MarioWiki:Featured articles/N2/Princess Daisy

Support

 * 1) It's a good page,with detailed sections. It's very pretty written.I think that if Baby Daisy is featured,Daisy need to be too.

Oppose

 * 1) Read through the article and did some minor research and it's said that Daisy appears in Super Mario-Kun, and whilst the FA rule of coverage says full isn't needed it does at least need a bit of it, probably talking about her role in the comic.
 * 2) Per Yoshi876.

Removal of Opposes

 * 1) Removal of the only two because there's no proof anyone has provided on the matter of the subject, so the can't count it against her article when including it would be a form of speculation with nothing to even say. Aka ridiculous opposes.
 * 2) Removal this opposes please,they are ridiculous.And the Super	Mario-Kun secfion is gone.As @UhuhalrightDaisy,they are aka ridiculous opposes.

Comments
Okay, so there's an improvement template. Before you opposers point this out, you need to figure out WHY there is an improvement template; otherwise, the improvement template's simply being there is a feeble reason to oppose.

I've dealt with the Mario Party series section and attempted the Relationships section, so that's some progress.

Yakuman DS, Mario Kart Arcade GP 2 and Mario Party-e have been inserted into the article. Additionally, the Mario & Sonic at the London 2012 Olympic Games has been given its own section, although it might need some condensing. Finally, the Gallery section has been filled. I'd like to think all that's left now is the Mario Golf: World Tour and Mario & Sonic at the Sochi 2014 Olympic Winter Games sections to be added, and then the article just requires a thorough proofread to rid it of possible spelling and grammar mistakes.

The Mario Golf: World Tour and Mario & Sonic at the Sochi 2014 Olympic Winter Games sections have been added, and I've given the article a thorough read, fixing everything I found wrong. So I'm inclined to support now.

@UhHuhAlrightDaisy The thing is, one of the requirements for featured articles is for it to have a reasonable amount of information from all sources and appearances. So lacking both sections would have a lethal effect on its worthiness of being featured as it fails to meet that requirement.
 * I didn't mention that the sections needed to be fleshed out with information. All I said is that Daisy needs a simple section on her appearance in those games. If she lacks even one sentence of that section, the article is incomplete, and we don't want that. Basically, what Icemario11 said.


 * Now, I may do a proofread of the article and see if the spelling and grammar is good enough.
 * The article still has a decent amount of errors such as italics errors. The enemies section is also dubious and needs slight expansion (maybe regarding Tatanga and Bowser?).
 * From what I can tell, Daisy doesn't interact much with either of them, and there wouldn't be too much to say especially in Tatanga's case.
 * Which is why I said "slight". There may be some interactions in non-game media, so that's still open.
 * Other media was what I ended up using for Tatanga since there's hardly much to go on for him otherwise. Bowser had enough game interaction for me to use that for him, so that's what I ended up doing.

@Yoshi876 Where did you find out Daisy appears in Super Mario-Kun?
 * He didn't read the article, is the thing. He looked at the old unfeature info and nothing else. That info was removed months ago. Clearly just someone who doesn't want the article featured for anything they think is a reason. UhHuhAlrightDaisy (talk) 23:16, 26 November 2013 (EST)
 * I have some scans of Super Mario-Kun, and Daisy does appear. I'm not sure exactly which volume, but she's there.
 * @UhHuhDaisy I'm fine with any article being featured as long as it has all the content, and seeing as Daisy does appear in Super Mario-Kun that needs to have some info, I'm fine with what her role is considering that Super Mario Kun is an obscure thing to get.
 * But we don't know that she does. There's no proof of it, that's why the info was removed, so your oppose needs to be removed. UhHuhAlrightDaisy (talk) 15:55, 27 November 2013 (EST)
 * Three sections up from this comment says she does appear, so my oppose stays.
 * Someone on here saying she does appear doesn't make it a fact. Are you trolling right now? UhHuhAlrightDaisy (talk) 15:58, 27 November 2013 (EST)
 * No, but someone on here who possesses volumes does make it fact.
 * I've looked through Super Mario-kun while I didn't look through each comic, I never found her in the many I had. So until they post the proof as opposed to saying they have it it's not a fact which is why your oppose is invalid. UhHuhAlrightDaisy (talk) 16:27, 27 November 2013 (EST)
 * Well she says she has scans that have her in it, and seeing as Lefty has no reason to lie, especially since she's supporting the nomination I'm heavily inclined to believe her and so my oppose shall stay.
 * There's no problem, guys. If we can see the scans that have Daisy in it then there is a valid reason to oppose. If we can't, due to lack of evidence, I'm afraid the opposes will go. Let's give it some time, there's no need to rush a nomination. --
 * The biggest problem is my sharing device that stores the scans somehow stopped working, so I can't access whatever I had.
 * Can you even name what volumes she appears in so others can investigate? UhHuhAlrightDaisy (talk) 12:00, 1 December 2013 (EST)

On a separate note, why is her relaitonship section a big bunch? Do other character pages do it like this now? UhHuhAlrightDaisy (talk) 12:48, 1 December 2013 (EST)
 * Yeah, there was a proposal to condense the relationship sections.

Removal since Lefty is just stalling the nomination. Lefty is stalling these few weeks and will be off the hook since he'll finally have a legit excuse to stall when Christmas week comes.

Can no one see his filibuster here? Obviously, he could give another user a torrent, but refuses to since he loves to stall.

if he has time for gameFAQs [which he has been posting on quite often, recently] then it obviously means he is not making this his online priority and is thus stalling a proposal to make it null and void.

As such, a time limit shall be given to him as VP. The time limit is by next Friday, December 13. If no such evidence is presented, opposals shall accordingly be removed to progress Daisy's nomination.