MarioWiki:Featured articles/N1/Diddy Kong: Difference between revisions
From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
Fawfulfury65 (talk | contribs) (→Oppose) |
(→Oppose) |
||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
#{{User|Superfiremario}} Per all. | #{{User|Superfiremario}} Per all. | ||
#{{User|Fawfulfury65}} The first section of the article I read needed a bit of work, so I can easily assume others do too (although I could be wrong). Plus, unless I'm going blind, there's no powers and abilities section. Like Reversinator said, <nowiki><be clear=all></nowiki> needs to be used around the article. The images look cluttered and it makes the article look messy. | #{{User|Fawfulfury65}} The first section of the article I read needed a bit of work, so I can easily assume others do too (although I could be wrong). Plus, unless I'm going blind, there's no powers and abilities section. Like Reversinator said, <nowiki><be clear=all></nowiki> needs to be used around the article. The images look cluttered and it makes the article look messy. | ||
#{{User|Jbsunshine124}} Per Fawfulfury65 | |||
==== Removal of Support/Opposes ==== | ==== Removal of Support/Opposes ==== | ||
Revision as of 15:44, August 6, 2011
Diddy Kong
Support
- DKPetey99 (talk) After hard editing, I feel this page is perfect. It has more than a decent amount of images and I feel no sections are missing info. I feel the Mario Kart section is the best out of all of them. I just added pictures and expanded the Donkey Konga section and added the Game Appearances table.
- LeftyGreenMario (talk)
Oppose
- Reversinator (talk) Half of the sections are missing images, and at the same time, all the images that are there are cluttering the article. <br clear=all> should be used in there. Also, the article is in the past tense when it should be in the present tense. Also, a few of the sentances are too fancy, such as "Trouble once again brewed in Donkey Kong 64. King K. Rool, hungry for revenge, attempts to attack Donkey Kong Island."
- Yoshiwaker (talk) - Per Reversinator, and a lot of the sections could use more info.
- Superfiremario (talk) Per all.
- Fawfulfury65 (talk) The first section of the article I read needed a bit of work, so I can easily assume others do too (although I could be wrong). Plus, unless I'm going blind, there's no powers and abilities section. Like Reversinator said, <be clear=all> needs to be used around the article. The images look cluttered and it makes the article look messy.
- Jbsunshine124 (talk) Per Fawfulfury65
Removal of Support/Opposes
Reversinator
- DKPetey99 (talk) Firstly, half of the images are not missing sections. Maybe only a quarter of the page is missing images, maybe even less. Tense is consistent and I have no problem with "fancy" sentences. Show me the rule that says that is not allowed. Though, those "fancy" sentences were fixed.
- LeftyGreenMario (talk) Look at my comment. If an article is written like a story (hence, fancy sentences), many people consider it to be biased, too flowery, and poorly written. Just because it isn't in the rules doesn't mean it is good or bad. The rules aren't everything; they are just basic guidelines. Anyway, I don't see any problem with this article, since I fixed most of the stuff.
Comments
Opposers: The article isn't written like a story anymore (like fancy sentences), I removed images that are cluttering sections, and I fixed the tense. There is an adequate amount of images in the article. Please specify which sections need information or else your vote is not valid. LeftyGreenMario (talk)
