Editing MarioWiki:Featured articles/Unfeature/N1/Wario
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__ | ||
===[[{{SUBPAGENAME}}]]=== | ===[[{{SUBPAGENAME}}]]=== | ||
{{ | {{UNFANOMSTAT | ||
|nominated=13:21, 8 March 2010 (GMT) | |||
|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 ==== | ==== Remove Featured Article Status ==== | ||
#{{User|Reversinator}} Where do I begin? We have some really short sections, lots of sections missing images, and some useless information. Examples: <br>1. Mario Golf series, Mario Football series, WarioWare, Inc.: Mega Party Game$. <br>2. Just scroll through the article and see for yourself.<br>3. "In the past, it's been suggested that Wario was actually Foreman Spike, due to similarities in appearance. That theory has been debunked, though some people still believe that Wario is based on Spike." | #{{User|Reversinator}} Where do I begin? We have some really short sections, lots of sections missing images, and some useless information. Examples: <br>1. Mario Golf series, Mario Football series, WarioWare, Inc.: Mega Party Game$. <br>2. Just scroll through the article and see for yourself.<br>3. "In the past, it's been suggested that Wario was actually Foreman Spike, due to similarities in appearance. That theory has been debunked, though some people still believe that Wario is based on Spike." | ||
Line 34: | Line 37: | ||
:Can we end this now? {{User|Gamefreak75}} | :Can we end this now? {{User|Gamefreak75}} | ||
@KS3: I removed all of the "removal of opposes" you mad e for several reasons. Firecat and Mariofan123 both sadi that the article was fine. Sure, they added a bit, but that wasnt their major vote. For me, my comment is EXACTLY the same as Time Q's, just directed at YOU!! Same with LGM, BLOF, and GF75. {{User|Raphaelraven497}} | @KS3: I removed all of the "removal of opposes" you mad e for several reasons. Firecat and Mariofan123 both sadi that the article was fine. Sure, they added a bit, but that wasnt their major vote. For me, my comment is EXACTLY the same as Time Q's, just directed at YOU!! Same with LGM, BLOF, and GF75. {{User|Raphaelraven497}} | ||
:I added them back. Basically, the opposers' task is to prove the supporters' points wrong. Saying that "the article is fine" doesn't even refer to the supporters' points. Anyone can say that, which would mean that no article can be unfeatured. If you think that certain votes are invalid, address it in the comments section. | :I added them back. Basically, the opposers' task is to prove the supporters' points wrong. Saying that "the article is fine" doesn't even refer to the supporters' points. Anyone can say that, which would mean that no article can be unfeatured. If you think that certain votes are invalid, address it in the comments section. – On a different note, I think we should check if this nomination is even up to date. Haven't the problems Reversinator pointed out already been fixed? {{User|Time Q}} | ||
::Basically, all of KS3's removals are invalid and I'm pretty sure the problem has been fixed ages ago.{{User|Gamefreak75}} | ::Basically, all of KS3's removals are invalid and I'm pretty sure the problem has been fixed ages ago.{{User|Gamefreak75}} |