Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Lakitu/archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Lakitu

Self-nomination. I'd say it's reached a certain standard of quality. - A Link to the Past (talk) 04:34, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

• Extreme lesbian support --Phroziac ^(talk) 04:41, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
• Support, I'd grumble that it's a little short, but I think the number of images compensates for that. Everyking 05:53, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
• Support. Pamri • Talk 06:58, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
• Support. Another great video game-related article to join Goomba and Link (Legend of Zelda) in the Great Hall of FAs. As mentioned above, it's rather short, but it is a solid coverage of the subject. Maybe we should move away from Nintendo for our next video game FAs, as currently there is a strong bias towards the company in terms of numbers of FAs about their products. Phils 11:23, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Hey, Wario's great too. :| - A Link to the Past (talk) 12:42, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
    • Of course it is. How could I forget about it?. :D Phils 15:10, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
• Complete Belarusian support Zach (Sound Off) 22:42, 14 September 2005 (UTC) Sorry Phroziac, I had to do it :P
• Absurdly exponential support Andre (talk) 19:19, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
• Silly Adjective Support -- Bobdoe (Talk) 21:22, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
• Minor object, much of the lead seems to have been assembled by pasting in sentences that occur later in the article, although repetition can be a useful literary device, it makes for a dull read for an article of this length.--nixie 23:28, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
  • You're absolutely right -- creating a good lead is probably me Wikipedia weakness. I've gone back through the article to remove what I felt was redundant. Would you mind giving it another look? BrianSmithson 16:24, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
• Support, very nice article. — Phil Welch 23:41, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
• Support. Awesome. Nufy8 01:50, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
• Fannish and not perfect prose: 'off of'? 'utilize' in the first caption? Tony 11:57, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
  • I've fixed the "off of", Tony, and changed "utilize" to "use" (though I'm not sure why http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/utilize isn't okay). I've also gone through the article to remove the more overtly fannish stuff. Does anything else strike you as being so? The article was largely my attempt to offer an example to contributors of video game-related topics on how to present a (okay, I'll say it) fannish subject in a manner that non-gamers would be able to understand. I probably left some superfluous content in, and others added more after the first draft was posted. Does the article now explain things in a way that the uninitiated can follow? BrianSmithson 16:24, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
• ObjectSupport Some original research and unbacked claims. In addition, there are no references for "Tetris Attack" and a few other game mentions. Examples:
  1. "Lakitu are rare in Super Mario RPG" Original research unless the manual specifically says that they are rare
  2. "Stomping Lakitu presents the biggest challenge, as it requires finding a sufficiently elevated perch from which to jump and timing the leap so as not to land on a Spiny egg." POV... need to back up
  3. " They are generally stronger and tougher versions of their normal counterparts" Back up
• Good article though... will support once these are taken care of Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 22:17, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Lakitus are indeed rare; I can only recall two - one in the beginning, and one as a cab driver of sorts. I'll fix up the other two, however. - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:51, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
    • Yes, but that's still original research without a source.... Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 22:58, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
      • Not really. They ARE rare, that fact is as true as Lakitu being the first boss in Tetris Attack. - A Link to the Past (talk) 23:09, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
        • Which should also be backed up by a source if it's mentioned. Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 23:34, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
          • Under that logic, everything should be backed up by a source; If there were only one Lakitu in the game, would it be original research to say there's only one? - A Link to the Past (talk) 23:53, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
            • Anyway, this argument is pointless; the statement is already changed to say "one of the few", as it IS one of the few Lakitus found. - A Link to the Past (talk) 00:01, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Before we destroy the article to deal with this objection, I'd like clarity. Do you want things like FAQs or strategy guides for the games to be listed as references? BrianSmithson 00:25, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
    • Ryan Norton is seriously off-base. Saying that "one of the few" should be backed up by a source is like saying that "He is typically depicted as a turtle-like creature" should be backed up by a reference. It's a fact, it's self-evident, it's obvious. If you need a source, surely the video game itself suffices. Oh, and by the way, I thought the article was a little long and perhaps over-exhaustive... but still high-quality. --Matt Yeager 06:12, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
• Grumble I still thank that it might be original research (FAQs etc. would be fine).... however most disagree with me which likely means I'm wrong... so I'll support, of course. Great job, BTW :) Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 06:54, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
• RIDICULOUSLY ADVERBIZED AND INNOCUOUSLY ADJECTIVIZED SUPPORT for reasons listed above. --Matt Yeager 06:12, 18 September 2005 (UTC)