MarioWiki:Featured articles/N4/Princess Peach

Princess Peach

Support

1. Ashley and Red (talk)OK. This article is full of info, and I reviewed jt by myself, it covers all her appearances. The article is well written, all in present tense, plus, have a good amount of images. The relationships article looks well divided, in this way. Her "Etymology/Name" section covers all the necessary info, and I can't find speculation anywhere. The article growed up since the last nomination (made by me, and the unfeature by me too). I also want to give special attention to the best sections, The Paper Mario and the Mario & Luigi ones, that are very well detailed. I also added more "Other Appearances" that were lacking, and made minor edits here and there. Oh, by the way, the Mario Party and the Mario Kart sections look trimmed enough, and detailed at the same time.
2. Smash Bros (talk)
3. +-~Rosetta~-+ (talk)
4. Floette (talk)
5. LucinaSuitSamus (talk)
6. The Mario Gamer (talk)
7. Toadbrigade5 (talk)
8. Megamario15 (talk)
9. 57sugoi (talk)
10. Raven_Peach (talk)

Oppose

1. Time Turner (talk) I have to disagree about the amount of images; there are a ridiculous number of sections that simply do not have images, even when they're easily accessed. There are plenty of sections that are short, and I understand that being a damsel in distress doesn't give itself to much information, but having so many sections like this make the article look off, and there are sections like the Mario Tennis series and the Mario Golf series that you'd think there'd be more info for. At least SMRPG, SSBB, and the M&L series have tense issues, the Paper Mario series' writing is really off (PM shows no demonstration of time nor connection between events, TTYD simply needs a rewrite along with a more concise view on Peach, SPM steps too far into flowery writing, and PMSS seems really short while still not focusing on Peach), her alternate outfits are needlessly divided and given way too much attention, the personality strings a bunch of unrelated events together in order to form some semblance of an actual personality (and it doesn't even mention the RPG's!)... This is not an article that should be featured.
2. Boo4761 (talk) Per Time Turner. Most of the sections have no images and are short. This is one of those articles that need more images, but don't have the template.
3. 3D Player 2004 (talk) Per all.

Comments

@TimeTurner, I will do the fixes in the clothing section, I think I ill leave just the main clothes info and put the rest in the "others" section. About SPM, I think the write isn't flowery, but I can't talk about PMTTYD 'cause I never played it....Images are the easiest to add, and the SMRGP section...well, I don't know, for me looks okay. The MLSS needs a review, yeah User:Ashley anEoTselkie/sig

Fixing the tense isssues right now. Would anyone mind on helping me by fixing some spelling issues or ading images?User:Ashley anEoTselkie/sig

Ummm... so, my vote is still here, but the description that I gave (per all) is gone. What happened? Megamario15 - The REAL Mario (talk) 19:34, 8 January 2015 (EST)

Supports on featured article nominations don't get reasons, simple as that. If someone does write something, it gets removed. All that's needed is your username to be listed. Hello, I'm Time Turner.

OK. I see. Thank you. Megamario15 - The REAL Mario (talk) 19:57, 8 January 2015 (EST)