MarioWiki:Featured articles/Unfeature/N1/Wario

Remove Featured Article Status

 * 1) Where do I begin? We have some really short sections, lots of sections missing images, and some useless information. Examples: 1. Mario Golf series, Mario Football series, WarioWare, Inc.: Mega Party Game$. 2. Just scroll through the article and see for yourself. 3. "In the past, it's been suggested that Wario was actually Foreman Spike, due to similarities in appearance. That theory has been debunked, though some people still believe that Wario is based on Spike."
 * 2) - Many sections, like the Mario Golf, WarioWare, and Mario Strikers series sections, need expanded. I won't vote to keep it featured until that stuff is fixed.
 * 3) Per all the reasons Revesinator said.
 * 4) There are too many areas that give us no information whatsoever, such as WarioWare: Snapped. So per FawfulFury65

Keep Featured Article Status

 * 1) - All of those are easily fixable sections and you could've taken the third one out yourself. Heck, I'll do it later. It's nice and long and has plenty of pics. Keep the FA status!
 * 2) As much as I hate this smelly blob of cholesterol fat, I think it should be kept featured. The problems you mentioned are easily fixable. But some sections do need to be longer (Super Mario Strikers/Football says look at this fatso, please.) Otherwise, this article has no serious problems.
 * 3) Though he CAN suck in black holes, rip the fabric of time and space, etc., per all. You can fix them yourself, unless you're very busy doing stuff to other articles.
 * 4) per my comment below.
 * 5) It's an excellent article. Various images, no spoilers, really MUCH text... Please, let it with the FA status! For the Super Mario Wiki!
 * 6) I agree with Mario Fan 123 here. Besides that, I'm a Wario fan!

Oppose Votes
Mario Fan 123
 * 1) Just pleading to keep it (mercy); just says an excellent article (This Is not an FA nomination, this is an FA unfeature nomination).
 * 2) You've basically just said you want it Featured.

Firecat
 * 1) saying that you are a wario fan doesn't make it a valid oppose reason
 * 2) I'm also a Wario fan, but I didn't vote for him.

BabyLuigiOnFire
 * 1) Per Time Q's comment.

Ralphaelraven497
 * 1) Per Time Q's comment.

LeftyGreenMario
 * 1) Per Time Q's comment.

Gamefreak75
 * 1) Per Time Q's comment.

Comments
To all the ones who vote in favor of keeping this article featured: You all admit that it has problems (that can be easily fixed). Until they're fixed, however, you can't vote to keep this article featured ('cause, well, there are problems). Basically, you are the ones that want to keep this article featured, so you should do anything it takes to make it FA-worthy.


 * Well, basically, the only problems are the three articles Reversinator mentioned, which need some slight expansion. It's not really that big of a deal, because anybody could've fixed them themselves.


 * The problem will hopefully be solved by tomorrow. The Football series is good enough (check out the others to see what I mean), the Golf needs just the stats, and I'll expand the WWMM part.

i gotta a question; if you guys are saying so many sections need help, WHY DONT YOU JUST FIX THEM!!!!!! dont nominate for unfeaturing it IS a quite good article. if you know how to fix it FIX IT, dont let become not featured. this article is PERFECTLY FINE. i support.

@BWOF: I am too busy helping RAP completing his test4, so I can't fix the Wario Article.


 * Can we end this now?

@KS3: I removed all of the "removal of opposes" you mad e for several reasons. Firecat and Mariofan123 both sadi that the article was fine. Sure, they added a bit, but that wasnt their major vote. For me, my comment is EXACTLY the same as Time Q's, just directed at YOU!! Same with LGM, BLOF, and GF75.
 * I added them back. Basically, the opposers' task is to prove the supporters' points wrong. Saying that "the article is fine" doesn't even refer to the supporters' points. Anyone can say that, which would mean that no article can be unfeatured. If you think that certain votes are invalid, address it in the comments section. – On a different note, I think we should check if this nomination is even up to date. Haven't the problems Reversinator pointed out already been fixed?


 * Basically, all of KS3's removals are invalid and I'm pretty sure the problem has been fixed ages ago.