MarioWiki:Featured articles/N1/Donkey Kong Jungle Beat: Difference between revisions

From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
 
(5 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
__NOTOC__
__NOTOC__
===''[[Donkey Kong Jungle Beat]]''===
===''[[Donkey Kong Jungle Beat]]''===
{{FANOMSTAT
{{FANOMFAIL
|nominated=02:59, 19 November 2011
|nominated=02:59, 19 November 2011
|passed=<!--When it is 5-0, put the time (such as 12:10, 11 December 2009) of the fifth support/removal of last oppose by copying it from the history of the page.-->
|lastedit=18:17, 13 February 2012
|nosupport=false
}}
}}
==== Support ====
==== Support ====
Line 9: Line 10:
#{{User|Commander Code-8}}
#{{User|Commander Code-8}}
#{{User|JORDAN DEBONO}}
#{{User|JORDAN DEBONO}}
#{{User|M&L}}


==== Oppose ====
==== Oppose ====
Line 20: Line 22:
Bop: What quality? Can you please specify? {{User|BabyLuigiOnFire}}
Bop: What quality? Can you please specify? {{User|BabyLuigiOnFire}}
:Meaning that while nothing is technically ''wrong'' with the article, there isn't that stuffed-to-the-brim-with-info style about it like there is our other FAs. {{User|Bop1996}}
:Meaning that while nothing is technically ''wrong'' with the article, there isn't that stuffed-to-the-brim-with-info style about it like there is our other FAs. {{User|Bop1996}}
::Like what, relatively? I mean, this article meets all the requirements. {{User|LeftyGreenMario}}

Latest revision as of 11:58, September 14, 2016

Donkey Kong Jungle Beat[edit]

Support[edit]

  1. Toa 95 (talk) - I have been editing this page for a while now, and I think it's good enough for featured article status.
  2. Commander Code-8 (talk)
  3. JORDAN DEBONO (talk)
  4. M&L (talk)

Oppose[edit]

  1. Bop1996 (talk) It doesn't have a significant amount of poor grammar or missing content, but there isn't the same level of quality that shines through in our other featured articles.
  2. Spidey665 (talk) Per Bop. Same goes for a lot of similar pages.
  3. Skyward Yoshi (talk) I think this is at a standard of a good article. Per Bop.

Removal of Opposes[edit]

Comments[edit]

Bop: What quality? Can you please specify? BabyLuigiOnFire (talk)

Meaning that while nothing is technically wrong with the article, there isn't that stuffed-to-the-brim-with-info style about it like there is our other FAs. Bop1996 (talk)
Like what, relatively? I mean, this article meets all the requirements. LeftyGreenMario (talk)