Do you ever browse Bulbapedia via a mobile device? Would you like to help us out? Check out this month's improvement drive, Mobile March!
Please remember to follow the manual of style and code of conduct at all times.
Check BNN and Bulbanews for up-to-date Pokémon news and discuss it on the forums or in our IRC channel #bulbagarden on

Talk:Berry/Featured article candidate

From Bulbapedia, the community-driven Pokémon encyclopedia.
Jump to: navigation, search


Support (4)

  • Support A very comprehensive article with information on every stage in the history of berries, from Gen II to Gen IV. Aesthetically pleasing, it is evident that a lot of time and effort went in to making the article what it is today. --RexRacer 18:34, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Very good and well written! Definitely worthy! Mudkipluvr4ever 18:56, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Support! Rex hit the nail on the head, it's very in depth and covers berries in all canon by a reasonable amount. Maybe Munchlax's Berry Bonanza and Swalot Plop could be given a mention. I could try writing something up on each if nobody else wants to. Besides that I think it meets the standard. And I'm assuming we're not looking to have every berry that appears in the anime included in the article? --Emp, out 20:10, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Support. Very comprehensive, uses templates where it should, seems to have everything necessary. --SnorlaxMonster 10:44, 13 February 2010 (UTC) Vote changed to oppose. --SnorlaxMonster 07:54, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Support because Platinum won't get chosen. This is gonna be featured. Virtual-Z 04:33, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Object (4)

  • I think that there are better articles than this one that could be an FAC article. - Pokémon1234567890 19:49, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
    • How does this mean the article isn't good enough for FAC? Turtwig A (talk | contribs) 21:51, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Needs work, image-wise. Also, it's another list for the most part. Bland to an extent... ht14 05:38, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Object. I voted for Support before the new table was introduced. I don't think a featured article should show missing images. When they are added, this article could be renominated. But for now, no. --SnorlaxMonster 07:54, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Object *fills in "All of the above"* CuboneKing
I only put the images in so that I'd have a list of all the filenames I need to upload to so someone wouldn't screw it up. I've been far too busy to clean up and animate them all, though. TTEchidna 04:36, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Other comments

Don't get me wrong, it's a good article; but, I think it's just good for the images. Speaking of which, the images have yet to be fully uploaded, so... ht14 03:53, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Shouldn't this be in oppose then? Turtwig A (talk | contribs) 12:26, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Point made. Changing to oppose. ht14 05:37, 22 February 2010 (UTC)