Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Charizard 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Charizard

Us PCP members have put in 2 and a half days of work into getting this article to featured status. We have added at least 30 new references, improved all the sections, and added a couple of extra images. I think its time that this article gets nominated, if you object it, please provide a good reason, cheers Minun ^{(マイナン)} 13:56, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

• Object - still in Category:Articles with unsourced statements. I'll have another look when this is fixed. —Celestianpower ^háblame 14:01, 12 July 2006 (UTC) Looking better. Now, what on earth is a "Fire/Flying type combo"? That paragraph needs to be made so non-Pokémaniacs can understand it. Appropriate linking to the subsections of Pokémon types would help immensely. —Celestianpower ^háblame 08:28, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Alright, thanks for making suggestions, i'll get to it. Minun ^{(マイナン)} 10:05, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
    • Hmm... I think I know what you mean, cheers Minun ^{(マイナン)} 10:07, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
      • Done, is there any other changes needed before you support the nomination? Minun ^{(マイナン)} 10:14, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
        • No, not done. I wasn't under the impression that "combo" was an English word. Plus, you have to link all of the types. Maybe explain what a type is? Oh, and "come at a cost" sounds POV to me. —Celestianpower ^háblame 12:51, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Fixed Minun ^{(マイナン)} 15:29, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
    • • • • Fixed, i've replaced combo with combination and added extra links Minun ^{(マイナン)} 13:18, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
            • Thank you, though one of the links is broken and in English "/" means or, surely you mean "and"? Anyway, I've noticed another thing. You seem to have mixed up plural and singular, a common problem when dealing with Pokémon articles. Remember, when you're talking generally, use "they" (intro, characteristics and video games), otherwise, use "he", "she" or "it". Thanks! —Celestianpower ^háblame 14:51, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
              • Sure, i'll get to it. Anyway, is it alright using references from fan sites, because someone seems to have problem with that, cheers Minun ^{(マイナン)} 15:02, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
                • I think i've fixed all the problems now, if you still object, please point out any more problems. Cheers Minun ^{(マイナン)} 15:40, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
                  • No, I'm afraid that you have not. "It spits flaming hot fire hot" for instance (needs to be "they spit", and needs a comma after fire). This is a problem through most of the video games and characteristics sections. Speaking of the characteristics section, try and cut down on the number of times you use "Charizard", it gets a pit grating after a while. —Celestianpower ^háblame 16:18, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
                    • I've fixed the problems you have pointed out, if you still object, please give another reason, cheers Minun ^{(マイナン)} 18:55, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
  • (Re-indent) "They spits flaming hot fire", "When it gets angry", "The temperature of its breathe" - all terrible grammar/plurality issues, and these are not isolated - it's a problem throughout. It should be them throughout the video games, characteristics and intro sections. —Celestianpower ^háblame 23:42, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
    • Fixed, point out any other problems if you still object, cheers Minun ^{(マイナン)} 10:15, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

• Object not finished. FAs take more than 2 and a half days. Highway ^Batman! 14:11, 12 July 2006 (UTC) I support, Highway ^Batman! 14:38, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
• Object again. ;) Sorry, but after all these things have been cleaned up, I feel the article needs more secondary sources. As far as I can see, I count 4 secondary sources out of 72. By the way, secondary sources are things which are the games, manuals, guides, fan sites or DVDs. They are also not the Amazon site hidden under a different title. This article needs way more. Sorry. Highway ^{Return to Oz...} 21:09, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Let me clarify, there are random links, huge spaces and paragraphs drowning on about unimportant stuff. I am dealing with Dorapion, Pachirisu and Chierimu, but I will deal with it soon. Highway ^Batman! 15:37, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
    • Thanks for leaving comments, thet will help, I'll just review the article and look for important stuff Minun ^{(マイナン)} 15:43, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Things still wrong -

• In other media doesn't cover Charizard in the real world nearly enough, look at Torchic, or even Bulbasaur. You should have let editors have a chance to work on it.
• Characteristics is in a "in-world" view point, as is In the video games.
• The writing has weak areas, the prose in characterstics is poor.
• Evolving, types and other Pokémon terms aren't explained.
• There are unsourced statements in the anime.
• The plurality of Charizard is muddled, they are sometimes referred to as singular, some times plural
• Things are over linked, or linked multiple times.

This FAC was before it's time, Highway ^Batman! 10:34, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I've fixed the mix of singular and plural words M inun ^(Spider-Man) 15:29, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

And now i've added the references for the anime M inun ^(Spiderman) 15:39, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Do you support yet? —M inun ^Spiderman 16:00, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

• He has: after where he has crossed out object, it says I support. smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 17:40, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

• Object, some of the above stuff is also true, but what really stands out is "In Other Media", which could (and should) be far longer, at least ten lines. Charizard is one of the more well-known Pokemon. —Cuiviénen 16:45, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I know, I want to remove that section, but HighwayCello won't let me, and its my own work, so I don't see why I shouldn't be able to delete it, cheers Minun ^{(マイナン)} 18:35, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

You absolutely need that section, and I'm glad you've kept it. The article has been much improved, so I support. —Cuiviénen 17:01, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Looking alright, with a vote of 3 supports and 4 objects, I just need to help fix the problems Celestianpower pointed out and then the FAC will be looking a lot better. Thanks for supporting, you've improved my wikimood. Minun ^{(マイナン)} 18:57, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

• Object. In other media section seems like an afterthought, too short. Surely more can be added? — Wackymacs 17:28, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
  • I've merged section per a comment on my talk page, cheers Minun ^{(マイナン)} 19:21, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
• Support All I can say is wow... I saw the objections and a nominated Pokemon article and figured this would be easy. In comparison, however, to other featured fictional characters (even other featured Pokemon articles) this is perfectly fine in terms of comprehensiveness. The references are very well done (love the formatting), and I only have two small issues. First, the statement at the end of the TCG section should be sourced. Just dig up an old copy of Scrye or something, should do fine. Second, are you sure the TCG section should be it's own full section and not a subsection of "Other media"? Staxringold _talk^contribs 23:58, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Yeah, thanks for supporting, this is the first time someones supported a fac started by me, so you have definitely improved my Wikimood, cheers Minun ^{(マイナン)} 10:05, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Yes, I'm sure. Highway ^Batman! 06:50, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
  • I agree, since Bulbasaur has a seperate section, Charizard should have one to, cheers Minun ^{(マイナン)} 10:15, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
• Support; this article was nominated somewhat too early. However, much post-nom cleanup has taken place, and I now feel I can support it. I've referenced the fact Staxringold pointed out. smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 07:02, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Yeah, thanks for supporting, this is the first time someones supported a fac started by me, so you have definitely improved my Wikimood, cheers Minun ^{(マイナン)} 10:05, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
• Object—you call these references? Answers.com, Pokemon fan sites, etc. Who runs these things? Serenii.net is one of the main sources you use, but what on earth is it? For all I know it's run by some guy working out of his basement. I expect the sources we cite to be more reliable than Wikipedia, and I'm not feeling good about that right now. Please use the print sources you mention and remove anything that only appears in fan sites; verifiability and reliable sources are important. --Spangineer^es (háblame) 14:30, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Actually, almost everything is from fan sites, so we would be removing everything Minun ^{(マイナン)} 15:01, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
    • Serebii.net, the main site used, is considered quite authouritative on Pokémon, a subject for which not a lot of paper sources exist. Admittedly, Answers.com is mainly a Wikipedia mirror, but as it was only used for a dictionary definition, I've moved it across to Dictionary.com. smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 15:25, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
      • I've got the felling this is not going to succeed, we'll have to try really hard Minun ^{(マイナン)} 15:38, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
        • Knowing a little bit about Pokemon, I think serebii.net can be considered reliable. Fan sites are not necessarily unreliable if the site is prominent enough, and Serebii is definitely the most prominent Pokemon fan site. —Cuiviénen 17:03, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
• Support, but I suggest WP:JAPAN contributors channel their energies in more constructive ways, like History of Japan articles. But then, this is purely my personal opinion. -- Миборовский 21:35, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Most of us don't know a lot about Japan; I think almost everyone at the Pokémon Collaborative Project came because we like computer games rather than Japanese culture. smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 21:45, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
    • Perhaps we can find a public domain or similiar free resource about Japan M inun ^(Spiderman) 10:00, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
      • anyway im glad the supports and objects are even, we just need one more before the supports are in the lead M inun ^(Spiderman) 10:01, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
        • FAC is not a vote. —Cuiviénen 15:27, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
• Object For two reasons:
  • The whole "Bellyzard" thing (second or third paragraph under the vg section) is wholly unencyclopediac.
  • Also, much of the article seems to have too much info about charizard in the pokemon universe rather than in the real universe.--Ac1983fan^{(yell at me)} 17:14, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. A couple of things, the Bellyzard is perhaps the most well known strategy in the meta-game, so it definitely deserves a mention. And two, could you highlight the areas in-universe? Highway ^{Return to Oz...} 17:29, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I am retracting my comments. I read through the article to quickly, so I am changing my opion to Support.--Ac1983fan^{(yell at me)} 17:43, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

• Object. First, 5 out of 5 citations checked in a citation spot check had problems (results here), and I see that this leans quite heavily on a site (serebii.net) that looks quite unprofessional (its articles are littered with spelling and grammatical errors). Other sources need to be found to replace serebii.net, and someone needs to go through the references one by one and fix all cases where the statement in the article is not directly supported by a statement in the source.
• Second, this needs a copyedit. The first section provides some good examples of issues that crop up throughout:
  • "Through evolution, a metamorphic change within a Pokémon caused by gaining experience in battle,": Perhaps replace with "through evolution, a sort of metamorphosis that Pokemon undergo as a result of gaining experience in battle'? Within is not the right word here, and the current structure of the sentence fails to identify who is doing the gaining (not that it isn't clear from the context, but it's grammatically necessary to clarify it).
  • "Charizard grow a pair of powerful wings, which allow them to fly at altitudes approaching 4,600 ft (1400 m), supplementing the fiery breath they would inherit": This sentence changes voices halfway through; it needs to be either all indicative or all subjunctive. Supplementing is also an iffy wording here; replace it with "and supplement" and remove the comma after "(1400 m)", perhaps?
  • "...earlier forms of Charmander..."; Change to "...earlier forms, Charmander..."
  • "However, the flames they produce as Charizard are even hotter than those produced by Charmeleon; at full intensity they would have the power to melt solid rock or large glaciers.": Why "however"? This doesn't contradict any previous statements. Perhaps change to "furthermore"? This is another sentence that goes from indicative to subjunctive in midstream. And why "even hotter"? "Hotter" will suffice.
  • "are said to ": Drop altogether.
  • "noted to rely on claws...": Change to "and rely on their claws..."
  • "Nevertheless, the strength of their flame is said to be so volatile, that accidental or careless uses have been noted to cause forest fires and other disasters.": Perhaps "Their flame is so strong that it has caused forest fires and other disasters when used accidentally or carelessly." "Nevertheless" is unnecessary, as it "have been noted to", and what does it mean to say that the "strength is so volatile"?
• Similar prose issues need to be fixed throughout; note that none of my above suggestions should be interpreted as endorsements of writing this section in an in-universe perspective; I was just going off of what I had to work with. --Robth^Talk 20:38, 21 July 2006 (UTC)