Difference between revisions of "Bulbapedia:Featured article candidates"

From Bulbapedia, the community-driven Pokémon encyclopedia.
Jump to: navigation, search
(Candidates: Pikachu (Pokémon) is a FAC)
m (Candidates)
Line 23: Line 23:
<!--These are '''featured article candidates'''.-->
<!--These are '''featured article candidates'''.-->
{{FAC||Pikachu (Pokémon)}}
{{FAC||Pikachu (Pokémon)|9 October 2010}}

Revision as of 12:00, 9 October 2010

Featured articles
What is a featured article?
Featured article candidates
Featured articles
The path to featured status
GlassOrnamentSprite.png   Start an article
GlassOrnamentSprite.png   Check criteria
GlassOrnamentSprite.png   Get nominated
GlassOrnamentSprite.png   Featured article

A featured article should exemplify the goals of Bulbapedia - an accurate, comprehensive and Pokémon-focused encyclopedia. Featured articles should be picked from the very best work on Bulbapedia, although this is not the same as picking from the most detailed or the most accurate.



  1. Check it against the featured article criteria. Pages that fail to meet the basic criteria will not be accepted as candidates.
  2. Add a {{FAC}} invocation to the candidates section, for instance, {{FAC||Bulbapedia}}, or if the article in question is not in the main namespace, {{FAC|Bulbapedia|About}}.
  3. Create the associated talk page by entering {{subst:FAC talk}} and saving the page.
  4. Add {{FAC notice}} to the top of the candidate article.


To vote, simply edit the appropriate sections. Add your signature (~~~~), preferably with a comment, to the list of supporters / objectors. Remember to update the count in the heading.


Pikachu (Pokémon)

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)
Maybe Bulbasaur? 梅子 02:35, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
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)
  • Support. I'm not fan of Pikachu, but it is time to have a Pokémon as FA and Pikachu has the best article of them.--でんのう Zえんし 06:48, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
  • This is my first time voting, so I could be wrong, but I can't see anything disqualifying about this article. --*Ɣℯ№ӎօṫհ* 19:56, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
  • I have to agree, I say it deserves to be one (I mean it is the "unofficial" mascot....) Ataro 22:57, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
  • I agree with all of the above. This is a very organised and well written article. There's tons of great trivia and it's about time a pokémon article got a FA. Pokemaster97 18:48, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
  • Altough I think the trivia section is a little messy. I'm for.-- Gagaromamah, Your Little Monster 06:07, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
  • Support. It is without a question the best article about a Pokémon on here. The Trivia section seems OK to me, and if it doesn't, nothing that a few edits can't fix. The Mascot of the series deserves a place in there. --Shinytwo 18:19, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
  • Although I was going to vote against for the trivia section, the fixed-up version looks tons better, so I think it should be a featured article now. --Purimpopoie 18:34, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
  • With the fixing of the trivia, I am in support of the article. It's Turtwig A! My talk or wiki edits 20:52, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
  • This article has obviously had lots of time and effort put into it. Pikachu is a great choice for the first Pokémon article to achieve FA status. SuperAmpharos 21:18, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
  • Seems good to me. It's awfully long, but I can't imagine how we could do anything about that. Plus, that length is due to large amounts of well-organized content. --AndyPKMN 00:41, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
  • Don't know if you want a newbie's opinion, but then yeah, it's a fairly longer than most pokemon articles, it's obtainable in almost every game, (mainly what I'm talking about is side games), and it's almost like the mascot of the whole company. Chocos0 04:14, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
  • I Think This Should Be Featured Article Brennan1357 13:00, 16 October 2010 (UTC).
  • The article is very detailed and covers a lot, thumbs up Diamond Lanturn CodeName: 05308 18:44, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
  • Not one single Pokémon article on this site comes real close to both the length and organization of Pikachu's. The organization stands out even more due to the amount of content. I don't really remember what the Trivia section was like before, but it looks organized and has several subsections with in it, which i can't say for many others. The Pokémon articles are the reason I came here in the first place, and having one as a featured article is long overdue.--Jdthebud 08:27, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
  • It has my support.--Pokélova! 04:59, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
  • This is a good article, very organized, very savvy. Plus, Pikachu is Pokemon's mascot; why NOT be a featured article?--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 mascot so I am on board for a yes. 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. - I'm a Girl. People Don't get that.... Speak To The Master...DialgaMaster! 15:25, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Object (3)

So you support now, too?----無限の知性DENNOUZENSHI 08:20, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
  • Yeah, no. Too disorganized. CuboneKing 01:05, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Is it better now?--でんのう Zえんし 09:57, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
I still disagree. CuboneKing 00:46, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
  • Not much better than any other Pokémon article. --Maxim 13:06, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
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)
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)

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)