. Everything looks good and the QPQ is done, so passing it. — Rhododendritestalk \\ 02:57, 9 May 2020 (UTC)reply