Editing MarioWiki:Featured articles/Unfeature/N2/Wario

__NOTOC__
===[[{{#titleparts:{{PAGENAME}}||4}}]]===
{{UNFANOMSTAT
|nominated=15:10, 26 December 2014 (EST)
|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|Mario}} Ah, isn't it the Christmas spirit to attempt to strangle the beloved fat man? Anyway, I think this article is kind of overlooked when it comes to quality standards because it seems to contain many holdovers from the previous time periods where melodramatic writing was considered amazing and the article and its sections appear long, so it must be good. See details below, and maybe you'll agree with me. I just hope y'all see me as honest than being involved in a conspiracy to eradicate Wario's dignity.
#{{User|Kart Player 2011}} per all.
#{{User|Tails777}}

==== Keep Featured Article Status ====

==== Removal of Support/Oppose Votes ====

==== Comments ====
The beginning section is not very detailed. It begins and ends a bit too abruptly. The second paragraph even has some flowery writing (Wario's greed pushes him to commit malevolent acts. He also tricks Mario, which must make him very smart even though he tricked the same guy who fell for King Boo's obvious contest trick in Luigi's Mansion and Bowser's invitation to the feast in Mario Party DS). The last sentence can work here, but again, it can use more details and it just seems a tad disjointed because of this. The "development" section is disappointingly small and just overall pathetic, by the way, more talk about it soon.

The history section is apparently complete. Well, not. I'm sure he appeared in ''[[Yakuman DS]]''. Wario is obviously involved in the Story Mode in ''[[Mario & Sonic at the Olympic Winter Games]]'', but the only information is a one-liner section stub without the template. There isn't even a section on the next two Mario & Sonic Olympic Games, even the London one, which also has a story. Missing information alone makes an article unfeatured and qualifies for a {{tem|rewrite-expand}}, but this article has a lot more problems than that. The Smash Bros. section doesn't explain how Wario fights at all bar special moves and Final Smash, I'm not exaggerating. The Mario Sports Mix is also not great; "Being a Powerful-type character, Wario's shots often pack a lot of power[...]". ''Game & Wario'' starts brilliantly with "In the game, Game & Wario, Wario appears" and then falls flat on its face when it comes to information. ''WarioWare: Touched!'' is incomplete. It doesn't talk about Wario's story nor Wario Man's story; it covers the opening and ONLY the opening sequence of the story. We've got a lot of pointless quotes strung in this History section, like the illustrative "Welcome to Wario World!", which tells us a whole lot about the game, Wario's personality, and... never mind. I like how the ''[[Mario Power Tennis]]'' section goes into big detail about its opening sequence while ''[[Mario Golf: Toadstool Tour]]'' has another lucrative opening sequence, but it doesn't get a mention whatsoever. And the other Mario Tennis games get nothing (Mario Tennis Open at least has the excuse of borrowing Mario Power Tennis's engine). Mario Party isn't known for expansive stories, but the article nevertheless doesn't do a great job. Being a consistently playable board token is notable, but it doesn't deem him as playing a large role, so the section is slightly misleading. There's also no information on the e-Reader Mario Party.

But that's not all. In sections that ''do'' have information, the article doesn't deliver well. We have a lot of gems like "unfortunately", "pretty easily", "complete decimation", "Wario Land features a new breed of Nintendo anti-hero actions: greed. In this game, Wario is told that there is immense treasure to be found on Kitchen Island, but that is guarded by the terrible pirate, Captain Syrup.",  and other substandard writing. You find that mostly in the earlier games, since back in 2006, people didn't have as much stuff to write about and also had lower quality standards.

How the article deals with cameos is inconsistent. Wario has his own section in "Other appearances", but the article also has its own section about Wario's cameo in ''Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga'', so that should be merged with the Other appearances section.

Anyway, I'll get into more later, but this is a good springboard for me, the Jumpman, to try and defeat the giant obese ugly greedy yellow purple monster that is bad and incomplete writing in a featured article. {{User:Mario/sig}} 15:10, 26 December 2014 (EST)

Continued: The history section. The article is lacking in the upcoming template for Smash 4, but it's been since October of this year that Smash 4 is released. It's safe to say that the Smash Bros. section is incomplete, and the article has failed to meet providing information for a recently released game. For starters, Smash 4 can talk about the alternate special moves, different animations, and aesthetic changes. ''[[Mario Super Sluggers]]'' needs more information on the Story Mode and its cutscenes, where Wario plays some role (like having dialogue), and he is a playable captain who uses a magnet to move stuff around. Both ''Mario Superstar Baseball'' and ''Mario Super Sluggers'' need information on Wario's chemistry, his team composition in single player mode, and, in ''Superstar Baseball'', alternate team names. There is hardly any information on Virtual Boy Wario Land (what makes it stand out compared to the other Wario Lands? I'm sure there are some aspects). I'm not asking for detailed gameplay information, but we have to have some idea what Wario does in the games.

There is no information about Fortune Street, and that's pretty sad since Fortune Street is a game that highlights each character's personality much better than most games. There isn't anything on Itadaki Street DS either, but that's not surprising.

The background section is very short and incoherent. It talks about how Wario is greedy since he was a child, but it then proceeds to be a lesser version of the General information section. This sentence is pretty much half the section. "Wario is very powerful; his weight and strength are often emphasized in the games he appears in, especially his own. He owns a number of vehicles, including two cars, a tractor, a plane, and a bike. He tends to name some of said vehicles after animals. Wario is very greedy, even with riches, he strives for more, which leads him to do some evil. Otherwise, he generally leaves people alone." The article can benefit from a development section, which talks about Wario's design, similar to [[Mario]]'s article. But we do have one, which sucks. The background needs to include information on the apparent rivalry Mario and Wario had since they were children (it's mentioned in the instruction manual for Super Mario Land 2: Golden Coins AND in the Mario & Wario comics).

Here we go to the General Information section. It's all right, but I think we can remove or at least rewrite this "Like Mario, he has many Italian traits. While he is of Italian heritage, whether he was actually born in the country Italy or not is still a mystery due to the lack of information on his birthplace." It's silly. We don't know if he has Italian heritage, and the only Italian traits is probably his accent. Unlike Mario, Wario doesn't have the stereotype of the Italian; he's that distorted of Mario to this point.

"Wario is not as unintelligent as he appears to be since he makes WarioWare games and can fly a plane. In fact, he may actually be very skilled at electronics, as he made a dimensional teleporter in a few seconds. He also constructed the Mario Kart 64 race track Wario Stadium. The reason many assume he is a bonehead is that he is hot-headed, clumsy, and sometimes forgets his common sense. "

He's a video game character. Flying a plane and making one video game isn't an indicator of intelligence, especially if you have characters like Toad and Kat and Ana (not that they're stupid, but they're kindergarteners) doing the same thing. Aside from the poor writing, this is not quite correct. I don't think Wario is viewed as smart, just mischievous, sneaky, and is the basic comic relief character. The example provided for the aggressive tidbit is not the best since Wario is classified as a heavyweight and thus is naturally capable of pushing people around whenever it's intentional or not. A better example is his stealing the systems from the Sewer Guru, getting into fights, provoking people, those kinds of things.

"In the Mario Party series, he apparently puts his greedy nature aside to play fair." Bowser also partakes in kart racing and playing tennis, what's your point?

"[...]it is shown his arms and legs are pure muscle meaning the rest of his fat must be stored elsewhere. "

And the article fails at a basic understanding of human anatomy. But, the general description is also overall poorly written, talking about excessive details. "His skin ranges from a fair to tan complexion. The tone is similar to that of the other men'. His nose is pink, large, slightly pointed down, and he has large nostrils. Wario's mouth is square, as is his head, with blocky teeth and a fixed grin. He also has a round, thick, cleft chin. He has round black-eyes shaped by his cheeks and arched brows. They are outlined with a light blue, baggy, ring similar to Waluigi's. He has very constricted pupils and his iris is of a very dark shade.

The clothing part is a bit better as it does its job at analyzing the changes and the differences between Mario, Luigi, and Waluigi's outfits, but it can trim with some details since a picture will do most of the work.

The development section is again, disappointingly small for someone who has an apparent backstory of "Wario was created due to the frustration of Nintendo R & D" thing and also considering the quite clever etymology. Some aspects of this section can be moved to "appearance" and "clothing". The description for the changes Wario has went through is hilarious: "He lost his cartoon-like artwork charm as in the SML2 game, but got seemingly fatter and realistic." Other than the bias ("charm"), Wario is pretty much the same, so I don't know how this article came to "seemingly fatter and realistic". Maybe it needs more explaining. The development section has an unconventional set up, being split by handhelds and consoles. As it's not very well written (as with most of this article), and its presentation is extremely tacky. The consoles section is scanty has heck and it can be removed or be at least rewritten.

Perhaps Powers and Abilities can use some expansion, but there isn't really anything wrong with it, so I think it's fine. The Relationships section is one of the better parts of the article. Provides a lot of information using valid sources and is just a general good analysis for the relationships. Maybe the Mona part can be explored more because Mona did call Wario a greedy punk at one point, so the relationship isn't perfect.

So, yeah, if you've actually read my PAIR-reviewish analysis, I hope you're convinced that this article should be unfeatured. Bottom line: poorly written, lacking information in countless spots, and fairly tacky presentation. It has its blemishes from 2006-7ish years and they're major flaws that should make this article removed from the main page. So, yeah, Wario, the article and the character, sucks.

{{User:Mario/sig}} 19:52, 26 December 2014 (EST)

:I don't think I can even try and oppose all this. {{User:Tails777/sig}}