Talk:Star Wars: The Clone Wars
(Redirected from Talk:Star Wars: The Clone Wars (2008 TV series))
Latest comment: 5 months ago by Deacon Vorbis in topic "Starwars; The Clone Wars" listed at Redirects for discussion
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Star Wars: The Clone Wars article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 4 months  |
 | Star Wars: The Clone Wars has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: October 30, 2025. (Reviewed version). |
| This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=small}
 | On 27 May 2007, Star Wars: The Clone Wars was linked from Slashdot, a high-traffic website. (Traffic) All prior and subsequent edits to the article are noted in its revision history. |
 | On 12 July 2025, it was proposed that this article be moved from Star Wars: The Clone Wars (2008 TV series) to Star Wars: The Clone Wars. The result of the discussion was moved. |
Hatnote
editJust FYI, I updated the hatnote because of the move (and the one for the Tartakovsky show). I think this is better but it may need to be adjusted further Ladtrack (talk) 03:32, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
GA!
editHi, sorry about the GA nomination. I was the only one active on the page, and I thought nobody would object, so I went ahead with it. Lililolol (talk) 22:13, 26 July 2025 (UTC)
- With your significant (>80%) authorship, you're well within your rights to nominate the article. If others disagree they can weigh in at the review. There is no basis for your nomination to be reverted, but you may withdraw it at your own discretion. — ImaginesTigers 22:17, 26 July 2025 (UTC)
- The last message in the discussion about going for GA was from me, expressing concerns about the state of the article. No one has disagreed with me, and no significant improvements have been made here. Frankly, I find it quite rude to have just been ignored like that. There may be no rules preventing the article from being nominated, but that doesn't make it right. This article is not ready for GA review, and there is WP:NORUSH. I believe we should be holding off on the review for now. - adamstom97 (talk) 23:36, 26 July 2025 (UTC)
- Um, it's not about being in a rush, like? Who said that? And saying "no significant improvements have been made here" is low-key a bold thing to say, considering how it used to look and how far it’s come. Lililolol (talk) 03:20, 27 July 2025 (UTC)
- By nominating for GA now rather than waiting for the article to be ready, you are rushing the process. Why not be patient and wait until all interested parties are happy for the nom to go ahead? And I didn't mean that there has been no significant improvements overall, I already said in the previous thread that your changes were an improvement and should be in the article. I mean there have been no significant improvements since we last discussed this and I felt the article wasn't ready for GA. Just because it is better than it used to be does not mean it is automatically at GA level. - adamstom97 (talk) 10:00, 27 July 2025 (UTC)
- Um, it's not about being in a rush, like? Who said that? And saying "no significant improvements have been made here" is low-key a bold thing to say, considering how it used to look and how far it’s come. Lililolol (talk) 03:20, 27 July 2025 (UTC)
- The last message in the discussion about going for GA was from me, expressing concerns about the state of the article. No one has disagreed with me, and no significant improvements have been made here. Frankly, I find it quite rude to have just been ignored like that. There may be no rules preventing the article from being nominated, but that doesn't make it right. This article is not ready for GA review, and there is WP:NORUSH. I believe we should be holding off on the review for now. - adamstom97 (talk) 23:36, 26 July 2025 (UTC)
- Hey, congratulations on getting GA! Are you going to submit a DYK hook? Ladtrack (talk) 19:01, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
- I thought I had withdrawn my nomination :/ Anyway, I’m not familiar with DYK, but feel free to do it if you’re interested. Lililolol (talk) 20:01, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
"Trench (Star Wars)" listed at Redirects for discussion
edit
The redirect Trench (Star Wars) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 7 § Trench (Star Wars) until a consensus is reached. Thepharoah17 (talk) 17:59, 7 October 2025 (UTC)
The redirect Star Wars: Ο Πόλεμος των Κλώνων (τηλεοπτική σειρά, 2008) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 January 16 § Междузвездни войни: Войните на клонираните (сериал) until a consensus is reached. Squawk7700 (talk) 20:35, 16 January 2026 (UTC)
"Starwars; The Clone Wars" listed at Redirects for discussion
edit
The redirect Starwars; The Clone Wars has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 January 16 § Clone wars errors until a consensus is reached. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 23:12, 16 January 2026 (UTC)