MarioWiki:Featured articles/N1/Mario Kart (series)

Mario Kart (series)

Support

1. Garlic Man (talk) - Very organized, plenty of imformation, overall excellent
2. Super-Yoshi (talk) - Includes major information on series, and this article has improved by over 5 KB. A must for FA.
3. Stooben Rooben (talk) The article has expanded greatly in the past 3 days; I find it consisting of all the adequate information and imagery to be a featured article. 20:50, 30 May 2008 (EDT)
4. Coincollector (talk) it's a great (I mean, shows a plenty of good info) article. it can require some minor edits, but that's like a piece of cake.
5. Clay Mario (talk) It is written well and carries a lot of information and detail
6. Pikax (talk) Per everyone.

Oppose

1. Time Questions: The Retro Grand Prix section should be worded differently from the Nitro Grand Prix section, otherwise the article loses much of its fluency. There's some minor inaccuracies in the item descriptions - what I noticed was that Green Shells don't break apart in Super Mario Kart (unless they collide with a player or item) (I don't know about other games, so I didn't edit it myself). It should also be mentioned that in some games, drivers shrunk by a Thunderbolt can be run over (e.g. SMK), while in some games (e.g. MKDS) this is not possible. And finally, I think it wouldn't hurt to put in the Modes section, which mode appeared in which game. Whether this is needed is debatable though, and I won't oppose just for this if the other problems are fixed. Otherwise, great article.

Comments

Er... Wut's with that last trivia? Is there something obvious I'm missing? :/ Great article, BTW. InfectedShroom (talk)

It's probably stupid, but I thought it was interesting that they were the only characters classified as the same weight in every game. Stooben Rooben (talk) 18:51, 1 June 2008 (EDT)

Oh, I see what you meant. I thought it was saying that they were all middleweights. :P InfectedShroom (talk)

Oh, I should probably reword it then. EDIT: Never mind; already done. :P Stooben Rooben (talk) 00:00, 3 June 2008 (EDT)

Sorry for opposing the article for such "minor" problems and hence delaying the time of it being featured, but seeing how often this article still gets edited, I don't think that's a problem. Time Questions 05:24, 5 June 2008 (EDT)