MarioWiki:Featured articles/N1/Mama Mario: Difference between revisions
Son of Suns (talk | contribs) m (→Comments) |
|||
Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
Trivia section perhaps? -- {{User|Son of Suns}} | Trivia section perhaps? -- {{User|Son of Suns}} | ||
I agree with Stumpers's suggestion to make an exception here. As for SoS's idea, I think a trivia section seems appropriate for such a minor reference, but if we do that, we would need to draw a line between major references mentioned in the main article, and minor references only put in the trivia section, and this is not good IMO. Strictly speaking, it is just a reference like any other. {{User:Time Q/sig}} 05:44, 11 January 2009 (EST) |
Revision as of 05:44, January 11, 2009
Mama Mario
Support
- Time Questions: It's ultra-detailed, well-written, complete (as far as I can tell), and one of the few articles that follow the new article organization standard... a prototype for all the articles yet to be updated to the new standard.
- Stumpers! - I am honored that someone would features this article! Son of Suns and Walkazo should be honored as well. Great job you two! The three of us have gone through that article so many times... so if Time Q also likes it, I'm pretty sure it's going to do okay as an FA.
- Per the two smart people above me. SJ derp :P
- . - Haha, when I first saw this nomination I thought it was a joke. But you three did a fine job! Congrats!
- — Stooben Rooben I must say that I am extremely impressed with the well-written detail of this article. Kudos to the people who dedicated so much time to editing it!
Oppose
Comments
Yup, kudos to Stumpers, SoS and Walkazo for their work on this article. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be much interest in this nomination... Time Questions 17:26, 6 January 2009 (EST)
- OOps, I thought I commented a while ago... Well, you have my support! .
- All we need are five votes are we're golden, so I think we'll make it. Stumpers! 01:40, 7 January 2009 (EST)
- Is the infrormation in the Mario kart double dash section neccisary? Luigfreak Mai talk
- Probably not. I'll get rid of it. If anyone has a problem with that, tell me. .
- I should have responded sooner, but yes, for the sake of completion we need to mention that factoid somewhere. Now, whether the way we're portraying the information may not be the best, however. Can anyone think of a better way? Stumpers! 00:19, 11 January 2009 (EST)
- Is the infrormation in the Mario kart double dash section neccisary? Luigfreak Mai talk
- All we need are five votes are we're golden, so I think we'll make it. Stumpers! 01:40, 7 January 2009 (EST)
I would just like to note that according to our current article organization policy, which is about to be changed, this article is improper, it should be (as I had earlier... not sure what happened), the television show and comics before the video games, because the tv show and comics came first. However, I believe we should turn away just this once and instead focus our efforts on changing the article to meet the NEW standard once said standard comes into play... see the proposal page for more information on the new organization standard. Basically, we won't have to change anything except the order in which we present the sources, so just a simple rearranging will be required. Is everyone okay with us making this one exception, with the promise that it WILL be rectified before the article is featured on the front page? Stumpers! 00:25, 11 January 2009 (EST)
1) How about this?
In Mario Kart: Double Dash!!, Mama Mario was referenced by Baby Luigi. If Baby Luigi were to fall into chasm, be blown up, or knocked aside by large obstacles or opposers using a Star, he would cry out "Mama" loudly in panic.
It's not much better, but it's something. Perhaps something could be mentioned about how Baby Luigi cries for his mother, while Baby Mario does not; I dunno.
2) I completely agree. — Stooben Rooben 00:30, 11 January 2009 (EST)
Trivia section perhaps? -- Son of Suns (talk)
I agree with Stumpers's suggestion to make an exception here. As for SoS's idea, I think a trivia section seems appropriate for such a minor reference, but if we do that, we would need to draw a line between major references mentioned in the main article, and minor references only put in the trivia section, and this is not good IMO. Strictly speaking, it is just a reference like any other. Time Questions 05:44, 11 January 2009 (EST)