MarioWiki:Featured articles/Unfeature/N1/Mario & Luigi: Partners in Time: Difference between revisions

From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
(it's been 24 hours)
Line 3: Line 3:
{{UNFANOMSTAT
{{UNFANOMSTAT
|nominated=21:47, 16 March 2013
|nominated=21:47, 16 March 2013
|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.-->
|passed=21:30, 19 March 2013
}}
}}
==== Remove Featured Article Status ====
==== Remove Featured Article Status ====
Line 13: Line 13:


==== Keep Featured Article Status ====
==== Keep Featured Article Status ====
#{{User|Sm64dude99}} though i don't have this game,it is one of my fave games. in conclusion,i belive this artical MUST keep it's featured status AT ALL COSTS WHO'S WITH ME!?


==== Removal of Support/Oppose Votes ====
==== Removal of Support/Oppose Votes ====
'''Sm64dude99'''
#{{User|LeftyGreenMario}} Mario & Luigi: Partners in Time may be one of your favorite games, but we are unfeaturing this article based on bad content, not on how much we like the game. Look, Mario is my favorite character of all time, but his article is an incomplete mess, and the article should NOT be featured. So, this game should not keep it is featured article status.
#{{User|Yoshi876}} Per LGM, I was going to raise the exact same point, but he beat me to it
#{{User|MeritC}} Per all; Sm64dud99 -- the reasoning you put there is nothing more than personal opinion. The question is this - does the ARTICLE CONTENT ITSELF comply to this wiki site's standards? That takes high priority over <i>everything else</i>.
#{{User|Gamefreak75}} Per all.


==== Comments ====
==== Comments ====

Revision as of 17:31, March 19, 2013

Mario & Luigi: Partners in Time

Remove Featured Article Status

  1. Yoshi876 (talk) Well, the Trivia section is too long and many sections of the article don't follow the Empty Sections Policy.
  2. LeftyGreenMario (talk) Those two problems above are easily fixed, but my main complaint about this article is that it does not cover all information available. This article (and the other two Mario & Luigi featured articles) has failed to cover badges, clothes, and key items. Without this vital information, this article is not complete. This is why I tagged a rewrite-expand template in the Items section.
  3. Glowsquid (talk) the plot "summary" is awful in every way imaginable and some that have yet to be invented.
  4. MeritC (talk) Yep, too many tags attached to it showing that the article has some series problems. And if I'm not mistaken, is the whole article in need of a REWRITE!!! overall?
  5. King Pikante (talk) I have no idea why this article is featured. It needs a rewrite template, not a featured article status. It just needs an overall rewrite.

Keep Featured Article Status

Removal of Support/Oppose Votes

Comments

LeftyGreenMario is female. LeftyGreenMario (talk)

So sorry, I apologize :( Yoshi876 (talk)
Don't worry. I'm totally OK with that. LeftyGreenMario (talk)

I just want to let you know, I think Mario & Luigi: Bowser's Inside Story's article has similar problems, but I don't want to go over this (pretty unnecessary) FA nomination number. LeftyGreenMario (talk)