SmashWiki talk:Article of the Week/nominations archive

From SmashWiki, the Super Smash Bros. wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive.png This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Direct any additional comments to the current talk page.

This page is an archive for nominations on the page SmashWiki talk:Article of the Week.

Successful votes[edit]

Item[edit]

Result: article selected as SmashWiki:Article of the Week/2007-9

Nominated for Article of the Week, Sunday February 25th to Saturday March 3rd (the 9th week of 2007)

  • Nom & for Smiddle ( TalkConts ) 18:34, February 18, 2007 (GMT)
  • For, one of our better articles. MaskedMarth (t c) 01:02, February 19, 2007 (GMT)
  • For -- Randall00 05:21, February 19, 2007 (GMT)
  • For, However I think a picture of a Capsule in the top-right corner would help spice up the page.-- Bean 06:42, February 19, 2007 (GMT)
I'm not sure what your crazy nom for lingo is referring to, but I think Global Smasher Compendium a top-notch article. -- Randall00 05:19, February 19, 2007 (GMT)
Oh, I see, "Item". Gotcha. Sure! -- Randall00 05:21, February 19, 2007 (GMT)
Nom is nominated, I think -- Bean 06:42, February 19, 2007 (GMT)
That's correct. Smiddle ( TalkConts ) 09:08, February 19, 2007 (GMT)

This is pretty much consensus, agreed? MaskedMarth (t c) 20:22, February 21, 2007 (GMT)

In any case we need to improve the opening text of "items" and beef it up a little by the end of this week. MaskedMarth (t c) 20:43, February 21, 2007 (GMT)

Mario (universe)[edit]

Result: article selected as SmashWiki:Article of the Week/2007-10

  • Nomination & for. I pretty much created the entire page, so maybe it's not even fair for me to nominate what I made. But I'm open to opinions, of course. This page is meant to be a model for all the Universe pages to follow, and each universe page aims to provide a no-nonsense franchise-based directory for SmashWiki readers. Erik the Appreciator 02:11, February 24, 2007 (GMT)
  • For. Really well done. I thought of nominating it too but I wasn't sure whether or not you had any more to add. Of course, like all our articles there are things that could/should be touched up (a quick check reveals that the trophy list isn't linking to trophies, for example) but this is far and away one of our best articles, and a great example for other universe pages to follow. Maybe my biggest concern is the naming convention; though it doesn't apply here, disambiguation text (the stuff in parenthesis) should only be used if there's another article with the same name... but now I'm kind of on a tangent. --Kirby King 00:52, February 25, 2007 (GMT)
  • Strong For, once we get the technical things sorted out. Let's save this article for SmashWiki's unveiling. MaskedMarth (t c) 17:03, February 25, 2007 (GMT)
  • For. Use of the word "mustachioed" makes this hands-down the best URL on the internet. :^) -- Randall00 16:56, February 26, 2007 (GMT)

Wavedash[edit]

Result: article selected as SmashWiki:Article of the Week/2007-11

  • Nom and for. It's pretty good. My biggest concern is that it is modeled too closely on XiF and Tobias' guide (linked at the end of the article), something I'm going to work on. MaskedMarth (t c) 18:04, March 7, 2007 (GMT)
  • Comment, since next Monday is coming soon and there are no other nominations, this article will become the next AOTW by default. Are there any objections? MaskedMarth (t c) 22:56, March 9, 2007 (GMT)

The Smash Affiliates[edit]

Result: article selected as SmashWiki:Article of the Week/2007-12

  • Nomination. Has a bloated trivia section; otherwise I think it's good. MaskedMarth (t c) 03:59, March 12, 2007 (GMT)

Metroid (universe)[edit]

Result: article selected as SmashWiki:Article of the Week/2007-13

  • Nomination. I would nominate the universe-related articles en masse, but I'd like to spread out their nominations over time (so that we don't have too many all at once). I like this article. MaskedMarth (t c) 03:59, March 12, 2007 (GMT)
  • For. Seems worthy. WaluigiIsAwesome 02:08, March 24, 2007 (GMT)
  • For. I suppose I should feel honored for all this, having written the majority of the universe articles' contents thus far; this vote might inspire me to create another Universe article. ^_^ My main suggestion to improve universe articles in general is to post an image of that universe's emblem at the start of each page, however. Erik the Appreciator 21:19, March 24, 2007 (GMT)

Tournament legal (SSBM)[edit]

Result: article selected as SmashWiki:Article of the Week/2007-14

  • Nomination. OK, I know it isn't pretty. It's functional though. I'd like to see what you guys think about this article (and articles like it). MaskedMarth (t c) 03:59, March 12, 2007 (GMT)
  • Weak For. Could be better, but it's pretty good. WaluigiIsAwesome 08:30, March 27, 2007 (GMT)
  • Wear For. What Waluigi said. ItemHazard (talk) 01:10, 26 June 2008 (UTC) ItemHazard

M3D[edit]

Result: article selected as SmashWiki:Article of the Week/2007-15

  • Nomination (and for, of course). I just noticed this article the other day. I think it's a very nice article - information-filled but concise. Thoughts? MaskedMarth (t c) 03:59, March 12, 2007 (GMT)
  • Against. Having smasher articles for AOTW could make others jealous (not me, though). Smiddle ( TalkConts ) 23:55, March 23, 2007 (GMT)
I'd say the nomination is valid; we're in the business of distributing information, not social networking and public relations designed to soften the blow for people with easily-bruisable egos. -- Randall00 Talk 20:29, April 2, 2007 (GMT)

Teleport (SSB)[edit]

Result: article selected as SmashWiki:Article of the Week/2007-16

  • Nom and tentative for It's pretty complete, but I dunno, it's not exactly flashy or lengthy. --Greenblob 19:03, April 2, 2007 (GMT)
  • Weak For WaluigiIsAwesome 17:11, April 5, 2007 (GMT)
  • For. We don't have a repository of amazing long articles anyways - most of the big ones have equally big problems. MaskedMarth (t c) 13:55, April 7, 2007 (GMT)

Final Destination[edit]

Result: article selected as SmashWiki:Article of the Week/2007-17

  • Nom and for Smiddle ( TalkConts ) 19:16, March 16, 2007 (GMT)
  • Weak against, as it is. Not ready yet - it needs wikification and a perhaps-thorough copyedit of the big paragraphs. It certainly has the stuff of a good stage article though. MaskedMarth (t c) 23:12, March 16, 2007 (GMT)
  • For -- I agree that this is one of the better stage articles. The Magnum Master 19:48, April 2, 2007 (GMT)
  • Weak For WaluigiIsAwesome 04:34, April 20, 2007 (GMT)

Directional influence[edit]

Result: article selected as SmashWiki:Article of the Week/2007-18

  • Nom and For Not because it's incredibly outstanding, but because it's good enough and we currently don't have any nominations with scores above zero. <_< --WaluigiIsAwesome 09:12, April 29, 2007 (GMT)

Tournament[edit]

Result: article selected as SmashWiki:Article of the Week/2007-21

  • Nom, abstain. Something I've been working on for a while on and off. Could probably use a History section and maybe some more pictures, but otherwise I think it's a good intro to the tournament scene and what one can expect to find there. --nealdt 19:42, May 4, 2007 (GMT)
  • For. I really liked this article, it really helped me host my first CAST when I first entered the competitive scene. Although, i agree with Nealdt, a History section would be nice.... --Janitor 05:33, May 16, 2007 (GMT)

Smash Bros. universe[edit]

Result: article selected as SmashWiki:Article of the Week/2007-22

  • Nom & for Smiddle ( TalkConts ) 11:20, May 18, 2007 (GMT)
  • Confident For. It's been a while since we've had a universe article as AOTC, eh? MaskedMarth (t c) 12:47, May 18, 2007 (GMT)
  • For WaluigiIsAwesome 03:38, May 20, 2007 (GMT)
  • For Thanks muchly, people. Supposing there are 17 Universe articles, and we feature one every three weeks, they'd last up to an entire year. I should warn, however; if the Dojo site is going to relaunch, and perhaps show an immense amount of new information about Brawl, all of these universe pages would need to be updated, though that might not really matter much to whether a universe page can be AOTW that week. Erik the Appreciator 16:52, May 20, 2007 (GMT)
  • For. Good article just like all the other universe articles. The Magnum Master 17:22, May 20, 2007 (GMT)
  • For Janitor 09:17, May 20, 2007 (GMT)

Amsah[edit]

Result: article selected as SmashWiki:Article of the Week/2007-24

  • Nomination & for. This page is quite complete, quite well organized. It seems well written, but since english isn't my mother tongue, I won't assert it. It's also interesting since, for the wiki readers, it's an open door to the european community. And also, I think this Amsah has an interesting smash career. --Slhoka 19:56, June 5, 2007 (GMT)
  • For, if for no other reason than the fact that we desperately need a featured article right now. WaluigiIsAwesome 02:40, June 7, 2007 (EDT)

Luigi (SSBM)[edit]

Result: article selected as SmashWiki:Article of the Week/2007-26

  • Nom & For: I remember the votes against Mewtwo (SSBM) on here some time ago, stating that the extreme detail on that page effectively scares away readers. This Luigi page appears to conform much better with what voters expect from a page on a playable fighter appearing in a specific Smash game; His pros and cons section is well-written prose, his big move-descriptions section is appealing to me personally (especially without a bunch of giant GIFs clogging up the page), and his unlock method is near the top where it should be. I'm also aware this was nominated three months ago and failed, but this is the editing that has occured to it since then. Erik the Appreciator 16:35, June 18, 2007 (EDT)
  • For, for the same reasons as before. I'll try to touch it up before it goes up. MaskedMarth (t c) 15:43, June 23, 2007 (EDT)

Unsuccessful votes[edit]

Global Smasher Compendium[edit]

  • Nom & for, In addition to being a well-written article, it's also an important one to expose to the masses. -- Randall00 16:00, February 23, 2007 (GMT)
  • Against. Parts read like a mix between a help file and a guide, others are more encyclopedic. Images should probably be thumbnailed, and there are some that I don't think belong at all. Besides that, I think right now it's important that we highlight articles that will help newcomers see what we hope all articles will look like, and even if I didn't see any problems with this one, it's not very helpful in writing an article about a character or a stage. --Kirby King 17:23, February 23, 2007 (GMT)
  • Against, what KK said. It's more of a guide. One of the first things in the article are download links, and in the end there are lot of images. Also, the word "you" and imperative verb moods are overused. Smiddle ( TalkConts ) 17:29, February 23, 2007 (GMT)
  • Against, per KK and AltAcnt. Though, I think GSC could be a potential candidate if its focus was on its history/significance instead of how to use it and the system requirements. MaskedMarth (t c) 17:37, February 23, 2007 (GMT)
    • kk, how about now? :^) -- Randall00 21:56, February 23, 2007 (GMT)
      • No. Still, there are a lot of you's, and imperative moods. Also, there are GSC/sv|two GSC/fr|translations to work on. I can help you with the Swedish one, but I'm a very poor French speaker. Smiddle ( TalkConts ) 22:36, February 23, 2007 (GMT)
      • Well it's as comprehensive as it will ever be in English and I removed the "you" completely now. As to the imperative moods, it's hard enough to give instructions without using "you" but it's more important for the information to be available in its most useful form than it is to scrutinize the tone. Either way, I did forget about the translations so it looks like this is going to take much longer than anticipated. -- Randall00 16:34, February 26, 2007 (GMT)

Luigi (SSBM)[edit]

  • Nomination & for. I've cleaned up the page considerably in the past two days and I think it's one of our better pages. MaskedMarth (t c) 00:46, February 24, 2007 (GMT)
  • For. Although I would really like to see standardization with the character pages, I like the way this page flows off the page. Standardization should happen after SSBB, however, when we know what to add for every character and page. Good job, Mask. Oddeven2002 01:10, February 24, 2007 (GMT)
  • Against. Haha, thanks for polishing that moveset off for me, Masked. That's something I've been putting off forever! Still needs info on the throws and other miscellaneous Luigi attacks if comprehensiveness is what we seek. It's an excellent article in its current form, yes, but I'm not sure this is quite the model for all character articles. Also, there's this pile of :Category:Character Match-ups|Character-specific match-up categories. Are we really going to be able to pull that off? If so, Luigi's article should link to it. If not, we ought to get around to deleting those pages. I have a hard time believing we're going to find anyone who knows a lot about a Yoshi vs. Zelda match-up. -- Randall00 16:50, February 26, 2007 (GMT)
  • Comment - My personal assessment of this article: I think the main shortcomings of this article is that it has too strong a focus on Luigi in competitive play, and is not organized very well - as you said, it is not the model for character articles we're looking for, but rather a well-crafted article in a flawed mold. I'd say the character match-ups are peripheral issues and don't play a significant factor in the Luigi (SSBM) article. Methinks we should begin by adding general information about Luigi - how he is portrayed in SSBM, where in the 1-player mode he appears, et cetera. A comprehensive moveset can come afterwards, but there really isn't much to say about Luigi's down tilt or forward throw. MaskedMarth (t c) 22:55, February 27, 2007 (GMT)

Mewtwo[edit]

  • Nom and For WaluigiIsAwesome 20:33, March 26, 2007 (GMT)
  • Against. This is the embodiment of a hyper-technical article that will scare away anyone who just wants to know about Mewtwo. Plus the GIFs lag my computer. --Kirby King 17:02, April 6, 2007 (GMT)
  • Weak For This is the embodiment of a hyper-technical article I would support as the Mewtwo-as-a-Melee-fighter gameplay-specific article that should be named Mewtwo (SSBM) and link from a general article about the character named Mewtwo. Per what I proposed in SmashWiki Pool Room, structuring the site's pages by the characters represented, rather than the characters as gameplay objects, will make Mewtwo a general article about the character in the style of the recent Universe pages I'vbeen making, and it will link to this gameplay-specific page, which should be called Mewtwo (SSBM), and Mewtwo will link to Mewtwo (SSBB) in the future if he returns in Brawl. I think it'd work best that way, so this article should remove the Origin section because that should go in the general Mewtwo article. Also, add Home Run Contest strategies like what is seen in the Peach gameplay article, and definitely remove the gifs because it takes my dial-up browser a full 30 seconds to load the page, and what the move animations look like probably aren't that important to Smash players anyway. Erik the Appreciator 17:47, April 6, 2007 (GMT)
    • Comment: IMO I think what this article has is too technical even for a general Melee (I think "Melee" reads better than SSBM, BTW) specific article. Say someone wants to find out what Mewtwo's down B does. It's not there until near the bottom of the page, and what's above it is largely hyper-technical information that will probably confuse said reader. In any event, this discussion is probably better for the Mewtwo page--here we should limit ourselves to the article as an AotW nominee. --Kirby King 20:49, April 8, 2007 (GMT)
  • Against. I've worked on this article a great deal, but I haven't really changed the focus of the article. Thus, it's about as good of a technical article as you're going to get, but it's still nothing that the average smasher can / wants to read. Paragraphs are more conducive to reading than lists, in my experience. MaskedMarth (t c) 12:10, April 9, 2007 (GMT)
  • Against. Really needs an introduction paragraph above the TOC, which is also ridiculously long. It's just too much for one article IMO. --nealdt 19:43, May 4, 2007 (GMT)