Editing MarioWiki:Featured articles/N3/Super Mario 3D World

__NOTOC__
===[[{{#titleparts:{{PAGENAME}}||3}}]]===
{{FANOMFAIL
|nominated=1:52 PM CST, February 11, 2017
|lastedit=12:45, 12 April 2017 (EDT)
|nosupport=False
}}
==== Support ====
#{{user|Supermariofan67}} - This article is very well-written, has no red links, and has a lot of info.
#{{user|Owencrazyboy9}} - Per Supermariofan67.
#{{User|TheFlameChomp}} Per Supermariofan67.
#{{User|Alex95}} Anything I opposed to has been fixed. Per Supermariofan67
#{{User|Yoshi876}}
#{{User|Yoshi the Space Station Manager}} Really long article, but it makes up by having the most items. It is also something that other articles should follow. Per all.
#{{User|Ultimate Mr. L}} After originally opossing due to a lack of information in the worlds table, I realized that that's OK. The information should be covered in the individual articles. As that was the only reason for my opposition, I am supporting.

==== Oppose ====
#<s>{{User|Baby Luigi}} The list of enemies, bosses, and objects irk me. I strongly believe that enemies here may need visual representations of themselves, because the average viewer may not know what a Splounder or a Flopter looks like because the enemy is never named in game and it forces viewers to click on a lot of articles until they finally get a visual picture of the character from clicking on the correct article or a name-guess. Besides, other featured articles list their enemies and objects, namely the ''Donkey Kong Country'' series articles, an example being ''[[Donkey Kong Country 2: Diddy's Kong Quest]]''. Addutionally, the reception section is half-assed, with no table, no Metacritic score, and some weasel-worded like criticisms, like its second, unsourced paragraph. Also, the gameplay paragraph can be rewritten. Having some enemies from Super Mario World, for example, does not exactly constitute as "elements from Super Mario World making a return". The gameplay section goes to great lengths explaining what makes a return from what previous game, when its priority is to first explain the general gameplay of how Mario functions; there's always first time viewers who may not know prior Mario information so this confuses potential first time readers and forces them to jump all over the wiki to know the full context of games. Therefore, that general gameplay should be talked about first, how the game plays, how Mario works, THEN it should list if those said elements of this game originate from a previous Mario game.</s>
#<s>{{User|TheFlameChomp}} I agree with I agree with Alex95's comment down below about the power-ups and transformations table.</s>
#<s>{{User|Owencrazyboy9}} Per both. Other than those major issues, everything else on the article is written nicely. It's just that those major sections are causing me to oppose.</s>
#{{User|Boo4761}} Large amounts of the article are lists. If we change those to what Baby Luigi said, maybe it could be worthy of featured status.
#<s>{{User|Alex95}} It feels like there are ''two'' lists of usable power-ups, with both the transformations and items listing the same power-ups. It seems redundant. Maybe that should be corrected in some way.</s>
#{{User|PinkYoshiFan}} My new oppose is that the tables make it super long, which is annoying and per Baby Luigi

==== Removal of opposes ====

=====Boo4761=====
#{{User|Supermariofan67}} I think everything has been fixed.
#{{User|TheFlameChomp}} Per Supermariofan67.
=====PinkYoshiFan=====
#{{User|Supermariofan67}} Per Baby Luigi's comments. This game has a very large number of enemies/objects. Therefore, it is going to have a very long article. The reason it couldn't be featured before is that it ''didn't'' have the tables.
#{{User|Baby Luigi}} Per Supermariofan67.
#{{User|TheFlameChomp}} Per Supermariofan67.
#{{User|Yoshi876}} Tables make the article better not worse.

==== Comments ====
#When making a table of the enemies and the items (Baseball, Goomba Mask, Propeller Box etc), should we only list the first level they appear in? I'm thinking of making a table or two during next week. {{User|A51 Trooper}}
:We don't necessarily need to list the level at all, but if we gotta list the level, then yes, only the first level appearance is required. {{User:Baby Luigi/sig}} 16:18, 5 March 2017 (EST)

I just made tables for bosses and supporting cast. They can be seen in [[User:Supermariofan67/Sandbox1|my sandbox]]. Do they look correct? If so, I will put it in the article. --{{User:Supermariofan67/sig}} 23:12, 9 March 2017 (EST)

@{{User|PinkYoshiFan}} The construction template was added after this feature nomination started. --{{User:TheFlameChomp/sig}} 11:19, 23 March 2017 (EDT)
:Technically, articles shouldn't even have to be under construction when it is nominated to be featured so he does have a point. {{User:Baby Luigi/sig}} 13:40, 23 March 2017 (EDT)
::Now that you put it like that, I understand how he does have a point. I originally thought that he was opposing because he thought that the template was there before the article was nominated. However, does his vote mean anything anymore now that the template has been removed? --{{User:TheFlameChomp/sig}} 21:07, 24 March 2017 (EDT)
:::The template appears to have been added when a user was in the process of making a table. Now that the table is no longer under construction, there is no reason for the template. --{{User:Supermariofan67/sig}} 21:31, 24 March 2017 (EDT)
::::Oh, OK, that makes more sense now. I think that is what I believed the template was added for when I added the comment in the first place. --{{User:TheFlameChomp/sig}} 21:46, 24 March 2017 (EDT)
:::::The template was removed so I removed the oppose {{User|PinkYoshiFan}}
::::::Your new oppose, aside from perring me, is very ridiculous. So what if the tables make the article super long? If they're informative, comprehensive, and useful, then who cares? {{User:Baby Luigi/sig}} 18:06, 26 March 2017 (EDT)
::::::Oh, and same thing with you Alex. I don't see what's wrong with including a table. This isn't the most comprehensive page on the wiki, not by far, and what's wrong with the table aside from what you think is "too much information". {{User:Baby Luigi/sig}} 18:07, 26 March 2017 (EDT)
:::::::Compare SM3DW's article with ones ''[[Super Mario 64]]''{{'}}s or ''[[Super Mario 3D Land]]''{{'}}s. The enemies are listed by bullets. There isn't any need to go into ''this'' much info with 3D World's when everything else uses the simple bullets. Sure, tables look nice, but being consistent is nice, too. Unless there's a bestiary in game that describes what each enemy is an I don't know about it, the table isn't needed. {{User:Alex95/sig}} 18:13, 26 March 2017 (EDT)
::::::::But compare that to games that are currently featured like [[Yoshi's Island DS]], or [[Donkey Kong Country]], where information like that '''is''' in tables. The reason they're in tables is so the reader can easily identify what the enemy is, rather than just playing pot luck by clicking randomly until they get to the desired page. {{User|Yoshi876}}
:::::::::Also, none you listed are featured articles. Super Mario 3D Land got unfeatured BECAUSE it is a loosely strung amalgamation of lists. Look at the articles Yoshi876 listed, they're all featured. {{User:Baby Luigi/sig}} 15:50, 28 March 2017 (EDT)
:::::::What do you think of [[User:Supermariofan67/Sandbox1|this]]? I was able to make the tables take up less space. I also removed the duplicate table for power ups. --{{User:Supermariofan67/sig}} 20:39, 26 March 2017 (EDT)
::::::::I don't like it. It looks even messier than what it is now, in the name of saving space. {{User:Baby Luigi/sig}} 15:51, 28 March 2017 (EDT)
@{{User|Pikante}} I don't think you can support and oppose at the same time. Also, your reasons are about the game itself and not the article. --{{User:TheFlameChomp/sig}} 22:01, 27 March 2017 (EDT)
:He cannot, and the rules state to remove any vote that contains a "fan vote", so his votes have been removed. {{User:Alex95/sig}} 22:08, 27 March 2017 (EDT)

All right, most major problems have been fixed. I'd like if the tables for enemies were screenshots from the game for consistency but I'd be nitpicking at this point. I still think the reception section could be a little more developed though. Also, Green Coin needs an image. Fix these and I'll support. {{User:Baby Luigi/sig}} 16:45, 11 April 2017 (EDT)

Okay, so I originally opposed because I felt the enemy table was unnecessary. However, I see that it looks fine and goes into a great amount of detail.<br>
Although, there are two tables that show the power-ups, both at [[Super Mario 3D World#Transformations|Transformations]] and [[Super Mario 3D World#Items and objects|Items and objects]]. It seems redundant to have both, so should we remove the first table as the second covers everything in more detail? {{User:Alex95/sig}} 16:56, 11 April 2017 (EDT)
:I agree that it seems redundant. --{{User:TheFlameChomp/sig}} 17:01, 11 April 2017 (EDT)
::<s>I think the power-ups and transformations are actually fine, as we do list them as distinct entities. However, the Support items don't need two images, so I agree with removing the second set of images for that particular table.</s> {{User:Baby Luigi/sig}} 19:27, 11 April 2017 (EDT)
:::When Alex95 added the comment, there were two separate tables that covered both transformations and power-ups. --{{User:TheFlameChomp/sig}} 19:37, 11 April 2017 (EDT)
::::Ninja'd: Disregard what I said, I've commented after the changes are made. {{User:Baby Luigi/sig}} 19:39, 11 April 2017 (EDT)

Seriously though, fix the green coin picture, or I'll be forced to oppose. Having a red link in place of an image is a pretty big problem. {{User:Baby Luigi/sig}} 19:36, 11 April 2017 (EDT)
:I will upload it tomorrow morning. Also, can someone put in a removal of oppose for Boo4761? This will run out of time very soon. --{{User:Supermariofan67/sig}} 20:51, 11 April 2017 (EDT)
:Ok. I have uploaded the image. --{{User:Supermariofan67/sig}} 10:36, 12 April 2017 (EDT)

@<s>{{User|Owencrazyboy9}} Your strikethrough covers the hash sign and screws up the list. Could you fix that please?</s><br>
{{User:Ultimate Mr. L/sig}} 19:51, 11 April 2017 (EDT)

Is there any possibility this could pass? The only thing preventing it from passing is {{User|Boo4761}}'s vote, which obviously is no longer valid. For some reason, it never got enough removal of oppose votes. --{{User:Supermariofan67/sig}} 13:42, 12 April 2017 (EDT)
:Maybe like in Paper Mario's case, since most problems got fixed, you could request staff to ask for another round immediately. {{User:Baby Luigi/sig}} 13:45, 12 April 2017 (EDT)