MarioWiki:Featured articles/N3/Super Mario 3D World: Difference between revisions
From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
m (→Oppose) |
Boo Diddly (talk | contribs) (→Oppose) |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
#{{User|TheFlameChomp}} I agree with Baby Luigi. | #{{User|TheFlameChomp}} I agree with Baby Luigi. | ||
#{{User|Owencrazyboy9}} Per both. Other than those major issues, everything else on the article is written nicely. It's just that those major sections are causing me to oppose. | #{{User|Owencrazyboy9}} Per both. Other than those major issues, everything else on the article is written nicely. It's just that those major sections are causing me to oppose. | ||
#{{User|Boo4761}} Large amounts of the article are lists. If we change those to what Baby Luigi said, maybe it could be worthy of featured status. | |||
==== Removal of opposes ==== | ==== Removal of opposes ==== | ||
==== Comments ==== | ==== Comments ==== | ||
Revision as of 16:40, February 21, 2017
Super Mario 3D World
Support
- Supermariofan67 (talk) - This article is very well-written, has no red links, and has a lot of info.
Oppose
- Baby Luigi (talk) The list of enemies, bosses, and objects irk me. I strongly believe that enemies here may need visual representations of themselves, because the average viewer may not know what a Splounder or a Flopter looks like because the enemy is never named in game and it forces viewers to click on a lot of articles until they finally get a visual picture of the character from clicking on the correct article or a name-guess. Besides, other featured articles list their enemies and objects, namely the Donkey Kong Country series articles, an example being Donkey Kong Country 2: Diddy's Kong Quest. Addutionally, the reception section is half-assed, with no table, no Metacritic score, and some weasel-worded like criticisms, like its second, unsourced paragraph. Also, the gameplay paragraph can be rewritten. Having some enemies from Super Mario World, for example, does not exactly constitute as "elements from Super Mario World making a return". The gameplay section goes to great lengths explaining what makes a return from what previous game, when its priority is to first explain the general gameplay of how Mario functions; there's always first time viewers who may not know prior Mario information so this confuses potential first time readers and forces them to jump all over the wiki to know the full context of games. Therefore, that general gameplay should be talked about first, how the game plays, how Mario works, THEN it should list if those said elements of this game originate from a previous Mario game.
- TheFlameChomp (talk) I agree with Baby Luigi.
- Owencrazyboy9 (talk) Per both. Other than those major issues, everything else on the article is written nicely. It's just that those major sections are causing me to oppose.
- Boo4761 (talk) Large amounts of the article are lists. If we change those to what Baby Luigi said, maybe it could be worthy of featured status.
