MarioWiki:Featured articles/N1/Baby Luigi: Difference between revisions
From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
White Knight (talk | contribs) |
White Knight (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
:::::Agreed. :D But still, "Dry Bones is Awesome!" is just praising the subject of the article; not the article quality itself. {{User:Garlic Man/sig}} | :::::Agreed. :D But still, "Dry Bones is Awesome!" is just praising the subject of the article; not the article quality itself. {{User:Garlic Man/sig}} | ||
I added an Interactions with other characters section, | I added an Interactions with other characters section, more to his personality, and a physical description section. That was my first major edit. Please don't be angry with me if I made a mistake. {{User|White Knight}} | ||
Revision as of 10:23, August 13, 2008
Baby Luigi
Support
- Marcelagus (T • C • E) -- Game section is chronologically organized, plenty of information. I don't think the game sections for the Yoshi series section can be much more expanded than that, as Luigi is the "Damsel in Distress".
- Per Garlic Man White Knight (talk)
- per everyone Mrsdaisyluigi (talk)
Oppose
Starry Parakarry 
- Um, so I know I at first supported this but I actually see that it needs some work before it can be nominated. It's missing an Interaction with Other Characters section, a Physical Description section and the Personality section is really shallow and doesn't go into much description. It basically only talks about him being a crybaby. He's gotta be more than that. Also, for the Personality section, there is no evidence of his actions. Like "and he gets along great with the babies". Well, what games show this? Once again, I'll work on this soon (the personality section is almost done) so expect everything to be finished soon.
Comments
Uhm, Starry Parakarry, you really shouldn't support nominations if you think the article is not FA-worthy yet. Time Questions 06:03, 12 August 2008 (EDT)
- Hey, you shouldn't be trying to convince users to not support. I still think fan votes shouldn't count... but whatever. Marcelagus (T • C • E)
- Huh, why not? I'm not trying to "convince" anybody, what I'm saying is just what the rules say: FAs are the "best the wiki has to offer" (or should be), and if an article can be largely improved and expanded, it isn't FA-worthy yet. Supporting such an article is a contradiction: Why would you present an article as outstanding, when in fact it can be largely improved? Do you want to present something "half-finished" as the best the wiki has to offer? Time Questions 13:43, 12 August 2008 (EDT)
- Yeah, if that's really what the wiki has to offer. Even though I do know articles always have room for improvement. Notice how she said "I'll try to work on that ASAP". That means she's going to WORK on it, not just pointing it out. I think that's fine. Also, maybe the Dry Bones nomination page or something, but someone said "YES, YES, YES" as a reason for support. I really don't see how that improves the article. :\ Marcelagus (T • C • E) Compared to "Yes, Yes, Yes", "I'll work on it ASAP" is a lot better, and is showing that he/she is trying to improve the article.
- No, because it's not the task of the supporters to improve the article (unless there are opposers who point out issues that need to be fixed). "YES, YES, YES", from my understanding, means "The article is good", and that's perfectly fine as a reason. "I'll work on it" means that there is something that needs to be worked on, and that's bad. Why not support after working on the article? But anyway, support votes aren't important really, so we shouldn't get into an argument about this :) Time Questions 14:48, 12 August 2008 (EDT)
- Agreed. :D But still, "Dry Bones is Awesome!" is just praising the subject of the article; not the article quality itself. Marcelagus (T • C • E)
- No, because it's not the task of the supporters to improve the article (unless there are opposers who point out issues that need to be fixed). "YES, YES, YES", from my understanding, means "The article is good", and that's perfectly fine as a reason. "I'll work on it" means that there is something that needs to be worked on, and that's bad. Why not support after working on the article? But anyway, support votes aren't important really, so we shouldn't get into an argument about this :) Time Questions 14:48, 12 August 2008 (EDT)
- Yeah, if that's really what the wiki has to offer. Even though I do know articles always have room for improvement. Notice how she said "I'll try to work on that ASAP". That means she's going to WORK on it, not just pointing it out. I think that's fine. Also, maybe the Dry Bones nomination page or something, but someone said "YES, YES, YES" as a reason for support. I really don't see how that improves the article. :\ Marcelagus (T • C • E) Compared to "Yes, Yes, Yes", "I'll work on it ASAP" is a lot better, and is showing that he/she is trying to improve the article.
- Huh, why not? I'm not trying to "convince" anybody, what I'm saying is just what the rules say: FAs are the "best the wiki has to offer" (or should be), and if an article can be largely improved and expanded, it isn't FA-worthy yet. Supporting such an article is a contradiction: Why would you present an article as outstanding, when in fact it can be largely improved? Do you want to present something "half-finished" as the best the wiki has to offer? Time Questions 13:43, 12 August 2008 (EDT)
I added an Interactions with other characters section, more to his personality, and a physical description section. That was my first major edit. Please don't be angry with me if I made a mistake. White Knight (talk)
