MarioWiki:Featured articles/N1/Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga

Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga

Support

1. MATEOELBACAN (talk) This article it's much detailed,sections with high quality images,sidequests section complete,all the special movdes with a demostration,all the references are written and has much official artwork this must be a FA.
2. user:Super Luigi! i agree, because this is the first Mario & Luigi RPG game, and it it is a highly detailed article.
3. Fawfulfury65 (talk) Just enough images are in here now and everything is well written.
4. Baby Mario Bloops (talk) - There are more images (though a few more in the enemies/bosses section would kill you)!!! That was the only problem, so I think that I will support for a greatly typed article!!!
5. BabyLuigiOnFire (talk) After waiting, I say, YEAH!! This is great now, with the added images
6. Gamefreak75 (talk) States important features of the gmae, has official artowrk, and states intro/ending. Though it may have few grammatical errors, those can easily be fixed.
7. Marioguy1 (talk) - The article has many screenshots that are very fun to look at :P

Oppose

1. Super mario fan (talk) - The story section has untrue or weird sections that aren't in the game.
2. Redstar (talk) - The article is horribly written with run-on sentences, bad grammar, typos, and other mistakes. It is also riddled with needless information, such as trivia (since been cleaned up) and other fluff.

Removal of Supports

MATEOELBACAN, Super Luigi!, Fawfulfury65, Baby Mario Bloops, BabyLuigiOnFire, and Marioguy1

1. Redstar (talk) - How exactly is the article detailed? It's full of needless information, which does not constitute "detailed". Actual information is lacking. Images also do not make a good article. While having them makes the article "prettier", they are no substitute for useful information. Either back up your supports with better reasons or be faced with my proposal for removal.

Removal of Opposes

Super mario fan

1. Fawfulfury65 (talk) What sections are untrue? I found every section to be right from the game.
2. MATEOELBACAN (talk) Per Fawfulfury65,I see the same

Comments

So you all say that the article lacks on images,huh?...Then I'll add them!--MATEOELBACAN 16:10, 13 November 2009 (EST)

I added some pics in the story section! Fawfulfury65 (talk)

Thanks ^^--MATEOELBACAN 18:07, 24 November 2009 (EST) I added all the other Sidequests,now there are complete!--MATEOELBACAN 18:59, 26 November 2009 (EST)

Why do the images in this article look so dark compared to the others? BabyLuigiOnFire (talk)

No idea,say it to Fawfulfury95,but the one that I uploaded it's bright--MATEOELBACAN 08:24, 28 November 2009 (EST)

Those were the best I could find, but I can try to get better ones if you want. Fawfulfury65 (talk)

Please do it if you can--MATEOELBACAN 11:17, 28 November 2009 (EST)

There we go, 6 bright new pictures added to the story section! Fawfulfury65 (talk)

And I added other more!--MATEOELBACAN 13:50, 28 November 2009 (EST)

Also now I added a new section: References to Other Games!--MATEOELBACAN 17:11, 28 November 2009 (EST)

I've added a proposal to remove all supports unless each user provides more substantial reasons. Redstar 23:12, 28 November 2009 (EST)