MarioWiki:Featured articles/Unfeature/N2/Beldam: Difference between revisions
From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
Boo Diddly (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
|||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
#{{User|Mario}} My god, that history section. | #{{User|Mario}} My god, that history section. | ||
#{{User|Icemario}} With a history section like that, I find it hard to believe this was actually successfully featured. | #{{User|Icemario}} With a history section like that, I find it hard to believe this was actually successfully featured. | ||
#{{User|Randombob-omb4761}} Per Ashley and Red. | |||
==== Keep Featured Article Status ==== | ==== Keep Featured Article Status ==== | ||
| Line 21: | Line 22: | ||
#{{User|Icemario}} Per all. | #{{User|Icemario}} Per all. | ||
#{{User|Mario}} It's still a hideously padded article. | #{{User|Mario}} It's still a hideously padded article. | ||
#{{User|Randombob-omb4761}} Seriously? Their is a freaking rewrite template on that page. Per all. | |||
==== Comments ==== | ==== Comments ==== | ||
Revision as of 12:09, March 9, 2014
Beldam
Remove Featured Article Status
- Ashley and Red (talk)There ia a rewrite template. The trivia section is very large and has poor elements (e.i The Magic of Oz thing) and there are some words in oast tense that should be in present.
- Mario (talk) My god, that history section.
- Icemario (talk) With a history section like that, I find it hard to believe this was actually successfully featured.
- Randombob-omb4761 (talk) Per Ashley and Red.
Keep Featured Article Status
- Epic Rosalina (talk) I've been waiting to do this for awhile, and I finally can now that the history section has been cleaned up. Any more issues that you have, tell me and I'll try to clean up.
- Mario7 (talk) This is an excellent article. It has a detailed history section, there is a lot of information on her, and it has a nice appearance.
Removal of Support/Oppose Votes
EpicRosalina and Mario7
- Ashley and Red (talk) @EpicRosalina, if you do it I may remove my vote. @Mario7: this isn't great, the story section is messed up and VERY detailed, this needs an trim. Also, are you blind???There is a rewrite template!!!!FA's can't have it.
- Time Turner (talk) The article Įstill has some very glaring flaws, as mentioned by Icemario. It is certainly far from being an excellent article. Remember, quality over quantity, and less can be more.
- Icemario (talk) Per all.
- Mario (talk) It's still a hideously padded article.
- Randombob-omb4761 (talk) Seriously? Their is a freaking rewrite template on that page. Per all.
Comments
@Epic Rosalina: What's been done was the tip of the iceberg; the article still reeks of flowery writing, still really needs some serious trimming, there's one instance of the writing looking personal and there are still several cases of misused tenses. Icemario (talk)
Will somebody PLEASE fix any issues that are left? I fixed what I could and I think it looks fine. Epic Rosalina (talk)
