MarioWiki:Featured articles/Unfeature/N1/Dimentio

Remove Featured Article Status

 * 1) Everything seems to be fixed, but the very last section needs images very badly.
 * 2) Some of the images are in bad quality.
 * 3) Per all. I think this article sucks!
 * 4) Per Doopliss42.
 * 5) Per SWFlash.
 * 6) Dimentio isn't a big enough character in the Mario Series. Why should he be a Featured Article when he's only been in SPM, while characters like Yoshi, who have made appearances in countless Mario games, are going unfeatured? (Also Per Doopliss42)

Keep Featured Article Status

 * As I said earlier, I went ahead and corrected the article's errors, so I'm going to go ahead and place my vote on keeping its Featured Article status.
 * This article has good quality. It's a pretty decent size, has good grammar, and images.
 * Per New Super Mario.
 * Per all.
 * 1) per all also this article doesn't suck its good and has enough info
 * 2) I fixed the tense issue yesterday. Overall, the article is well-written, informative, and pleasing to the eye. It's definitely one of the best this wiki has to offer.
 * 3) Personally, I think this is a very good article. It has images, and it also is very long, so I think we should keep it as a Featured Articles.
 * 4) As much as I hate Dimentio, the article does indeed meet the requirements. I think it should still be featured.
 * This article is descriptive, an appropriate size, and has good pictures, not to mention its one of the most important articles due to Dimentio being a major and sybolic villain. Overall it should stay.
 * 1) Per all.
 * 2) This is a very impressively written article with great picture's and great writting, overall it should stay.
 * 1) This is a very impressively written article with great picture's and great writting, overall it should stay.

Comments
In my opinion, you can always change the tense yourself quite easily (though it is quite a pain). I understand changing the informal parts are a pain, though. Images should be the main concern, though. I don't have the game to do this, though.

I'll see what I can do about fixing this article's problems.

The template is still there :/ And did you read my other reasons?

The present/past-tense errors have been corrected.


 * Really? I still see some past tense verbs.

BLOF, By "good quality" I mean that I beleive that it seems lenghty enough and seems interesting to read.
 * But is the quality of the writing good? I am forced to support unfeaturing this if the article is filled with bad grammar.

@BLOF: I'll go and look for grammar mistakes I missed and fix them.

I hardly found anything with grammar. And I gave some reason to my vote.
 * @SKMarioMan: Could you pinpoint an area where information is sparse for us? That way, we know what to fix.

I know that the featuring/unfeaturing process can drag on for a while, but by what margin does either side have to lead vote-wise before the article's fate is decided?


 * By a ratio of 1:5 and the proposal drags for 4 months.