Editing MarioWiki:Featured articles/N2/Paper Mario
From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
__NOTOC__ | __NOTOC__ | ||
===[[{{#titleparts:{{PAGENAME}}||3}}]]=== | ===[[{{#titleparts:{{PAGENAME}}||3}}]]=== | ||
{{ | {{FANOMSTAT | ||
|nominated=12:26, 1 January 2017 (EST) | |nominated=12:26, 1 January 2017 (EST) | ||
| | |passed= | ||
}} | }} | ||
==== Support ==== | ==== Support ==== | ||
Line 12: | Line 11: | ||
#{{User|Alex95}} I originally opposed. However, {{User|Gabumon}} rewrote the article in its entirety and now appears to be up to date. So per him. (The only thing bugging me at this point is that the person who nominated this is currently blocked, but I don't think that's that big of an issue?) | #{{User|Alex95}} I originally opposed. However, {{User|Gabumon}} rewrote the article in its entirety and now appears to be up to date. So per him. (The only thing bugging me at this point is that the person who nominated this is currently blocked, but I don't think that's that big of an issue?) | ||
#{{User|Supermariofan67}} Ok looks good now. Per Alex95 | #{{User|Supermariofan67}} Ok looks good now. Per Alex95 | ||
==== Oppose ==== | ==== Oppose ==== | ||
#{{User|Owencrazyboy9}} I agree. Having a rewrite or construction template on the page is against the nomination rules. Also, I spotted a red link. Per Alex95. | |||
#{{User|Luigi 64DD}} Per all. | |||
#{{User|Yoshi876}} The article is still undergoing work to fix the issues it had when it became unfeatured. It's in no state to be re-featured at this current time. | |||
#{{User|Baby Luigi}} Article size has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the article. If that were the case, [[Yoshi]] would be candidate for a featured article but as it is currently, it is a cesspool of bad and flowery, biased writing. The article still has a construction tag and a rewrite template on the top of the page, and it irks me that you didn't give a crap about the rules, which explicitly forbid nominating articles with those tags up (which have their own stories to tell that I won't go over, but are there for a reason). '''Read the guidelines first''' before you make nominations that fail on the very first and clear rule. | |||
#{{User|Toadette the Achiever}} Per all. Length does not always guarantee good writing. | |||
#{{User|Bazooka Mario}} In the future, you need to review [[MarioWiki:Featured_articles#Featured_article_standards|our rules]] before you nominate articles like this. There is an impressive amount of work poured in, but it remains that this article is incomplete. Please be more careful in the future. | |||
#{{User|Boo4761}} First of all, there is a rewrite template on the top, second, Article size has nothing to do with its quality. Lastly, this article is largely incomplete and we are still working on the issues that got it unfeatured. You have clearly never read the guidelines for nominating articles, can you please read it in the future? | |||
==== Removal of opposes ==== | ==== Removal of opposes ==== | ||
'''Alex95''' | |||
#{{User|Gabumon}} - The rewrite tag has been removed, and all issues mentioned on the unfeature list have been rectified. | |||
'''Owencrazyboy9''' | |||
#{{User|Gabumon}} - See Alex95. Also, featured article standards call for a "reasonable" amount of red links, and one is reasonable. | |||
'''Yoshi876''' | |||
#{{User|Gabumon}} - See Alex95. | |||
'''Baby Luigi''' | |||
#{{User|Gabumon}} - See Alex95. | |||
'''Toadette the Achiever''' | |||
#{{User|Gabumon}} - The quality of writing is acceptable. | |||
'''Bazooka Mario''' | |||
#{{User|Gabumon}} - The article is no longer incomplete. | |||
'''Boo4761''' | |||
#{{User|Gabumon}} - See Alex95 and Toadette the Achiever. | |||
==== Comments ==== | ==== Comments ==== | ||
Line 29: | Line 50: | ||
Sorry for going the unclassy route with calling for the removal of oppose votes. I'd prefer a more discussion-based approach, but time is running out. If you read this, please re-evaluate the circumstances of this article and consider removing your oppose votes yourselves. - {{User|Gabumon}} | Sorry for going the unclassy route with calling for the removal of oppose votes. I'd prefer a more discussion-based approach, but time is running out. If you read this, please re-evaluate the circumstances of this article and consider removing your oppose votes yourselves. - {{User|Gabumon}} | ||