1,352
edits
Zelda Wiki:Featured Article Nomination: Difference between revisions
From Zelda Wiki, the Zelda encyclopedia
Zelda Wiki:Featured Article Nomination (view source)
Revision as of 05:00, 15 February 2010
, 15 February 2010Spelling
m (Vote number ten) |
m (Spelling) |
||
| Line 59: | Line 59: | ||
#The article has superior flow and readability, with precisely-cited references, for a Zelda region that still hasn't been properly explored in the games! {{:User:Cipriano 119/sig}} 01:08, 2 November 2009 (UTC) | #The article has superior flow and readability, with precisely-cited references, for a Zelda region that still hasn't been properly explored in the games! {{:User:Cipriano 119/sig}} 01:08, 2 November 2009 (UTC) | ||
#This article has really seen a lot of overhaul and fixing from what I've seen in its history. We can't deny how great it's become, and I think it would be a wondrous addition to the featured lineup. Very informative to the readers, and a great long article to show off ;) But in all seriousness, I give this my full support.{{:User:Neo/sig}} 18:09, 14 February 2010 (UTC) | #This article has really seen a lot of overhaul and fixing from what I've seen in its history. We can't deny how great it's become, and I think it would be a wondrous addition to the featured lineup. Very informative to the readers, and a great long article to show off ;) But in all seriousness, I give this my full support.{{:User:Neo/sig}} 18:09, 14 February 2010 (UTC) | ||
#Vote number ten! As stated above, the article is lengthy, a "good read", and just down right impeccable. This is the kind of article ZW needs, and should be a good role model for what other articles should be like. Also, it shows editors what we mean by " | #Vote number ten! As stated above, the article is lengthy, a "good read", and just down right impeccable. This is the kind of article ZW needs, and should be a good role model for what other articles should be like. Also, it shows editors what we mean by "quality", and should give other wikis a "run for their money!" {{:User:Austin/sig}} 04:55, 15 February 2010 (UTC) | ||
{{oppose}} | {{oppose}} | ||
#I can't really support this one. It is way too story like. It's wording is too overly elaborate, it's way too dramatized, and it still seems like it is too wordy. It needs some serious work before it should be featured.{{:User:Matt/sig|~}} 18:37, February 14, 2010 (UTC) | #I can't really support this one. It is way too story like. It's wording is too overly elaborate, it's way too dramatized, and it still seems like it is too wordy. It needs some serious work before it should be featured.{{:User:Matt/sig|~}} 18:37, February 14, 2010 (UTC) | ||
