Approved Submission [Pact] Sesestran Sub-Culture/Faction

Links?

I'm fairly certain @Arieg is referring to this thread, @Ametheliana.

So whats my to do list?

Arieg said:

For the old Sesestrans? Just one thread and then things kinda got pulled.

Click to expand...

Apologies for the double post - but you're being dishonest with @Ametheliana, @Arieg. This is because after a bit of research I found not one but three roleplaying threads...

• [ASE-SCU Diplomatic Conference] First Meeting
• [SCU-HSC Diplomatic Conference] Arrivals and First Meeting
• [Sesestran Colonial Union] Contact at Ayano

.......and a huge number of other threads, most of them - coincidentally enough - tech-related.

That's a long list of submissions, Arieg.

xImmortalxBeauty said:

You've left out the part of the Starmap Update thread where Wes removed the Sesestrans from the map, @FrostJaeger.

Click to expand...

My apologies, then - but you also left out the part about them being removed "due to debate over where to put [them]," @xImmortalxBeauty. Said post also says that they were removed from the map - which is not the same thing as being removed from canon.

Again the Sesestrans are decanonized they no longer count as a pre existing sarp faction.

As an addendum to Ame's action to place this on hold: I'd like Ame and Arieg to be the ones posting in here. The rest of the cliques, please stay out of this thread and let the submitter and reviewer play their roles out.

@Ametheliana ,can you give me a head's up on why it's on hold? You can have me or the others tackle this if it's a bit much.

Doshii Jun said:

As an addendum to Ame's action to place this on hold: I'd like Ame and Arieg to be the ones posting in here. The rest of the cliques, please stay out of this thread and let the submitter and reviewer play their roles out.

Click to expand...

With all due respect @Doshii Jun, doesn't this statement conflict with what @Wes said here (emphasis mine)?

Wes said:

[...]

1. Submitters have no authority to ask someone to leave their submissions thread. All SARP members have a right to comment on a submission, because any addition to the canon universe may affect one or more of their plots or characters.

[...]

Click to expand...

No, it doesn't.

I'm not a submitter. I'm staff, and I'm telling everyone to stay out while Ame and Arieg work this out.

I claim this ability under my express directive to "prevent drama." If you don't like it, talk to Wes.

Cadette, being another reviewer and clarifying Ame's point, doesn't jam me up any.

I'd prefer not to lock the thread. I'd rather people listen and adhere to what I politely ask.

So whats holding this one up?

Update?

Can I get a checklist for this @Ametheliana or would you like this to be handed off to another techmod?

This review is for: Sesestran Sub Culture with URL: https://wiki.stararmy.com/doku.php?id=wip:sesestran_culture

The submitted article is/has…
[◎[ ‿ ]◎] A very high level of overall quality
[◎[ ‿ ]◎] A general topic sentence under the title header
[N/A] Artwork (Required for new species; Strongly recommended for vehicles and hand weapons)
[◎[ ‿ ]◎] Needed and/or useful to the setting
[◎[ ‿ ]◎] In the proper format/template
[◎[ ‿ ]◎] Proofread for spelling and grammar
[◎[ ‿ ]◎] Easy to read and understand (not a lengthy mass of technobabble)
[◎[ ‿ ]◎] Wikified (terms that could be a link should be a link)
[◎[ ‿ ]◎] No red and/or broken links
[◎[ ‿ ]◎] Reasonably scientifically plausible
[◎[ ‿ ]◎] Reasonably neutral point of view
The submitted article is/does not…
[◎[ ‿ ]◎] Overpowered (or cutting tech for a faction with little or no roleplay)
[◎[ ‿ ]◎] Obtusely redundant
[◎[ ‿ ]◎] Contain copy pasta descriptions of systems or interior compartments
[◎[ ‿ ]◎] Unauthorized by faction managers or player-controlled corporation
[NO] Contain references to IC events that have not occurred (SM must authorize retcons)
[◎[ ‿ ]◎] Use second-person language (“you” or “your”) unless it is an instructional guide aimed at players.
[◎[ ‿ ]◎] Use bombastic language (“virtually immune,” “nearly indestructible,” “insanely powerful,” “horrible effects”)
[◎[ ‿ ]◎] Use an unbalanced header/text ratio (many headers but sections are one-liners)
[◎[ ‿ ]◎] Use major unapproved sub-articles that should be submitted separately
[◎[ ‿ ]◎] Lacking Detail
[N/A] Images hosted on sites other than stararmy.com (Photobucket, Imageshack, etc are not allowed)
The article has…
[N/A] Speeds in compliance with the Starship Speed Standard, if applicable
[N/A] Damage Capacity and Damage Ratings in compliance with the DR Guidelines
[N/A] The in-character year of creation/manufacture. (Should be current year. Future years not allowed).
[N/A] The Standard Product Nomenclature System, if applicable.
To the submitter: Is this a refit or overhaul of a previous article? If yes, provide a link and a list of changes.

Notes:
Figure out this not a faction is a faction that contributed to the culture and then we can go from there. If it's not a faction and retconned then how is it contributing to the culture of the Pact?

I intend to finish this review by: Oct 8, 2017

Ametheliana said:

Figure out this not a faction is a faction that contributed to the culture and then we can go from there. If it's not a faction and retconned then how is it contributing to the culture of the Pact?

Click to expand...

Effectively its a Caprica to the Pact's twelve colonies.

¿What?

Ametheliana said:

¿What?

Click to expand...

Effectively if this was NATO the Sesestrans would be the UK circe 1980.