MarioWiki:Featured articles/N1/List of Collectibles from Mario Party DS

List of Mario Party DS Collection Descriptions

Support

1. Super-Yoshi (talk) - The list is fully complete, a very detailed introduction. Also, includes every possible image along with every description with no spelling errors. It's a perfect article.
2. Stooben Rooben (talk) - This article is literally 100% complete. And, I don't believe there is a rule against lists being FAs.
3. Princess Grapes Butterfly (talk) -Per all. Like stated above, this page is compelete and even contains visuals!
4. The Chozo Yoshi (talk) - Per all.
5. 1337Yoshi (talk) - Well-written, nothing left out, etc.

Comments

I don't think this can be featured. If you don't count all the card descriptions (and you're not supposed to do AFAIK), the article doesn't have 4,000 characters. Time Questions 07:53, 16 October 2008 (EDT)

I have one comment and one question. The comment is that the article is well over 4,000 characters, excluding the tables. The question is, what does AFAIK mean? Stooben Rooben (talk)

I think it means As Far As I Know. And thanks :D - Super-Yoshi (talk)

Ah, that makes sense. Thanks. Also, Time Q, if you check here, you can see that the article is 30,000 characters without the table coding. Stooben Rooben (talk)

I think you misunderstood Time Q, I'm sure he meant that the text, excluding the tables AND the descriptions taken from the game, doesn't have 4000 characters. Because most of the info is directly copied from the game, and almost nothing but the introduction is self-written. If this can be featured, then the same would go for the Trophy Descriptions of the Smash Bros. series. --Grandy02 09:21, 17 October 2008 (EDT)

Thanks Grandy, this is exactly what I meant. The descriptions are quotes, and those don't count for characters. Almost nothing about this article is original to the Super Mario Wiki, so having this featured would look really odd. (BTW, yes, "AFAIK" does mean "as far as I know" - sorry, I thought this was a common acronym :D) Time Questions 09:26, 17 October 2008 (EDT)

Oh, okay. Thanks for clearing that up. The page with only the table and the introduction, would still calculate to a little over 5,000 characters, not including images. I do understand what you're saying about it being mostly quotes, but the fact that it's actually 100% complete is really noteworthy, IMO. (It probably is a common acronym; I'm just an acron00b. :P) Stooben Rooben (talk)

What do you mean by, "5,000 characters not including images"? The only actual self-written text that appears on this page is the introduction plus three more short sentences. Quotes as well as "official profiles and statistics" sections are clearly to be excluded when counting characters, as stated in the FA nomination rules. I don't see a difference here. (LOL, I just noticed that I also put "BTW" when explaining the meaning of "AFAIK". And now I put "LOL". OMG.) Time Questions 15:42, 17 October 2008 (EDT)

St00by meant that without the coding of [[Image:blahblahblah.png]] it's still a reasonable amount of characters. Seriously, it's one of the few 100% complete articles IMO. So what do you guys think? Super-Yoshi (talk)

According to current rules, it is clearly not a valid FA from my point of view. More opinions? Time Questions 06:21, 18 October 2008 (EDT)

The rules say "…have at least 4,000 characters (letters, spaces, etc.) not including templates, categories, quotes, images, or 'official profiles and statistics' sections. Text in an image thumbnail may be included.". Except for the introduction and four other sentences ("All ... are listed here"), the article only consists of tables, images and text from the game. I think Time Q is right. --Grandy02 07:45, 18 October 2008 (EDT)

I honestly don't think this article is worthy of being featured. The only "meaty" part of the article is the opening paragraph, and falls far less than 4000 characters. There are other lists, like Trophy Descriptions (SSBM), but alas it is just a list. It is compelte, with accurate descriptions from the game, but it couldn't really be featured, AFAIT. (also, the beginning paragraph has several mistakes; but those can probably be easily fixed). Garlic Man (talk)

So what should we do now? This can't be a FA with the current rules in my opinion. --Grandy02 14:36, 18 October 2008 (EDT)