MarioWiki:Featured articles/N2/Paper Mario

Paper Mario

Support

1. MarioMario456 (talk) 155KB and no red links.
2. Gabumon (talk) - The rewrite template was outdated and has been removed. All issues that resulted in the article's previous unfeaturing have been addressed and corrected, and the article now offers extensive and sufficient coverage of all aspects of the game. There is a reasonable amount of red links (one). The article meets the standard for being featured now. The one remaining issue is the lack of a critical reception section, which is not strictly necessary for an article to become featured and can easily be added in the future.

Oppose

1. Alex95 (talk) If lack of red links is your only reason, I'm gonna say no. The page currently has a rewrite template and a construction template at the top, which goes against the rules for nomination. See also: MarioWiki:Featured Articles/Unfeature/N1/Paper Mario
2. Owencrazyboy9 (talk) I agree. Having a rewrite or construction template on the page is against the nomination rules. Also, I spotted a red link. Per Alex95.
3. Luigi 64DD (talk) Per all.
4. Yoshi876 (talk) The article is still undergoing work to fix the issues it had when it became unfeatured. It's in no state to be re-featured at this current time.
5. Baby Luigi (talk) Article size has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the article. If that were the case, Yoshi would be candidate for a featured article but as it is currently, it is a cesspool of bad and flowery, biased writing. The article still has a construction tag and a rewrite template on the top of the page, and it irks me that you didn't give a crap about the rules, which explicitly forbid nominating articles with those tags up (which have their own stories to tell that I won't go over, but are there for a reason). Read the guidelines first before you make nominations that fail on the very first and clear rule.
6. Toadette the Achiever (talk) Per all. Length does not always guarantee good writing.
7. Bazooka Mario (talk) In the future, you need to review our rules before you nominate articles like this. There is an impressive amount of work poured in, but it remains that this article is incomplete. Please be more careful in the future.
8. Boo4761 (talk) First of all, there is a rewrite template on the top, second, Article size has nothing to do with its quality. Lastly, this article is largely incomplete and we are still working on the issues that got it unfeatured. You have clearly never read the guidelines for nominating articles, can you please read it in the future?

Comments

While I agree that the article is still unfinished, I feel like I should mention that the reasons listed on the unfeature page apply to an outdated version of this article. I've performed an extensive rewrite of the article last April that addressed those reasons, thus the version of the article that was unfeatured does not exist anymore.

I believe that, as soon as the storyline summary has been rewritten and a final check has been performed, the page will be up to featured standard. - Gabumon (talk)

The only major thing I've seen that needs to be rewritten is the staff section, where it's just an excerpt of the staff page and we discourage that An example on how it would ideally look like is this. And I think this article would benefit from a reception section, as that's starting become the norm. Otherwise, I think it would be fine to take off that rewrite tag. The only issues I see are minor ones. Ray Trace^(T|C) 20:23, 1 March 2017 (EST)