MarioWiki:Featured articles/N1/Luigi

From the Super Mario Wiki


Luigi

Support

  1. Dude this artical rocks!!!!! If you don't choose it I will!!!!!!!! Mario Girl 00 (talk)
  2. Steam5 (talk)
  3. Joseph363 (talk)
  4. Luigi001 (talk)
  5. DaWeegeeMan (talk)
  6. White Knight (talk)
  7. Fantastic Mr. L (talk)
  8. Henrydamoose (talk)
  9. Luigiweegee (talk)
  10. Worldminus1 (talk)
  11. Dry Paratroopa (talk)
  12. Leirin (talk)
  13. Luigi 128 (talk)
  14. Evil Yugi
  15. Darkdonpatch (talk)
  16. Wonny2000 (talk)
  17. FUNKY RULZ!!!!!!!!!!
  18. Timmy Tim (talk)
  19. General bob-omb (talk)
  20. Baby Mario Bloops (talk)
  21. Cmario17 (talk)
  22. Bowser-omb (talk)
  23. MATEOELBACAN (talk)
  24. Lolcats124 (talk)
  25. Purplebackpack89 (talk)
  26. Supergoombabob (talk)
  27. User:Yoshionfire
  28. User:ohsnap!
  29. K-Luigi (talk)
  30. Ralphfan (talk)
  31. Kaleb12 (talk)
  32. Mario Fan 123 (talk)
  33. tonym101101 (talk)
  34. VCS777
  35. Mario Fan 123 (talk)

Oppose

  1. Fixitup Some sections seem mis-placed, some art is bad quality, and it isn't arranged in the same manner as many other articles are.
  2. Per above. Also, a length problem.Iceyoshi (talk)
  3. Wow, this article and the Bobomb article... They have both failed. The Super Princess Peach and Mario is Missing sections are too short, especially the mario is missing section because he is the main character. Really, I'm truly sorry for the mixup. I thought the article hasn't changed in 4 months Again sorry. I also have no idea what Finding Yoshi section is there doing in the middle of nowhere also the SPM section is a little too much... a little?Super mario fan (talk)
  4. Stumpers (talk) More information needs to be included about the DiC television shows. No mention of his role in the stories are mentioned. Right now it's just a list of shows and a mention of Luigi being more cautious there.
  5. Paper Jorge (talk) Like Stumpers said, it's just not long enough and it's notc complete with information. We're missing some stuff.
  6. Blitzwing (talk) - Lack of info on the Mario is Missing! section (It doesn't mention much except the premise, but then again the plot of the NES, Snes and PC versions are different) and jumpy writing ("In the end he saved Mario and was a hero!")
  7. Clay Mario (talk) Per Stumpers. Also, just because he is Luigi, doesn't mean he gets a FA. Only if the article has enough info and good quality.
  8. Time Q (talk): It's not organized according to our standards (history section!).
  9. Super Mario Bros. (talk) Although Luigi is an awesome character, his article is not. Fix up the problems stated by the other opposers and I will change my vote. I will also try to add good information to the article and help make it FA-worthy.
  10. Marioguy1 (talk) Too many fan-votes on the support side. Per all + get rid of the creative headers!
  11. SpriteYoshi (talk)Per Marioguy
  12. Tucayo (talk) - Per all, I hope we beat Fans
  13. BabyLuigiOnFire (talk) Per all. I like Luigi, but I dislike fan votes. Plus there are too many red links
  14. Lemmy Koopa Fan (talk) Per all. the Mario is Missing, Super Mario World Show, and the entire spin-off section needs alot of work. Plus there are alot of votes saying stuff like "he's freakin' Luigi!" and variations.
  15. Fawfulfury65 (talk) Way more can be added in the Super Mario World TV show section.
  16. Booderdash (talk) This actually became a fa? Good thing it was unfeatuered! This article is missing some places where he appeared, and is stubby in some other cases.
  17. Panchito Images are placed badly throughout the whole article.
  18. User:Reversinator"This article or section is under construction. Therefore, please excuse its informal appearance while it's being worked on. We hope to have it completed as soon as possible." That's breaking a rule, thus this can't be a featured article.
  19. 4DJONG (talk) Look at the "Super Mario World (TV series)" section it is extremely short, and I also agree with what Time Q in that the history section needs to be reorganized to meet our standards.
  20. LeftyGreenMario (talk) Changing vote again. This article needs more images IMO. Besides, do I see a construction template?
  21. KS3 (talk) The first support vote was a fan vote. AND DID YOU GUYS READ THE NEW FA RULES!!! There are a few reasons why. First, I hate Luigi. Second, Per all who oppose. Third, people vandalize this page (there was this guy in December or something who vandalized Luigi so it says he is gay and retarded). Fourth, there is a construction template. Fifth, there are not enough images. Sixth, a lot of sections need expanding. Seventh, this article is outright bad. Another Example of a bad article (Boo, Mario, Mario (series), Yoshi's Story, and Castle Bleck are all examples).
  22. Commander Code-8 (talk) The section Super Princess Peach and Super Mario Galaxy are just one sentence at a time, therefore making it unsuitable to be a Featured Article at this stage.
  23. MasterKoopa (talk) Per all, it pales a bit in comparison to the other featured articles.

Removal of Oppose Votes

Comments

I think this article need perhaps an image of Luigi in Hotel Mario and maybe less red link. Other than that, it's definitely a good article. MUCH better than what it was two months ago. --Blitzwing 07:16, 10 April 2008 (EDT)

Uh, just as a side-note... there are Quote Pages, per this proposal. So... Before completley deleting all those perfectly good quotes, make a quote page. InfectedShroom (talk)

Many of Luigi's quotes have been moved to extra pages, so do you still have any reason to oppose, Toadette? Time Q (talk) 06:18, 12 April 2008 (EDT)

Hmm... I'm gonna look over this page really well before I vote. Supposedly it's better, but I'll make sure. :P InfectedShroom (talk)

Done revising. Looks good to me. InfectedShroom (talk)

Fixitup, you should be more specific and give examples. I think your statements don't really help the supporters to improve the article. Which sections are misplaced, which images are of bad quality, and what exactly should be arranged in a different way? Time Q (talk) 15:31, 14 April 2008 (EDT)

Other than pointing out what images are of bad quality, I will easily do everything else you suggested. Why though? Right? Well you see, if I were to have to point out the images, that would show how useless they even are. So, I think it's safe to say anyone on here should know what a bad image is... You know what, they probably don't so here's some examples:

  • 1. Is the image cropped from an original version?
  • 2. Does the image contain a site logo?
  • 3. Is the image altered from it's original size?
  • 4. Is the image blotchy blurry, or just plain bad looking?
  • 5. Is the image placed somewhere in the article where it overlaps a heading, another, image, or text that is off alignment?

Those all are great examples of the images found on the Luigi article. (All of these include screen-shots and artwork)

As for how it's set up, just refer to another character article. Daisy's page, for example, has up-to-date information, even if it's old news. It also has an order of sections which follow other pages that are in accordance.Fixitup

Hmm... I can only find four images that apply to your "rules." I'll get to work on them. InfectedShroom (talk)
Oh, I think not.

You see how the babies screenshot is going into the side of Captured Kamek? That shows that the image does not fit properly, therefore the way it is set up or the size needs to be adjusted. You see how the DK screenshot is very small, and has almost more text than imagery? Not only that, it overlaps as well. It shouldn't even be here.

See that? The image is already spaced out, and it still doesn't fit. Also, one thing I want to point out is the fact all of these sections speak of what has happened with Luigi, but none of them refer to any of the video-games the paragraphs are about. How is someone supposed to know when any of this is going on if it's all written as if it happened in the real world?

This first problem is on this page a bit too. You see how even the smallest amount of text going past an image can look weird if it's not another paragraph? Also, look at this image. This is completely cropped from a screen-shot. This doesn't count as art or a screen-shot. It's nothing. This needs to be replaced by official Paper MArio art, or a good screenshot of Luigi.

[[5]] This is probably one of the lowest quality screenshot son the entire page. Seriously, he's playable throughout the game, get a good shot of him. What... what's this? Is this an edited image? It's definitely not qualified to be a screenshot, and weather it makes a good example or not doesn't mean it should be here. You see what's wrong here, right? Yeah, you should by now. :)

First problem is an opinion being stated in an images description. Different or not, calling it odd is your own opinion. Next, this is seen around the beginning too, as the image is higher than it should be. Finally, another image overlapping. Fixitup

Alright, that's just what I wanted in the first place. I will work on all of that stuff. InfectedShroom (talk) I already edited this image, see the edited version here.
Good change, very good. Fixitup
Alright, one question, about the titles of each section. I understand what you are trying to say, but I want to clarify. A section needs a title that is of the game. So, for example, "Captured by Kamek" would be changed to "Yoshi's Island DS." Am I correct? InfectedShroom (talk)
Nnnoooo-.. You would change the sections wording to clarify what game it is talking about. Fixitup
Alright. InfectedShroom (talk)

Alright, Fixitup, I think I fixed the article. Could you please tell me your opinion? InfectedShroom (talk)

I vote for the removal of the following votes: WaluigiRocks' (fan vote), Jaffffey's (fan vote), Byfordej's (fan vote), Meat Knight's (fan vote), and Glitchman's (sorry, Glitch, but those are both fan votes. Reason for removal: Per two fan votes). InfectedShroom (talk)

Opposed. At least for Byfordej, you definitely can't tell whether it refers to the character or the article. (Of course the former is more likely, but you can't just assume things.) Time Q (talk) 07:51, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

Super mario fan: Please explain your vote. What exactly is messed up? In its current form, your oppose is invalid. Time Q (talk) 14:34, 15 June 2008 (EDT)

IceYoshi, will you please clarify your oppose? You don't specify if the article is too long or too short and you don't specify which parts are so. You oppose is thus invalid. Stumpers (talk) 12:11, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Well, he "perred" Fixitup, so his oppose is only invalid if Fixitup's one is. Time Q (talk) 15:51, 1 July 2008 (EDT)
Ice Yoshi explained what he meant on another FA page: he means that the article is too long. No policy backs up this opinion so the only thing keeping his vote there is the per of Fixitup. Stumpers (talk) 20:52, 21 July 2008 (EDT)

They put in stuff about Super Mario armadaLuigi3000 (talk)

I added a little to the super princess peach and mario is missing articles but it's not much. DaWeegeeMan (talk)

I really don't understand most of the oppose votes. Fixitup (or FD09, whatever): saying refer to any other character article doesn't help users if you ask me. Ice Yoshi: again, just perred Fixitup and, as Stumpers said, an article being too long is not valid. Super Mario Fan: Those sections have been expanded. Paper Jorge: Should we just take your vote as "per Stumpers" or do you mean something else when you say We're missing "some stuff"? Blitzwing: I THINK I fixed that after I read your oppose. So anyway, could these oppose votes please be explained, or do I need to vote for removal of oppose votes? White Knight (talk)

That place is awesome! Toad4566 (talk)

I want Luigi3000,Mario321,Luigi519,Big-bang,Roshipower,Luigifreakinrocks124's votes removed I don't hate Luigi but those votes say nothing about the article Dark Lakitu 789 (talk)

Actually, we don't remove the supporters' votes. Ever. There was a proposal about it one time, but we instead decided to enable the deletion of only the opposers' votes. Soooo... They're not gonna be removed. Sorry. :P InfectedShroom (talk)

If Mario isn't a featured article, why should Luigi? For the fan votes who are saying Luigi is Mario's brother. Booderdash (talk)

Please do not question the character; Mario is not a featured article nor will he ever be. Mario's article however is a different story. Marioguy1 (talk)
As you can see here, SolarBlaze gave me permission to do this! Marioguy1 (talk)

what the hell lol half the votes for Support are "Luigi ruels lets feature him!!!" Super-Yoshi (talk)

Time Q, can't I remove support votes with SolarBlaze's permission; He is an admin! Marioguy1 (talk)
I see he gave you permission to do it, but that was wrong information, sorry. You can't remove those votes. Why would you want, anyway? The nomination has way more than the required 5 supporters either way. Time Q (talk)

I talked about thin sunject in ·mwikistaff and they gave me permission to delete all fan votes Tucayo (talk)

I don't know who or what "thin sunject" is, or who gave you permission, but removing support votes is not allowed according to our rules. Please accept that. What harm do they do, anyway? Time Q (talk)

4DJONG voted 2 times (#44 and #56).Can I remove one of his votes?Dark Lakitu 789 (talk)

Removing support votes is not allowed. Even if he did vote twice, it wouldn't really matter. This nomination is not going to pass because the article has not yet met the qualifications that an F.A. has to meet. Super Mario Bros. (talk)
Uh, yes, of course he shouldn't vote twice. Thanks for noticing. Time Q (talk)

I thought that my first one was deleted sorry. 4DJONG (talk)

Too many of the votes deleted were fan votes and shouldn't have been tossed Purplebackpack89 00:14, 23 November 2009 (EST)

Can we please delete these fan votes? There are a lot of them. – Ralphfan (talk)

If they refer to the article then no, we can't, and there's no reason why we should. Time Q (talk)

KS3: I said this in the Boo nomination: this was before the new rules was put into regulation. BabyLuigiOnFire (talk)

The first vote is not valid. Can we delete the nomination then? Tucayo (talk)

Please do. I can't believe this is still here after almost two years. Reversinator (talk)
It was perfectly valid when it was put, and it still is. Time Q (talk)
Just because it includes the word "artical"? (Not even spelled correctly....) Sorry to say this, but that's a fanboy (girl) vote and it doesn't say why the "artical rocks". This is leading to a proposal. Tucayo (talk)

It has a rewriting and expanding template now... does that not mean it can't be featured? Lemmy Koopa Fan (talk)

Well, that's kind of unclear. Articles can't be nominated when they have such templates, but it's not that clear what happens when someone puts those templates on an article that is already nominated. Usually, the nomination is not deleted then. Time Q (talk)