Talk:PokéShipping/Featured article candidate: Difference between revisions
From Bulbapedia, the community-driven Pokémon encyclopedia.
Jump to navigationJump to search
Zesty Cactus (talk | contribs) m (→Object (1): updating count) |
Kenji-girl (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
*'''''Support!''''' Definitly the most detailed and the best shipping article there is.--[[User:Smartkidhen|Smartkidhen]] 20:51, 7 January 2010 (UTC) | *'''''Support!''''' Definitly the most detailed and the best shipping article there is.--[[User:Smartkidhen|Smartkidhen]] 20:51, 7 January 2010 (UTC) | ||
====Object ( | ====Object (3)==== | ||
<!--Please remember to update the count along with your vote.--> | <!--Please remember to update the count along with your vote.--> | ||
* Eh. The prose isn't fantastic (written very casually, lots of contractions) and I think the POV nature of shipping makes it kind of a weak choice for a Featured Article. --[[User:Zesty Cactus|<span style="color:#006400">'''Zesty'''</span>]][[User talk:Zesty Cactus|<span style="color:#3CB371">'''Cactus'''</span>]] 21:23, 7 January 2010 (UTC) | * Eh. The prose isn't fantastic (written very casually, lots of contractions) and I think the POV nature of shipping makes it kind of a weak choice for a Featured Article. --[[User:Zesty Cactus|<span style="color:#006400">'''Zesty'''</span>]][[User talk:Zesty Cactus|<span style="color:#3CB371">'''Cactus'''</span>]] 21:23, 7 January 2010 (UTC) | ||
* Too many personal opinions and theories that try to make the reader lean to a specific thought. Featured articles should present interesting facts, and the opinions shouldn't overwhelm those facts, which is what this article is doing. [[User:Dany36|Dany36]] 21:47, 7 January 2010 (UTC) | * Too many personal opinions and theories that try to make the reader lean to a specific thought. Featured articles should present interesting facts, and the opinions shouldn't overwhelm those facts, which is what this article is doing. [[User:Dany36|Dany36]] 21:47, 7 January 2010 (UTC) | ||
* Um no... IT'S A SHIPPING. People who don't like this ship are going to be ticked. And it's not cause I'm not a big fan of the ship. I'd do the same for OrangeShipping. And as what was said above, there are way too many opinions in the article. Shipping pages should never be nominated for FAC. --[[Tracey Sketchit|<span style="color:#33CC66;">'''ケンジ'''</span>]][[User talk:Kenji-girl|<span style="color:#6600CC;">'''の'''</span>]][[User:Kenji-girl|<span style="color:#FF00CC;">'''ガール'''</span>]] 22:48, 7 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
====Other comments==== | ====Other comments==== | ||
Revision as of 22:48, 7 January 2010
Shipping:PokéShipping
Support (1)
- Support! Definitly the most detailed and the best shipping article there is.--Smartkidhen 20:51, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Object (3)
- Eh. The prose isn't fantastic (written very casually, lots of contractions) and I think the POV nature of shipping makes it kind of a weak choice for a Featured Article. --ZestyCactus 21:23, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
- Too many personal opinions and theories that try to make the reader lean to a specific thought. Featured articles should present interesting facts, and the opinions shouldn't overwhelm those facts, which is what this article is doing. Dany36 21:47, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
- Um no... IT'S A SHIPPING. People who don't like this ship are going to be ticked. And it's not cause I'm not a big fan of the ship. I'd do the same for OrangeShipping. And as what was said above, there are way too many opinions in the article. Shipping pages should never be nominated for FAC. --ケンジのガール 22:48, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
