Zelda Wiki:Failed Nominations

Three votes in opposition of a nominated article or picture disqualify it from becoming featured.

The Legend of Zelda: Phantom Hourglass
This would be an informing and new article for newcomers. --Eponasowner 19:18, 30 November 2007 (EST)

Support

 * 1) It's the newest Zelda game so I think people should know about it. --Bigrageous 15:35, 22 December 2007 (EST)

Opposition

 * 1) Other than the fact that this has had only one vote in almost 3 months, I think the quality of the article is somewhat lacking (there are other better game articles), and it shouldn't be featured merely by virtue of PH being the newest game in the series. —Adam (talk) 13:11, 23 February 2008 (EST)
 * 2) I would have thought a more interesting article for newcomers would be something like A Link to the Past or Ocarina of Time. --AmrasCalmacil 15:56, 24 February 2008 (EST)
 * 3) I agree, though Phantom Hourglass is a great game for Zelda newcomers, the article lacks interesting content. Ika5263 23:57, 28 February 2008 (EST)

Epona
A main part of the Zelda games, with a nicely set-out page and appropriate graphics. Should deserve a Feature. --Beanie 23:47, 23 February 2008 (EST)

Opposition

 * 1) I love Epona, but in my opinion, this article isn't very well written. It doesn't deserve to be featured untill it get a good rewrite.--Link hero of light 10:16, 24 February 2008 (EST)
 * 2) It's a good article, but not great. And it doesn't cite any sources. —Adam (talk) 16:13, 29 February 2008 (EST)
 * 3) I love Epona as well, but as you said it is not very well written. --Claire 16:53, 29 February 2008 (EST)

Helmaroc King
Cool boss should be featured --Trogdor 3:49 19 February 2008 (EST)

Opposition

 * 1) Is that really a good reason to be featured?  (Unsigned vote by AmrasCalmacil - see rule 6 above)
 * 2) Short answer; no it's not! The article is average at best, and cites no sources. —Adam (talk) 11:20, 8 March 2008 (EST)
 * 3) Uhh...yeaah....nowhere near as cool as most other bosses AND you didn't give a very good reason to why it should be featured. --ShadowLink45
 * 4) Well, no? It's a good length, but links to almost nothing else in the Wiki, needs quite a bit of re-writing, and, as mentioned, cites no sources. --Ando (Talk) 18:38, 10 March 2008 (EDT)