Pikipedia:Featured article/nominations: Difference between revisions
Gamefreak75 (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
Pikpikmate (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
* <span style="font-family:times;color:#080">'''''[[User:Greenpickle|G]][[User talk:Greenpickle|<span style="color:#050">P</span>]]'''''</span> (nominator) | * <span style="font-family:times;color:#080">'''''[[User:Greenpickle|G]][[User talk:Greenpickle|<span style="color:#050">P</span>]]'''''</span> (nominator) | ||
*{{User:Gamefreak75/Sig}} | *{{User:Gamefreak75/Sig}} | ||
*[[User:Pikpikmate|Pikpikmate]] ([[User talk:Pikpikmate|talk]]) | |||
===Oppose=== | ===Oppose=== | ||
===Comments=== | ===Comments=== |
Revision as of 19:00, February 11, 2013
Archived nominations can be found at Pikipedia:featured articles/past nominations.
This page is used to nominate articles to be featured on the Main Page. To nominate an article, create a new section titled the name of the article you nominate, then create 'support', 'oppose' and 'comments' subsections and sign your name under 'support', along with your reasons if necessary. Other users can then sign their support or opposition and the article will be featured when a new one is needed if it has enough support.
A featured article must be well-written, as complete as is feasible and interesting to read. This requires that it also has adequate appropriate tables, diagrams or images.
Puffy Blowhog
I nominate the page Puffy Blowhog to be featured. It is a very neat and tidy article, has lots of information, an image, and info on any glitches there might be involving blowhogs. It is also very detailed, and everything about it just seems right. I have also just fixed it up, giving it much better sentence structure, and it now sound even more fluid to read than it did before. On top of that, the Burrowing Snagret article has been featured for almost a year, and we will need to find a replacement featured article instead.
Support
- Los Plagas (talk) - Nominator.
Oppose
- GP - Doesn't read great, not particularly well-organised, not very long, and the images aren't the best. A good enough article, but not worth being featured, IMO.
Comments
It's pretty well organized, but it's so short... If there are other articles that would be better highlighted, I'd prefer one of those. Otherwise, I can support this nomination. — {EspyoT} 07:18, 8 February 2013 (EST)
I'm going to side with Espyo on this one. I'm neutral on it. --FREAK ~Game Freak~OUT!
Gate
Seems to have all the necessary information, good structure, and worded well. GP