MarioWiki:Featured articles/N1/Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga

Support

 * 1) This article it's much detailed,sections with high quality images,sidequests section complete,all the special movdes with a demostration,all the references are written and has much official artwork this must be a FA.
 * 2) user:Super Luigi! i agree, because this is the first Mario & Luigi RPG game, and it it is a highly detailed article.
 * 3) Just enough images are in here now and everything is well written.
 * 4) - There are more images (though a few more in the enemies/bosses section would kill you)!!! That was the only problem, so I think that I will support for a greatly typed article!!!
 * 5) States important features of the gmae, has official artowrk, and states intro/ending. Though it may have few grammatical errors, those can easily be fixed.
 * 6) - The article has many screenshots that are very fun to look at :P
 * 7) - Awesome article. The tables are great, good job Gamefreak!!

Comments
So you all say that the article lacks on images,huh?...Then I'll add them!--MATEOELBACAN 16:10, 13 November 2009 (EST)
 * I added some pics in the story section!
 * Thanks ^^--MATEOELBACAN 18:07, 24 November 2009 (EST)


 * I added all the other Sidequests,now there are complete!--MATEOELBACAN 18:59, 26 November 2009 (EST)
 * Why do the images in this article look so dark compared to the others?
 * No idea,say it to Fawfulfury95,but the one that I uploaded it's bright--MATEOELBACAN 08:24, 28 November 2009 (EST)
 * Those were the best I could find, but I can try to get better ones if you want.
 * Please do it if you can--MATEOELBACAN 11:17, 28 November 2009 (EST)
 * There we go, 6 bright new pictures added to the story section!
 * And I added other more!--MATEOELBACAN 13:50, 28 November 2009 (EST)


 * Also now I added a new section: References to Other Games!--MATEOELBACAN 17:11, 28 November 2009 (EST)

I've added a proposal to remove all supports unless each user provides more substantial reasons. Redstar 23:12, 28 November 2009 (EST)
 * MATEOELBACAN - Unfortunately, though your reasons are much more clear, I still cannot support either this page becoming a Featured Article or your proposal. The article may be detailed, but it is riddled with bad writing and grammar-issues. These are not few and far between... You can see this from the very first sentence of the plot summary. Many of the sections are also quite empty. While they have information, they don't give any more than a quick summary. Compare this article's Techniques section with Paper Mario's Battle System section. That article actually goes in depth on the many nuances of how battling actually works in the game. This article's corresponding section only lists techniques that can be used, and does not explain how or when they can be used. The Sidequests section, as you brought up, is also devoid of anything other than a short list. All it says is: "There are some sidequests in the game, which would be beneficial for Mario and Luigi." Helpful, isn't it? That section needs to explain what sidequests pertain to in this game and how they relate to the main quest, as well as why they are "beneficial". This article needs work. Redstar 23:46, 28 November 2009 (EST)


 * Also, the article needs a related-Bestiary, and the Bosses section needs to be filled out to become less of a list. Use the Paper Mario corresponding section as a basis. Really, this article is missing a lot. Redstar 23:51, 28 November 2009 (EST)
 * ...-- 23:54, 28 November 2009 (EST)
 * Redstar, your really overracting about this, and your worried about grammar? When you want to get rid of votes, you made a spot for all of them, not just one spot for all of them. As I was saying, if we got into depth like you said, this article would be even longer than Mario's!!! We have to shorten it so that we can not bore or frighten some users with how long it could be. And the grammar, well, I don't really notice it, and this is actually quite well written. If you think you can make it better with the grammar, than why don't you do it? Also, the boss section and that, like before, don't have this page running a mile just to have it completely detailed to the last atom of the game.
 * Wanting a clean, professional encyclopedic article is not over-reacting. Having standards is not a bad thing... The article must present all related information, or else it simply is not complete. If it becomes long or not is a non-issue (especially considering I've suggested methods to make it shorter as well as longer). This is an encyclopedia-style site. We should not worry about whether we "bore" or "frighten" readers. They come here for information just as much as entertainment. And, finally, yes... I'm worried about grammar. Bad writing is the worst thing an article can do. Redstar 00:22, 29 November 2009 (EST)
 * So then, as I have stated before, since you believe that we should pretty much rewrite the entire story section, fix the enemies/bosses (that I spend hours on) to make it "prettier", and add things like the Paper Mario article (which is not even a FA) is what you want? Well, just do it yourself since you want this all to be a clean, professional encyclopedic article (to tell the truth, this is actually a wikia more than a encyclopedia). That's all I am saying...
 * I would do it, if I had actually played the game. And it really shouldn't be on my shoulders, since I'm not the one that wants it to be a Featured Article. All of you want it, so if it's really that important, you should all be willing to improve the things needing work to make it happen. It should also be stated that there's little difference between a wikia and an encyclopedia, and I've noted on several occasions sysops and official information related to editing on this particular wikia has stressed that we must strive for an encyclopedic standard. Redstar 00:37, 29 November 2009 (EST)

Two comments: First, oppose votes can only be removed if 3 users, including a sysop, support this. No sysop agreed yet to remove LeftyGreenMario's vote. Second, you can't propose to remove support votes. There's no way a support vote can be "valid", other than it includes each and every point of what makes an FA an FA, which would be redundant. If you, Redstar, don't agree that this article becomes featured, then your oppose vote is totally sufficient, as it outweighs an unlimited number of support votes.
 * I hope the first point isn't referring to me, because I didn't remove any oppose votes. As for the second, that's unfortunate. It seems rather unfair that oppose votes can be voted off but support ones can't (One bad oppose removed tips the balance in favor of 10 bad supports, which can't be removed?). But, whatever, that's a discussion for somewhere else. Redstar 06:44, 29 November 2009 (EST)
 * No, the first point wasn't referring to you. As for the second point, it's not unfair at all. An article meets FA quality if it meets these standards. If users feel that the standards are met, they can support. The only way they could justify that is to name each and every criterion and say that it's met, which would be redundant. On the other side, opposers have to be specific and say which part of the standards is not met. If they don't justify their votes sufficiently, they can be removed. (That's also why we have the "including one sysop" rule, so that oppose votes are not just removed by the supporters because they want the article featured.) But support votes can't be removed, since there's no real way to "justify" their votes. I hope this clarifies it.
 * I'm not asking for any in-depth justification, but a vote that simply says the article is "good" or "has nice images", as many of these are largely composed of, just does not seem to be a fair vote when oppose-votes do specify at least one failure of criteria. Redstar 06:58, 29 November 2009 (EST)
 * Nominating a FA is a proposal. Supporters propose FA status. If opposers don't agree with that, they have to say exactly why. Supporters can't exactly say why they think an article should be featured because the only way to do that would be list each and every criterion and to comment that it's met. If every supporter had to that, that would be insane. I'm repeating myself, but that's really all there is to say about it.

I added tags to all the areas I feel need to be worked on before this article can be truly considered for feature-status. Work should be done to correct the bad writing, grammar issues, and typos, as well as to expand/split the sections I've marked as such. Redstar 07:27, 29 November 2009 (EST)
 * Wait a second! You called that Battle System section a stub?! No way! What else could be added there?!
 * WTF?! What's wrong with it?,It has much information,Another Image or what? -- 08:29, 29 November 2009 (EST)
 * Enough with the images already. They're merely a band-aid on real issues. The Battle System section is fine as is, but I would like at least an introductory paragraph that discusses how you battle rather than the what you can use that's already there. Note Paper Mario's Battle System section:

"Paper Mario introduced a new battle system. Mario and one partner of their choice fight against the enemies. Mario has HP and BP, while all characters share FP. FP is used for special moves, HP is Mario's life force and BP affects the types of Badges Mario can wear.

Each attack has its own "Action Command", which increases the damage if performed correctly. For example, for "Jump", the player must press A just as Mario is about to hit the enemy, and for Hammer, He must hold left and release at the right time. Mario can also decrease enemy damage by 1 by pressing A just as they hit him.

When Mario levels up, the player can choose to increase HP by 5, FP by 5 or BP by 3. The best idea is to upgrade BP with the occasional HP/FP boost until his BP is at maximum (30), then upgrade HP and FP.

When Mario and his team rescue a Star Spirit, they could summon them to use their powers against an enemy or two. Star Spirit Powers can be used if there is plenty of Star Energy. If Star Energy is used up Mario can use focus to regain Star Energy. Star Energy can also fill up as a battle progresses."


 * It discusses HP, BP, and FP, and goes into Action Commands and leveling. I want to see how Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga works. Everything else is fine as is, I just want a paragraph or two on that. Redstar 08:36, 29 November 2009 (EST)
 * Ok,Ok..but why merge the Enemies witn and uncreated article called "Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga (Bestiary)",hey,if you haven't noticed this is't Final Fantasy..-- 08:39, 29 November 2009 (EST)
 * Yes and the bosses section. Rewritten? How? What is there to add?
 * Well the (bestiary) is an intended move for all articles, but it takes a lot of work and so far as only been done for Paper Mario, as seen here: Paper Mario (Bestiary). It really cleans up the main article, so I only feel a split is necessary and the new bestiary can be worked on at leisure. As for the Bosses section, I'd only like where those bosses are fought to be added right after. If there are chapters or something like them in Mario & Luigi, like in the Paper Mario series, what chapters those bosses are fought in would do as well. Again, here's the Paper Mario standard:

"NOTE: There are several must-do battles in the game where you must beat an amount of enemies (not specific bosses) in order to proceed or gain an item (for example, at the start of Bowser's Castle, you must defeat a Koopatrol; which isn't a boss; to get a Key and move on). These will not be recorded here. Also, the location as to where a boss if fought will be recorded. Prologue

* Jr. Troopa, Goomba Road area * Red and Blue Goomba, Goomba Road * Goomba King and Red and Blue Goomba, Goomba King's Fortress * Magikoopa, Shooting Star Summit area

Chapter 1

* Bowser???, Koopa Bros. Fortress * Koopa Bros., Koopa Bros. Fortress

After Chapter 1

* Jr. Troopa, Pleasant Path

Chapter 2

* Buzzar (optional), Mt. Rugged * Tutankoopa, Dry Dry Ruins

Chapter 3

* Tubba Blubba and Tubba Blubba's Heart, Tubba Blubba's Castle/Gusty Gulch

After or during Chapter 3

* Jr. Troopa, Forever Forest

Chapter 4

* Anti-Guy (optional boss), Shy Guy's Toy Box * Big Lantern Ghost, Shy Guy's Toy Box * General Guy, Shy Guy's Toy Box

Chapter 5

* Lava Piranha and Lava Bud's, Mt. Lavalava

[After or during Chapter 5

* Jr. Troopa, Toad Town

Chapter 6

* Lakilester (recruited after beated), Flower Fields * Huff N. Puff, Cloudy Climb

Chapter 7

* Jr. Troopa, Shiver Snowfield * Monstar, Shiver Snowfield * Crystal King, Crystal Palace

Chapter 8

* 3 Anti-Guy's (faced if player fails Guard Door Quiz), Bowser's Castle * Jr. Troopa, Bowser's Castle * Bowser, Peach's Castle * Bowser, Power Platform

Other/Optional

* Blooper, Toad Town Tunnels * Electro Blooper, Toad Town Tunnels * Big Blooper, Toad Town Tunnels * Chan, Toad Town Dojo * Lee, Toad Town Dojo * The Master, Toad Town Dojo * The Master, Toad Town Dojo * The Master, Toad Town Dojo * Kent C. Koopa, Pleasant Path" Redstar 08:49, 29 November 2009 (EST)

But the bestiary will take MUCH work +_+!,also in Mario & Luigi there aren't optional bosses. -- 08:55, 29 November 2009 (EST)
 * Like I said, just split it into the page that will become the bestiary, and edit it at leisure while the main article will be satisfactory. And if there aren't any optional bosses, then you don't have to make a section for them. Simple as that. Redstar 08:59, 29 November 2009 (EST)
 * There aren't chapters in SSS so you can't do that. Its a free roam overworld. Therefore, with the right abilities, you can travel anywhere you want in the game.
 * Per Fawfulfury
 * Why are you both being so literal? I said if there are chapters or something like them, then add that. Since there isn't, then don't add those and simply add the fight-locations. Simple as that. Redstar 09:19, 29 November 2009 (EST)
 * Wait,wait I'll add them..
 * Sorry if we're being literal then. Just saying though. No chapters. What do you think of what I added in the bosses section? I'm not done, I need to add pictures in the boxes. I don't have enough time right now to do that.
 * It's getting there. I just want the locations present, but images might be good. I'm not sure, since it might be a bit bulky, but we'll see. If you both just get the Boss Battles and Battle System sections filled out, I'll go ahead and re-write the other areas myself later today and change my vote after. Redstar 09:53, 29 November 2009 (EST)

Well now every section is fine except the story section, which you said you would fix. If you want, I can fix it all, but since my edits for some reason don't fit your standards you have to fix it all. We're waiting, will you fix it now?
 * Yes, I'll re-write the Story section myself. The reason why I feel your edits don't fit standards can be read on your talk page. But, thanks for all the work you guys put into it. The Story section is the only part I feel needs work, so I'll get to that now. Redstar 21:42, 30 November 2009 (EST)

I changed my vote, so there is no reason to delete my vote now unless all of those mistakes I complained about are fixed.

Um... Redstar, I still have spied some mistakes. First of all, "afterwords" is spelled "afterwards" in the article, which is incorrect spelling. It should be spelled "afterwords" with an O. And just one other thing I saw, you wrote "BeanBean" with two capital Bs. The game spells it with only one capital B, Beanbean. That's all that I saw, but other than that, you did great fixing every thing in that long section! Afterward is spelled with an a, not an o. And I didn't do those rewrites... I started to, but it was reverted and someone else started to do it. Whether it's better or not now I don't know. Redstar 16:01, 1 December 2009 (EST)

Afterward is correct, but I mean afterwards is not a word. If you won't undo my work, I'll fix all the places where it says BeanBean instead of beanbean.
 * Well, I know that. I don't know why I'd undo your work. I tried re-working it myself, but someone else undid it before I was finished... I've decided to support the Featuring of this article, since I feel we've done enough work towards improving it. Some finishing touches can be done, but I'll change my vote if LeafyGreen does so. Redstar 16:37, 1 December 2009 (EST)

Hmm. I still see grammar errors. I think every tense in this article should be past tense. Also, I see no change in the enemy chart.


 * But,there are much changes!, you must only see the differences with the history button and you'll see the added images and information, also the grammar errors are only very few and it can be changed anytime!, if you want edit them yourself!-- 15:50, 3 December 2009 (EST)
 * I'm going to have to side with MATEO on this one. We've worked on this thing for over a week now, and I feel I've pushed it to a good place. I would re-write the Story section myself, but the last time I tried that I was reverted because someone else wanted to do it instead. If there's any issues, be bold! You can be the person to do the last bits of work to get this featured. Redstar 16:03, 3 December 2009 (EST)

Ok, so right now, I'm going to abstain (changed my vote, once again) until the bestiary is complete. I already uploaded some images needed, so all we need know is the stats.

So, does anyone here have the SSS guide with stats?

I'm wondering. Shouldn't the bosses have stats like the enemies have for consistency? I also think the Koopalings should be separated.

Yeah I was thinking of doing that. You can work on all that boss section stuff, and I can find an online guide for stats.

Ok I checked every walkthrough and not one of them had POW, DEF, or SPEED. But they do all have HP, EXP, and Coins. So, should we change the table to show HP, coins, and EXP instead of the other stats?


 * Well, if that's the only thing you can find, then sure. But some enemies have ATK stats implemented on them already. I'll take that with a grain of salt, though.
 * I fixed the table up now, but I need help putting in the stats. | This dude's walkthrough shows all the stats needed so people can check that and help.

Ok Ok, NOW! Its all over! I finished the sections, the tables, and I'm beat! Please tell me this is good now!!!

There's two votes plus an admin on all of the oppose vote removals so... we can delete them now, right?
 * According to my past proposal - yes

...Finally!!! 7-0!!!!-- 17:47, 16 December 2009 (EST)