Battlestar Wiki:Quality Articles/Rapture: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 20:24, 17 May 2007

This discussion is about Rapture's proposed Quality Article status.
This discussion is being used to help the Rapture article achieve quality.

Summary

Insert summary here...

Suggestions

From Battlestar Wiki talk:Quality Articles:

Rapture guide is pretty good. If it was fixed up a little bit more... i think we be golden for an FA status. Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 12:38, 17 May 2007 (CDT)

Mhh, yes. That one looks good. Maybe if we find some official statements and a bit more noteworthy dialogue (just a few items. Some pages tend to go overboard with it). --Serenity 12:41, 17 May 2007 (CDT)

I'll try to pull something appropriate out of the podcast for an official statement or two. --Steelviper 13:27, 17 May 2007 (CDT)

How are we doing? More statements or dialogue needed? --Steelviper 15:20, 17 May 2007 (CDT)

We don't typically have many screencaps in episode summaries, but this one could stand a couple: One of the Eye's nova over the Temple, and maybe one of Three approaching the Eye vision system. Also, does the production picture a good thing to have, since the stand-ins are still a bit of a distraction based on what we know now? --Spencerian 15:24, 17 May 2007 (CDT)

@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 ::I'll try to pull something appropriate out of the podcast for an official statement or two. --[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 13:27, 17 May 2007 (CDT)
 :::How are we doing? More statements or dialogue needed? --[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 15:20, 17 May 2007 (CDT)
+::::We don't typically have many screencaps in episode summaries, but this one could stand a couple: One of the Eye's nova over the Temple, and maybe one of Three approaching the Eye vision system. Also, does the production picture a good thing to have, since the stand-ins are still a bit of a distraction based on what we know now? --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 15:24, 17 May 2007 (CDT)