Talk:Pikachu (Pokémon)/Featured article candidate: Difference between revisions

From Bulbapedia, the community-driven Pokémon encyclopedia.
Latest comment: 14 November 2010 by The dark lord trombonator in topic Pikachu (Pokémon)
⧼bulbapediamonobook-jumptonavigation⧽⧼bulbapediamonobook-jumptosearch⧽
011284mm (talk | contribs)
m Protected "Talk:Pikachu (Pokémon)/Featured article candidate": Featured status denied. ([edit=sysop] (indefinite) [move=sysop] (indefinite))
 
(5 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
==[[Pikachu (Pokémon)]]==__NOTOC__
==[[Pikachu (Pokémon)]]==__NOTOC__
====Support (18)====
====Support (20)====
<!--Please remember to update the count along with your vote.-->
<!--Please remember to update the count along with your vote.-->
*This is an extremely detailed and accurate article. Bulbapedia needs a Pokémon species article as a FA because that's what Bulbapedia is all about. What better Pokémon to represent Bulbapedia than the most well known of them all, Pikachu?--[[User:Alex726|<font color="#7D7D7D">'''Alex'''</font><font color="#000000">'''726'''</font>]]<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Alex726|<font color="#007100">'''cont</font><font color="#DF0000">ribu</font><font color="#0000A0">tions'''</font>]]</sub> 02:18, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
*This is an extremely detailed and accurate article. Bulbapedia needs a Pokémon species article as a FA because that's what Bulbapedia is all about. What better Pokémon to represent Bulbapedia than the most well known of them all, Pikachu?--[[User:Alex726|<font color="#7D7D7D">'''Alex'''</font><font color="#000000">'''726'''</font>]]<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Alex726|<font color="#007100">'''cont</font><font color="#DF0000">ribu</font><font color="#0000A0">tions'''</font>]]</sub> 02:18, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
Line 22: Line 22:
* This is a good article, very organized, very savvy. Plus, Pikachu is Pokemon's mascot; why NOT be a featured article?--[[User:Skulblaka Shurtugal|Long Live Pokémon! --Skulblaka Shurtugal]] 22:36, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
* This is a good article, very organized, very savvy. Plus, Pikachu is Pokemon's mascot; why NOT be a featured article?--[[User:Skulblaka Shurtugal|Long Live Pokémon! --Skulblaka Shurtugal]] 22:36, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
*To start, I thought there had already been a Pokémon page as a featured article? Personally I cannot stand the little rodent, but I will agree that the article is very well written and seems to cover almost everything known about Pikachu. I always thought it was the {{tt|mascot|So it would make the best for a first featured Pokémon page}} so I am on board for a yes. [[User:011284mm|011284mm]] 14:57, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
*To start, I thought there had already been a Pokémon page as a featured article? Personally I cannot stand the little rodent, but I will agree that the article is very well written and seems to cover almost everything known about Pikachu. I always thought it was the {{tt|mascot|So it would make the best for a first featured Pokémon page}} so I am on board for a yes. [[User:011284mm|011284mm]] 14:57, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
*Definite support, really detailed and the (unofficial) mascot -Chiramii
*Pikachu isn't my favorite pokemon, but it's article is very detailed. I think it would make an awesome FA. -[[User:DialgaMaster105|<span style="color:#33ccff;background:#9900cc"> I'm a Girl. People Don't get that.... </span>]][[User talk:DialgaMaster105|<span style="color:Light Blue;background:Pink"> Speak To The Master...DialgaMaster! </span>]] 15:25, 7 November 2010 (UTC)


====Object (3)====
====Object (3)====
Line 36: Line 38:


====Other comments====
====Other comments====
* '''Result''': Despite its overwhelming support, this page was denied featured status as it is too similar to the 648 other species articles, it is essentially a long list of tables, and the anime and manga sections aren't well-written. The Editorial Board is currently devising a new formula for the species pages; this article may be renominated once the structure has been implemented. &mdash;'''<span style="font-family:Verdana"><span style="color:#000">darklord</span>[[User talk:The dark lord trombonator|<span style="color:#0047AB">trom</span>]]</span>''' 06:48, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 06:48, 14 November 2010

Pikachu (Pokémon)

Support (20)

  • This is an extremely detailed and accurate article. Bulbapedia needs a Pokémon species article as a FA because that's what Bulbapedia is all about. What better Pokémon to represent Bulbapedia than the most well known of them all, Pikachu?--Alex726contributions 02:18, 9 October 2010 (UTC)Reply
Maybe Bulbasaur? 梅子 02:35, 9 October 2010 (UTC)Reply
Bulbasaur was already nominated and did not get voted in as a FA. Even if Bulbasaur literally represents Bulbapedia, it's article is not as detailed as Pikachu's. I am not playing favorites. I'm just stating my opinion that Pikachu's article is better than Bulbasaur's.--Alex726contributions 02:44, 9 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

Object (3)

So you support now, too?----無限の知性DENNOUZENSHI 08:20, 28 October 2010 (UTC)Reply
Is it better now?--でんのう Zえんし 09:57, 12 October 2010 (UTC)Reply
I still disagree. CuboneKing 00:46, 20 October 2010 (UTC)Reply
But it's longer and more comprehensive, plus it's quite representative of the franchise as a whole. --AndyPKMN 16:23, 16 October 2010 (UTC)Reply
I agree with Andy. This article may be similar to the other Pokémon articles but it has a much higher quality than the rest. I am somewhat surprised that it has never been nominated to be a FA before but than again everyone does have their own opinion and I recognize that.--Alex726contributions 18:10, 16 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

Other comments

  • Result: Despite its overwhelming support, this page was denied featured status as it is too similar to the 648 other species articles, it is essentially a long list of tables, and the anime and manga sections aren't well-written. The Editorial Board is currently devising a new formula for the species pages; this article may be renominated once the structure has been implemented. —darklordtrom 06:48, 14 November 2010 (UTC)Reply