MarioWiki:Featured articles/N/Mario vs. Donkey Kong 2: March of the Minis

Mario vs. Donkey Kong 2: March of the Minis

"Mario vs. Donkey Kong 2: March of the Minis" was nominated for featured article status on May 3, 2026, 22:07 (UTC). If the nomination does not pass by July 2, 2026, 22:07 (UTC), it will be considered failed.

"Mario vs. Donkey Kong 2: March of the Minis" has met FA status requirements on May 14, 2026, 02:11 (UTC), and it will become a featured article on May 20, 2026, 21:11 (UTC) if unopposed.

Current time: May 14, 2026, 06:37 (UTC)

Support

1. ThePowerPlayer (talk) This article now meets all of the requirements for a featured article; compare it with the Mario vs. Donkey Kong article, which I previously successfully nominated for featured status, to see how this article is of comparable quality. The intro paragraph is detailed and does a good job at explaining this game, its gameplay, and other notable elements like the focus on the Mini toys and the return of Pauline. The rest of the article is also well-written and thoroughly detailed. Every section has at least one paragraph that summarizes its content, such as openings to describe tables for levels, objects, and enemies, as well as a synopsis of critical reception toward the game. All sections also have representative and properly captioned images. There are no red links or improvement templates, and all points that require additional veracity (including all of the game's release dates and names in other languages) are cited when appropriate. To my knowledge, there isn't anything remaining to be done to significantly improve the article any further.
2. Rykitu (talk) Per ThePowerPlayer. This is very thorough. Nice job!
3. Yoshi vs. Paper (talk) Per ThePowerPlayer. You did an amazing job on improving the article!
4. Killer Moth (talk) Per ThePowerPlayer. The article is very thorough and well written. Great work!
5. Power Flotzo (talk) As the person who created most of the level articles for this game, per all.
6. Camwoodstock (talk) Nicely done! Our only real complaint is a petty gripe we had that we would've done the level table differently from how we did it originally, but, nothing a bit of regex and grit can't fix, we went ahead and took care of that ourselves! With that dealt with, we now feel confident in giving a support; not a single citation missing in sight, the page is fully-featured down to the citations and the tables (our area of expertise) check out per our style guide.