Talk:April Fool's Day 2005/Featured article candidate

Support (1)

• A unique report that is informative and well illustrated. - 振霖_T 17:39, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• I agree with the previous comment. In addition, it may be wise to have another candidate ready, as this article will only be relevant for a few weeks at the most. - Argy 01:07, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Object (3)

• The article seems to have very limited relevance now that the day had passed, and is in all honesty little more than a list of events, with little depth. Hardly the kind of material we'd want for our first feature. - User:Archaic

• Agreed. The first impression that people get from coming to Bulbapedia could very well be the featured article, being the cream of the crop, if this is a page of jokes... Then well I don't think it's a good advertisement if anything else. And while it is informative, it has little content at all, being nothing more of a basic list and a couple of screenshots. Little effort has been put into the article. - Ferret

• Weird article, over two years out of date now. And we've got a lot of better articles now. --Pie ^~♪♫ 18:26, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Other comments

• A reminder: the featured article of the day is different from a featured article - an article will always have featured article status, and a featured article of the day is necessarily a featured article; however, a featured article does not necessarily have to ever be, or have been a featured article of the day. - 振霖_T 16:05, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)