MarioWiki:Featured articles/Unfeature/N3/Culex: Difference between revisions
From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
(→Remove featured article status: Corrected spelling of "judgement." to "judgment.", added my own "two cents" to the discussion.) |
m (Text replacement - "{{[Ff]a-archive" to "{{FA archive notice") |
||
| (8 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
__NOTOC__ | __NOTOC__ | ||
===[[{{#titleparts:{{PAGENAME}}||4}}]]=== | ===[[{{#titleparts:{{PAGENAME}}||4}}]]=== | ||
{{ | {{FA archive notice|unfeature=yes | ||
|nominated=17:58, March 15, 2019 | |nominated=17:58, March 15, 2019 | ||
|passed= | |passed=03:35, April 1, 2019 | ||
}} | }} | ||
==== Remove featured article status ==== | ==== Remove featured article status ==== | ||
#{{User|Baby Luigi}} I realize that I've [[MarioWiki:Featured articles/Unfeature/N2/Culex|nominated this article in the past and failed]] but in the lieu of newer writing and expanded writing guidelines, we finally have a more detailed explanation of the reasonable length rule. The key phrases in the writing guideline part being, "''editors should be fully confident that the articles are long and detailed enough in length to make the | #{{User|Baby Luigi}} I realize that I've [[MarioWiki:Featured articles/Unfeature/N2/Culex|nominated this article in the past and failed]] but in the lieu of newer writing and expanded writing guidelines, we finally have a more detailed explanation of the reasonable length rule. The key phrases in the writing guideline part being, "''editors should be fully confident that the articles are long and detailed enough in length to make the judgement.''" and "''if editors have to ask the following question, "Is this article long enough to be featured?" chances are, the article likely does not pass the grade comfortably and therefore should not be considered to be featured.''" This article is on the tail-end of typical Featured Article lengths. It has a similar amount of content as most other generic boss articles, if not, less, due to its less important role in the storyline than, say, [[Cortez]] or [[Tubba Blubba]]. If editors have to debate about its length to begin with, can you really say it comfortably meets standards for top article space in MarioWiki? "Good enough" isn't a standard for Featured Articles, it has to pass all grades comfortably without hassle, as with the title, "best MarioWiki has to offer". I fail to see how a standard, hodgepodge boss article is our best and thus am voting to remove its title again. | ||
#{{User|Doomhiker}} The page itself is good, however in my opinion [[Kiddy Kong]] is the minimum for FA length, which is much longer than this page. Per Baby Luigi. | #{{User|Doomhiker}} The page itself is good, however in my opinion [[Kiddy Kong]] is the minimum for FA length, which is much longer than this page. Per Baby Luigi. | ||
#{{User|Waluigi Time}} It's a good article, but definitely not among the best of the wiki's content. | #{{User|Waluigi Time}} It's a good article, but definitely not among the best of the wiki's content. | ||
# | #{{User|Ridley12}} I agree with what Baby Luigi said. A boss page this short shouldn't be considered for the wiki's best work if something like Cortez's or Wart's pages exist, especially since Culex is an optional boss. | ||
{{User|Ridley12}} I agree with what Baby Luigi said. A boss page this short shouldn't be considered for the wiki's best work if something like Cortez's or Wart's pages exist, | #{{User|Toadette the Achiever}} Ehh, what the heck? It may be impressively written, but I can sympathize with why this shouldn't be a featured article. | ||
#{{User|FanOfYoshi}} That's useless. | |||
==== Keep featured article status ==== | ==== Keep featured article status ==== | ||
| Line 17: | Line 18: | ||
==== Comments ==== | ==== Comments ==== | ||
{{user|HEROMARIO}} | |||
Uh... It needs work but the boss itself is a ? | |||
Latest revision as of 16:40, May 31, 2024
Culex[edit]
This is an archive of a successful unfeature article nomination. If this page is unprotected, do not modify its contents, as it is an archive of past discussions.
Culex was nominated to be unfeatured at 17:58, March 15, 2019 and passed at 22:35, 7 April 2019.
Remove featured article status[edit]
- Baby Luigi (talk) I realize that I've nominated this article in the past and failed but in the lieu of newer writing and expanded writing guidelines, we finally have a more detailed explanation of the reasonable length rule. The key phrases in the writing guideline part being, "editors should be fully confident that the articles are long and detailed enough in length to make the judgement." and "if editors have to ask the following question, "Is this article long enough to be featured?" chances are, the article likely does not pass the grade comfortably and therefore should not be considered to be featured." This article is on the tail-end of typical Featured Article lengths. It has a similar amount of content as most other generic boss articles, if not, less, due to its less important role in the storyline than, say, Cortez or Tubba Blubba. If editors have to debate about its length to begin with, can you really say it comfortably meets standards for top article space in MarioWiki? "Good enough" isn't a standard for Featured Articles, it has to pass all grades comfortably without hassle, as with the title, "best MarioWiki has to offer". I fail to see how a standard, hodgepodge boss article is our best and thus am voting to remove its title again.
- Doomhiker (talk) The page itself is good, however in my opinion Kiddy Kong is the minimum for FA length, which is much longer than this page. Per Baby Luigi.
- Waluigi Time (talk) It's a good article, but definitely not among the best of the wiki's content.
- Ridley12 (talk) I agree with what Baby Luigi said. A boss page this short shouldn't be considered for the wiki's best work if something like Cortez's or Wart's pages exist, especially since Culex is an optional boss.
- Toadette the Achiever (talk) Ehh, what the heck? It may be impressively written, but I can sympathize with why this shouldn't be a featured article.
- FanOfYoshi (talk) That's useless.
Keep featured article status[edit]
Removal of support/oppose votes[edit]
Comments[edit]
HEROMARIO (talk) Uh... It needs work but the boss itself is a ?
