Talk:Pokémon Crater/Featured article candidate: Difference between revisions
From Bulbapedia, the community-driven Pokémon encyclopedia.
Jump to navigationJump to search
m (→Object (7)) |
|||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
Is there any rule that fansites can't be featured articles? I don't think so.--'''[[User:Misty-may-dawn rulz|<span style="color:#ED9121">Misty</span>-<span style="color:#CC0000">May</span>-<span style="color:#0000CC">Dawn</span>]] [[User talk:Misty-may-dawn rulz|<span style="color:#00CC00">rulz</span>]]''' 10:03, 25 August 2008 (UTC) | Is there any rule that fansites can't be featured articles? I don't think so.--'''[[User:Misty-may-dawn rulz|<span style="color:#ED9121">Misty</span>-<span style="color:#CC0000">May</span>-<span style="color:#0000CC">Dawn</span>]] [[User talk:Misty-may-dawn rulz|<span style="color:#00CC00">rulz</span>]]''' 10:03, 25 August 2008 (UTC) | ||
:It's common sense. If an article is featured, it should be about a big and important subject in the franchise. Take the current featured articles, and even the other nominees, as examples. Do we want a ''fan site'' with ''fakes'' on our front page? --[[User:ElectAbuzzzz|electAbuzzzz]] <sup>([[User talk:ElectAbuzzzz|TALK]])</sup> 10:15, 25 August 2008 (UTC) | :It's common sense. If an article is featured, it should be about a big and important subject in the franchise. Take the current featured articles, and even the other nominees, as examples. Do we want a ''fan site'' with ''fakes'' on our front page? --[[User:ElectAbuzzzz|electAbuzzzz]] <sup>([[User talk:ElectAbuzzzz|TALK]])</sup> 10:15, 25 August 2008 (UTC) | ||
I'm leaving this for future reference. Featured articles exemplify Bulbapedia's MoS, and articles that do so should be nominated here, even if they happen to be about fansites or glitches, or whatever. [[User:JirachiWishmaker0802|JirachiWishmaker0802]] 03:49, 17 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 03:49, 17 October 2008
Support (2)
- It's a good article.--Misty-May-Dawn rulz 12:21, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
- I was a member, and, though there was a more recent logo, it was overall a good article--KukiTalk 12:26, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
Object (7)
- I don't think this article should get featured... Even if we put aside the fact that it's about a fan-game with fan-Pokémon (and that's a really big if), it's just not that good. Definitely not close to the articles we already have featured. --electAbuzzzz (TALK) 12:45, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
- It's a frickin' fan site. --ニョロトノ666 21:18, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
- concur with the aboveDCM
- Yeah. --Martonimos((Argh|Blargh)) 23:42, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
- Fansite = No nomination. --ケンジのガール 07:34, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
- I honestly didn't know that we had a page for the site, and don't think we even should. It's a fansite, and the guy who ran it quit. Theininen 21:42, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
- It's a good article, especially for a fan-gamesite, but I don't think it's good enough, or important enough to be named a Featured Article - Kogoro | Talk to me | 01:55, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Other comments
Is there any rule that fansites can't be featured articles? I don't think so.--Misty-May-Dawn rulz 10:03, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
- It's common sense. If an article is featured, it should be about a big and important subject in the franchise. Take the current featured articles, and even the other nominees, as examples. Do we want a fan site with fakes on our front page? --electAbuzzzz (TALK) 10:15, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm leaving this for future reference. Featured articles exemplify Bulbapedia's MoS, and articles that do so should be nominated here, even if they happen to be about fansites or glitches, or whatever. JirachiWishmaker0802 03:49, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
