Editing MarioWiki:Featured articles/Unfeature/N1/Dry Bones

__NOTOC__
===[[{{SUBPAGENAME}}]]===
{{UNFANOMSTAT
|nominated=13:00, 26 July 2010 (UTC)<!--Sign with FIVE tildes(~) here to put the exact date of the nomination. -->
|passed=<!--When it is 5-0, put the time (such as 12:10, 11 December 2009) of the fifth support/removal of last opposet  by copying it from the history of the page.-->
}}
==== Remove Featured Article Status ====
#{{User|Booderdash}} Many information is missing. Winter Olympic Games and Super Mario Galaxy 2 doesn't even have a section! Nsmbwii, nintendo comics system, and more are stubs and can be expanded. Mario Party series is bad. Plus The Super Paper Mario doesn't have the tattle info. Long and unnesscary trivia too.
#{{User|KS3}} Per Booderdash.
#{{User|Fawfulfury65}} It's in past tense!!!
#{{User|LeftyGreenMario}} The ripoff of Koopa Troopa also has a weird Paper Mario templates section. It is not in the correct tense. Sections can be expanded, too.
#{{User|Commander Code-8}} Per all. And what does '''Dry Bones make their true debut is in the game Super Mario Bros. 3.''' mean?? (That sentance is also grammatically incorrect and I copied it from the page).

==== Keep Featured Article Status ====
#{{User|Gamefreak75}} The MASATOWG cannot be expanded, since they only appear in the hockey tournament against Dry Bowser. SMG2 doesn't need a section, it should be merged with Galaxy 1. NSMBWii should be merged with NSMB. Comic system most likely cannot be expanded. Someone could easily get the SPM tattle info and I do not believe the trivia is long/unnecessary.

==== Removal of Support/Oppose Votes ====
'''Gamefreak75'''
#{{User|Booderdash}} If there is still problems with the article your vote is invalid, just because "it can be fixed" doesn't mean its good right now. And frankly many sections have problems not just one. I wasn't even thinking about the SPM when I nominated it.
#{{User|MrConcreteDonkey}} They appear in the curling as well.

'''Fawfulfury65'''
#{{User|Marioguy1}} - Orly?
#{{User|LeftyGreenMario}} - No wai!

==== Comments ====
The only one problem is the tattle info for SPM, which is not a reason to unfeature it. {{User|Gamefreak75}}

No gamefreak it isn't. For one, Smg2 isn't even on it, and many sections are stubs. {{User|Booderdash}}

:Did you bother reading my oppose? >_> {{User|Gamefreak75}}

Yes, but thats not the way to go at all. Every article on the wiki has seperate sections for the 2 games. I don't see why this one needs to break it. Also, notice nearly all of the trivia has wrong grammar, and the last one makes no sense.{{User|Booderdash}}
:Sections can be merged if there is not enough content to fill up one section. {{User|Marioguy1}}
::Winter Games section is labeled ''Mario & Sonic'' Series, I expanded the SMG section to include SMG2. NSMBW has been merged with NSMB. IDK much about the Nintendo comic's system. Define "more". The MP series section has been expanded with a sub-section on Dry Bones' only notable appearance (in any Nintendo game afaik). IDK SPM tattle stuff. The trivia section is near empty. I changed the tense. {{User|Marioguy1}}
::Which there should be for the NSBMW and SMG2, considering there platforms (2.5 and 3D). {{User|KS3}}
:::What? I don't follow... {{User|Marioguy1}}

Thats strange. So the millions of things that couldn't be expanded on other articles that were nominated could've been merged all along? I don't really think so.{{User|Booderdash}}

Mg1, while your trying to fix this article is heartwarming, you add ALOT of grammar issues to sections you worked on, especially the SMG section. {{User|Booderdash}}
:Actually, yes they could have. I'll use the SMG and SMG2 sections from Dry Bones as an example. If we were to have two seperate sections for the two SMGs in this article, we would have two choices: Either we have two sections both describing how Dry Bones is on four legs, invincible to all attacks with an aggressive behavior or we would have one section describing all that and a one-liner in the other one describing the game-exclusive things (of which there is one AFAIK). So yes, it is wise to merge two sections as closely related as these two. And thanks! But I couldn't find the grammar issues...I went through the article and fixed everything I could find but, could you point out the issues for me? {{User|Marioguy1}}

"Sigh" Don't worry about it. I'll fix it for you, its easier than pointing them out anyways... {{User|Booderdash}}

LGM, how come you're voting to remove FF65's vote, if her vote is part of YOURS? {{User|Booderdash}}
:OK, the mistakes you fixed were worded grammatically correct before, you just changed the wording. Anyways, abstaining from voting to remove an invalid vote because it advantages you is not a good thing, try to remain indifferent when voting on those types of things. And lastly, are there any more sections that need fixing? {{User|Marioguy1}}

Not really, though I did see the more smarter thing, and yes that was ironic and stupid of me. But I don't have a spellchecker on my computer so..., and anyways, LGm's vote does not make sense though. Ff65's vote was in past tense, and LGM said no wai, yet part of her OWN vote is "not in correct tense". {{User|Booderdash}}
:In that case @LGM: Could you remove the past-tense part of your vote? And I won't pursue the more smarter thing, it was a mistake, we all make them. Anyways, are there any sections that need expanding? {{User|Marioguy1}}