Template:Did you know nominations/Bantha
- 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) 06:01, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Bantha
- ... that the bantha creature in Star Wars was portrayed by an elephant, who kept shrugging the costume off her body during filming due to the intense heat?
- ALT1:... that the bantha in Star Wars, was inspired in part by Banths, lion-like creatures featured in John Carter of Mars?
- ALT2:... that Anthony Daniels, the actor who played C-3PO, said the bantha was "one of the best things" in the original Star Wars film?
- ALT3:... George Lucas decided to make the bantha a live-action creature rather than use stop motion animation because he wanted a Tusken Raider to jump on its back?
Improved to Good Article status by Hunter Kahn (talk). Self-nominated at 03:12, 3 April 2020 (UTC).
for ALT1, ALT2; 
for ALT2ALT3;
for the original hook, as it seems to be missing something. Article is high-quality and recently promoted to GA status. Hooks check out (with the exception of the original). Alt2 is my favourite, as I think it'll appeal to the most readers/lead to the most clicks. Josh Milburn (talk) 11:08, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
Josh Milburn, regrettably, you are not an eligible reviewer for this nomination, since you were the reviewer at GAN per WP:DYKSG#H2: You're not allowed to approve your own hook or article, nor may you review an article if it's a recently listed Good Article that you either nominated or reviewed for GA (though you can still nominate it for DYK).
The idea is that a new reviewer might spot something that the original reviewer might have overlooked in their review (and indeed this has happened in the past). So we're going to need a fresh review by someone not involved with the GA review. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:50, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
for the main hook, as the online source says only that the elephant kept shrugging off the costume. It would be okay without the last five words, or perhaps Hunter Kahn can say exactly where they are from? ALT1 falls foul of Rule C6.
for ALT2 and ALT3. Article meets the requirements and is recently promoted to GA status, Earwig has no concerns, QPQ done. Moonraker (talk) 05:48, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
- @BlueMoonset: Thank God someone else reviewed it. To my eyes, ALT1 doesn't violate C6 at all! Must be because I'm "involved", and not because I understand that ALT1 is a claim about real-world inspirations, and not a solely in-universe claim about fiction. It's great that we have all these rules ensuring that we all waste our time bickering on pages like this rather than improving the encyclopedia. Josh Milburn (talk) 08:16, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
- Josh Milburn, in my humble opinion C6 is a heavy-handed rule and misunderstood even by DYK’s leading lights (see, for example, here). But the rule is the rule, and one fictional character being inspired by another fictional character within someone’s head does seem to me to be skating on the thinnest possible ice, I am sure that would not get promoted. I rather like the main hook without its stab at the elephant’s thought processes, but it is not for the reviewer to change it. Moonraker (talk) 09:03, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
- If you say so. Josh Milburn (talk) 09:35, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
- Moonraker Sorry for my delay in responding to this. I'm fine with removing the last five words from the main hook and going with that if that's easiest, but the Pollock book (an offline source cited for this fact) says ""Elephants are not accustomed to the intense heat of Death Valley, and filming went slowly, as the beast kept shrugging off its heavy costume." That's where I got that portion of the hook from... — Hunter Kahn 21:19, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
- If you say so. Josh Milburn (talk) 09:35, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
- Josh Milburn, in my humble opinion C6 is a heavy-handed rule and misunderstood even by DYK’s leading lights (see, for example, here). But the rule is the rule, and one fictional character being inspired by another fictional character within someone’s head does seem to me to be skating on the thinnest possible ice, I am sure that would not get promoted. I rather like the main hook without its stab at the elephant’s thought processes, but it is not for the reviewer to change it. Moonraker (talk) 09:03, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
- The main hook is good, with the last five words struck out, and so are ALT2 and ALT3. I also like to see the elephant getting into the hook. Thank you, Hunter Kahn, the source doesn’t quite get there. Ready to go. Moonraker (talk) 04:54, 22 April 2020 (UTC)