MarioWiki:Featured articles/N2/Super Mario Odyssey

Super Mario Odyssey

Support

1. Mari0fan100 (talk) Ever since this article failed to be a featured article last year, it's gotten lots of improvements. There are no red links and no improvement tags. There is no flowery/informal writing, and the entire article is very organized. The New Enemies column, the Returning Enemies column, whenever an enemy can be captured or not, the number of Power Moons needed to power up the Odyssey in a certain kingdom, etc. They're all very organized. Additionally, Doomhiker just added in the critical reception this game gets. Factoring all that in, this article is now ready to become a featured article.

Oppose

1. Super Radio (talk) see comment
2. Doomhiker (talk) Changing my mind as per Super Radio, Super Mario Odyssey's page and sister pages are not complete for multiple reasons. There is some good sister pages such as Peronza Plaza, but there are a lot more that need to be made and improved, and SMO's page is not finished for multiple reasons listed by Super Radio in the comments.

Comments

I am nearly done, but it is not finished. There is a couple of sections that need tables, so I personally think that it is currently unfinished. The reason that I am not opposing is that I may be able to finish the page soon, however this nomination should of been delayed a bit longer. Doomhiker (talk) 14:59, 2 February 2019 (EST)

Uuh, where to start:

• there sure as heck is more to say about the gameplay.
• most sections regarding elements in the game are just galleries. The article shows images of characters such as Talkatoo and Pauline, implying they appear in the game, but what role do they have exactly? We may never know, unless we visit their respective pages, but you know, that takes time. If you were a regular reader looking for brief information about elements in a video game, wouldn't it be more convenient to just scroll through the page and see them all in one place? A featured article shouldn't just look nice (although honestly this can't be said about half of this page); it should have enough information in it to satisfy as many interests as possible.
• although it doesn't exactly concern the article, and some people might comment that this is not something to worry about, this article's sister pages are... well, of mixed quality. Look at the Kingdom template. See how many red links there are? Information on Super Mario Odyssey stuff is far from being covered in its entirety, with some pages being too stubby and others non-existent. I never liked it when a page of good quality about a game entices me to look for more detailed information about an element in it, only to stumble upon a stub lazily slapped in there to meet a quota.

There's some fundamental issues that need to be solved on this page if you want it to have a chance to be featured in the first place. Then there's an even longer way of maintaining good info on as many aspects of the game as possible, both on the page and on its sister articles, until everything feels like it could satisfy you as a reader. Don't do it just because no article has been featured in a while. -- -- KOOPA CON CARNE 16:08, 2 February 2019 (EST)

Also, the wildlife section is just a good ol' classic list. How do you know nobody just came up with or erroneously added something in it? I've honestly seen this before. When I touched up the Mario vs. Donkey Kong: Tipping Stars page, the Objects section listed things that weren't even in the game, and were probably just copy-pasted from the Mario vs. Donkey Kong: Mini-Land Mayhem! page, while others were listed multiple times under different names. A good way to prove whether something is in the game or not is by taking screenshots and adding them to their respective element in the list. -- -- KOOPA CON CARNE 16:16, 2 February 2019 (EST)

I don't want to vote yet, but I'd like to point out that the "Clothing," "Glitches," and "Staff" sections violate MarioWiki:Empty sections. Scrooge200 (talk) 16:12, 2 February 2019 (EST)