MarioWiki:Featured articles/N1/Pinna Park

From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search

Pinna Park


  1. KS3 (talk) This is a great article with a minimal amount of errors and lots of pics.
  2. Mr bones (talk)
  3. Commander Code-8 (talk)
  4. Fuzzipede27 (talk)
  5. New Super Mario (talk)


  1. Bloc Partier (talk) -- The article has poor, immature writing. It's all simple sentences and simple word choice. Plus, the images all need captions.
  2. Reversinator (talk) Per Blocky, plus it also has some useless info.
  3. MrConcreteDonkey (talk) Per Bloc Partier, also many sections are short and not enough detail is provided.
  4. Baby Mario Bloops (talk) - I have to admit, it does look a lot better than before. Yet, some stuff can still be improved with the word choice. Also, the beach image at the beginning of the page doesn't fit there. Other than that, it is pretty good.
  5. LeftyGreenMario (talk) It can use an information box at the beginning.
  6. Booderdash (talk) Per all.

Removal of Oppose Votes


What's wrong with simple sentences? What if a whole article was written something like this: Pinna Park at this point in time is an amusement park due to the fact that it has a ferris wheel in the middle of the park. At a later date all of a sudden, Bowser Jr. makes use of ElectroKoopas to take in possession of the the park due to the fact during that time there is no doubt but that Mario is going to take Bowser Jr. into defeat, owing to the fact that Mario is in possession with E Gadd's new innovation, the FLUDD, until such time as Bowser Jr. made an escape. Okay, I know that's is not how it goes, but my, isn't that easy to comprehend?LeftyGreenMario (talk)

Well, if you took that from the article, the problem is that the sentences are not so great. There are a few comma mistakes just in that quote. I guess the simple sentences part is a bit harsh, but I still see room for sentence improvement. There are mistakes, unclear statements, and very dull language. For an article to be featured, it has to be the best of the best; without better word choice, this article is not in the best of the best. Bloc Partier (talk)
I wasn't intending to write good sentences. I just wanted to make up the stringiest sentence possible so you can see that simple sentences are better than these types of sentences (I don't see any comma errors anyway). This article is not very exciting to read, though; I agree with you on dull sentences. LeftyGreenMario (talk)
Well, there were errors... Either way, I'm glad we agree. Bloc Partier (talk)
Well, people fixed a few errors. I don't see anymore... KS3 (talk)
Lacks any form of references. Looking at the requirements for being a featured article on this Wiki: "…be sourced with all available sources and Mario-related appearances." Clearly, the lack of references tells us that this article cannot be featured quality by the standards put in place and should be failed if this is not fixed. - NARCE 03:25, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
And a bunch of featured articles needs to be unfeatured because of that.
Are you asking if many FAs need to be demoted due to failing a necessary component of being an FA? Then, yes. A resounding yes. - NARCE 04:35, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
If your rules are applied, we will have no FAs left. KS3 (talk)
It's not my rules, it's the rules used to decide what articles are featured quality. But anyway, yes, we will have featured articles by the fact that if the improvements are made, they can stay featured. - NARCE 23:34, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
@NARCE: Just give a rest, you could say that on all the articles at the rate of your criation stuff. Not everything has to have 100 sources/references. Baby Mario Bloops (talk)

Hm... Maybe someone could add a location infobox or something... - Edofenrir (talk)