MarioWiki:Featured articles/Unfeature/N1/Princess Daisy

Remove Featured Article Status

 * 1) This article is incredibly bare. While it covers almost every game that Daisy has appeared in, most of them only have one or two sentences that cover them. I understand that in some cases, there isn't much that can really be said, but how come Mario Party 3 is able to get a full paragraph, and yet Mario Party 6 only has a single sentence, and Mario Party 9 only has two? There are also quite a few sections that don't have images when it would be appreciated, such as the Super Smash Bros. Melee section. It would be nice to see what Peach looks like when she's colored with the Daisy palette, wouldn't it? Also, the comics, despite having so much available content to write about, are just as short as a lot of the other games. Certain games, like Mario Kart Arcade GP 2, Yakuman DS, Mario Party-e, and possibly others are only mentioned in Daisy's "List of Appearances by Date". A couple of the sentences from the "Relationships with Other Characters" section seem a bit conjectural to me, such as "Regardless, Daisy and Mario are good friends", "Daisy and Waluigi have a complex relationship", "Peach missed female companionship until Daisy's arrival in the Mushroom Kingdom" (the source doesn't link to anything relevant to the sentence, so I'm ignoring it), and possibly others. I also like (I'm using the word here sarcastically) how the article uses an image of Waluigi and Daisy in the same shot to illustrate their relationship. A few of the sections in "General Information" seem rather bare to me, too. To be honest, the article actually didn't look that bad at the time of its being featured when the old way of writing and formatting articles was considered, but today, I don't think this article can really keep its status without some improvement.
 * 2) Per GD
 * 3) - Per GD.
 * 4) Per all.
 * 5) - Per GreenDisaster.
 * 6) Per GD.

Keep Featured Article Status

 * No, this article will not be unfeatured as long as I am opposing. Two things: One, I fixed GD's mistakes. 2: This is one of the last FA's featured in 2007 that has never been unfeatured before. Take a look. You'll see that many other FA's from 2007 were unfeatured at one point.

Removal of Support/Oppose Votes

 * 1) - many sections still lack images, the general information sections haven't been fixed at all, the waluigi relationship section is still pretty ridiculous... all you really did is minorly fix up the mario party 6 and mario party 9 sections (the second of which is still particularly bare). the second part of your reasoning ("This is one of the last FA's featured in 2007 that has never been unfeatured before.") shouldn't even apply to voting against this, i'm sorry.
 * 2) You have fixed only a small portion of the problems that I've mentioned, and even then, all you did was add two obvious sentences to sections. Several sections still don't have either images or information, several games are still not covered, the "Relationships with Other Characters" section still has poorly written sentences, the "General Information" section still has brief descriptions... Also, it does not matter when this article was featured, nor does it matter how many articles that were featured and are still featured during that year still remain. A article is only featured because it represents some of the highest quality of writing that is shown on this wiki. It does not matter who the article covers, what the article was like in the past, or when it was featured. One simple question has to be answered when an article is nominated to be featured: "Does this article represent the best the Super Mario Wiki has to offer?" As of now, this article most certainly does not represent the best, and that is why it will be unfeatured.
 * 3) Per all.

Comments
1.This article is not bare at all. The scroll bar alone is enough evidence of this. Sure, some of the games only have a few sentences. But you must keep in mind this is generally information provided from the game manual and is used for tons of other characters who are featured, including Luigi. The point is, although there might not be enough stuff per section, other characters, the majority, rather, follow this same format. It is a common issue that has leeway due to the fact most other featured characters share this.

Mario Party 3 was given more description because Daisy had a prominent role in that game, obviously. There was a story mode, and regardless of who played as, you would end up against Daisy and go through the same scenario. Mario Parties 6 and 9 do not have set scenarios against Daisy, thus why they only seem to include game manual information and are shorter.

There don't need to be images for the Super Smash Bros. Melee section. Anything needed is clearly shown in the Super Smash Bros. section below-- her trophy, stickers, etc.

The fact is, Daisy is not in Super Smash Bros. Melee. It is just an alternate colour scheme. No image is needed, as this information is more relevant to peach, and you can find this information and images on Peach's page, where it belongs.

The reason Mario Party 6 has a description and Mario Kart Arcade 2 does not is simple. She is playable in one, and a cameo in the other. There is no gaming manual talking about her being a cameo in MKA2, hence why there does not need to be any description for the game.

The first two quotes about Daisy can be concluded from her chemistry with the characters in Mario Super Sluggers along with the Mario Party names. Not so conjectural.

The sections in the general information are not bear at all. It goes straight to the fine details including the littler heart detail shown on her back briefly when her hair goes up in Mario Kart Wii. I do not possibly see what is so bear about her general information.

All in all, her page is not bear. It is long and detailed. The shorter descriptions are a common thing shared by the majority of all featured articles. You'll see it no matter what. Daisy is no exception. Some are longer because she plays more of a role in those games as opposed to others. I feel like this is only being proposed because someone is disappointed the Waluigi article got un-featured. Just a glance at his trivia section is a lot worse than whatever you see wrong with Daisy's page.

She shall remain featured.


 * I will go through your argument, piece by piece, and counter-argue all of those points. One, there is not a single featured article on this wiki where there are more sections that have a small amount of sentences then those that are actually expansive. Also, Luigi is not a featured article (and probably won't be for a long time), and even then, most of his sections are well-expanded. Two, while Mario Party 6 was devoid of a story, Mario Party 9 had one. Yes, your actual character of choice doesn't impact what happens, but whichever character is chosen still plays a role, and since Daisy can play that role, Mario Party 9 can be elaborated on in this article. Three, they do need images, especially since the article explicitly mentions it. Yes, Daisy is not in Super Smash Bros. Melee. That is a fact. However, how come we are allowed to write information on it, but not obtain an image for it, and why are we allowed to get an image with Peach in Daisy's palette in Super Smash Bros. Brawl? There are also quite a few sections that just flat-out don't have any images, such as Super Mario-Kun, most of the Mario Party sections, Itadaki Street and its sequel, and others. Images for these exist; it's just a matter of posting them on the article. Four, I never compared Mario Party 6 to Mario Kart Arcade GP 2 information-wise, so I don't know where you got that from but just because it's a cameo does not mean we can not cover it, especially when it's a Mario character cameoing in a Mario game. Actually, because it's a cameo, we should cover it more, as simply saying "Cameo" does not give us any information on her actual cameo in the game. Besides, what about the other games I mentioned, like Mario Party-e and Yakuman DS, where she actually makes an appearance as a playable character? How come those appearances shouldn't be covered? Five... Fine, it's one of the weaker points from my argument, but I still stand by it. The Mario Party team names are just arbitrary nicknames that have some sort of a connection to the two characters that form this team. For example, in Mario Party 8, Toadette and Boo have the team name of "Boo Duet". This does not prove anything about the relationship between those two characters; it is just a nickname. Also, how does the name "Double Facers" or "Skinny Stars" prove anything about their relationship? I also don't understand how "Waluigi has a crush on Daisy" plus "Waluigi and Daisy have bad chemistry in Mario Superstar Baseball" equals "Daisy and Waluigi have a complex relationship". Six, the general information section covers Daisy in some places well enough, but in others a bit too briefly. For the clothing, the separation of all the outfits seem rather awkward to me when each of them has so little information. It would look good without all the sub-sections. Daisy's personality is nothing but a single line, which is odd for me. Powers and Abilities (including Special Abilities) is pretty good, but one good section does not make up for a bunch of bad sections. Also, you used "bear" instead of "bare" when you had already used "bare" correctly a bit higher up. Seven, Daisy's article is not long, and it is most certainly not detailed. The short descriptions are not shared by any featured articles, and if they are, it is only for a small amount of sections, whereas in this article, more than half of the sections are short. Obviously, some sections will be longer than others if Daisy plays a larger role in them, but that should not and does not justify all of the short sections. Waluigi was unfeatured a year-and-a-half ago, so if this was because of that, it's a very late counter. Also, why would I try and unfeature Daisy in retaliation for Waluigi being unfeatured? Wouldn't I try to do something like, oh, I don't know, feature Waluigi? Do you really think that Waluigi's two points of trivia is worse than the entirety of Daisy's article? How? You also confused "bare" and "bear" again.


 * Simply put, there are too many problems with this article for it to keep its featured article status. GreenDisaster (talk) 08:18, 11 February 2013 (EST)