MarioWiki:Featured articles/N3/Baby Mario

Support

 * 1) This article has been nominated featured multiple times, and it failed for a good reason too. However, all the errors that were present in the previous nomination are currently checked. There is no section stub anymore. It has been removed quite some time ago. And for those of you wondering about the Partners in Time section, I rewrote it and cleaned it up. I also proofread the article carefully and corrected any major errors I can find. Finally, the article has enough images to illustrate Baby Mario's roles in game. I believe this article is ready to be featured.

Oppose

 * 1) There are two things that immediately stand out to me: one is that the section on Super Mario-Kun (you forgot a hyphen there) does not inform the reader on what role Baby Mario actually plays in the comic. The other is that the cameos section lists games where Baby Mario does not make a notable appearance, even though pretty much every other article has individual sections for each of these games, and articles that do have a cameos section use it for listing a character's appearance in non-first-party games. The intro to the article also feels rather off to me, especially with the "created to be Mario as an infant" line. It just doesn't sound right. However, I think my biggest problem with the article is the overall style of writing. There are numerous sections and lines that I don't think go very well in the kind of articles that we want to have, such as in the Touch & Go section, with "Baby Mario rides Yoshi's back in the spin-off Nintendo DS game Yoshi Touch & Go" (unnecessary introduction), "Every mode starts similar to Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island with Kamek knocking Baby Mario off the Stork and taking Baby Luigi captive" (doesn't give context on these modes), in the Mario Golf section, with "In result, he is the strongest of all the default characters, yet he is the fourth weakest in the entire game" (seems overly specific), in the Mario Tennis Open section, with "After four years of absence regarding playability" (seems unnecessary), and I haven't even read the whole article yet. Another major problem is the inclusion of details that are either unnecessary in the covering of Baby Mario or stray from focusing on Baby Mario himself. "After defeating him, Kamek uses his power to make Baby Bowser very large", "[Baby Luigi] is saved by Yoshi and Baby Mario", "Bowser orders Kamek to kidnap the babies because with their combined power, Bowser is able to take over the universe", "[The Baby Mario and Yoshi Court] is mainly for speed characters, since it has the fastest ball speed, but a weak bounce", half of the section covering Mario Tennis (Game Boy Color) goes over the minigame named after Baby Mario, the Mario Kart DS section focuses more on Baby Park, and again, haven't read the whole article yet. If I can find all of these problems in the first half of the article, do you think that the second half is any better?
 * 2) - As GreenDisaster said, the Super Mario-Kun section needs expanding. And the Gallery header is empty as per the Empty Section Policy.
 * 3) Super Mario-Kun may be based mostly off the games but the fact is that there are differences and those differences need to be mentioned in the article otherwise the article is lacking information relevant to the character. Also obscurity is not a good reason to feature and article which lacks info.

Removal of Opposes
GreenDisaster
 * 1) The Super Mario-Kun is based off the games. It is not an entire story in its own, and its basic plot is already covered by aforementioned sections. Sure, there are a little tweaks here and there such as Mario and Luigi traveling to the past to stop Kamek, but overall, the story is pretty much unaltered from the original. You have to note that the Super Mario-Kun is a bit obscure and out of reach in Western Shores, so we don't know much about it anyway. I also split off the cameos into their own sections, so this fixes your problem of the cameos section. I also tweaked the intro a bit so it does not sound as strange as before. EDIT: I covered all of your recent problems with a little editing. All the focus around other characters and objects have been removed, with some parts reworded (such as changing passive tense to active tense). There's nothing much I can do about Mario Kart DS, since Baby Park certainly is Baby Mario's only appearance in Mario Kart DS, and it will remain that way. And yes, I removed several other focus-straying points you haven't mentioned, such as the one from Mario Superstar Baseball. And no, basing the problems in only one half of the article isn't completely covering the entire article since the other half covers personality and other stuff, but if there are any more problems, mention them in the comments and I'll do my best to fix them
 * 2) Per BLOP.

Tucayo
 * 1) Basically pering GreenDisaster, which the issues he mentioned I covered in my above support vote. I also covered the Empty Section Policy by adding a small gallery.
 * 2) Per the fiery infant.

Comments
I definitely agree with you. The page looks like it is in good shape, and I think it deserves to be featured article. GalaxyFan (talk) 21:48, 8 March 2013 (EST)
 * One thing for certain is that it is definitely better looking than before; the other times it got nominated, it was still a mess.

This may be a small problem, but didn't Baby Mario appear in the Super Mario Kun manga as well? Why don't I see it? 173.55.155.46 13:37, 9 March 2013 (EST)
 * Fixed
 * The section mentions that he plays a "large role" in the comics, but... what is it? All it tells us is essentially, "Baby Mario appears in this comic and this comic where he does stuff", which doesn't actually inform us.
 * I removed that part. All that's needed there is that the volume is based on the games. The games they are based on are already mentioned in the earlier parts of the article, so no further elaboration is required.
 * I also split off the cameos section and incorporated it in the main article, plus I tweaked the intro a little bit.

Oh, and another thing: do you think Mario needs a section in "Relationships with Other Characters"? 173.55.155.46 15:10, 10 March 2013 (EDT)
 * Maybe, but it's not as well-defined as Baby Luigi with Luigi.