Entertainment
 

Wookieepedia:Featured article nominations/Mount Sorrow

From Wookieepedia, the Star Wars wiki.

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a featured article nomination that was successful. Please do not modify it.

[edit] Mount Sorrow

Support

  1. Cue insane cackle! .... 23:55, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
  2. Great job by Fourdot on expanding! JorrelFraajic 23:56, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
  3. Darth Culator (Talk)(Kills) 00:04, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
  4. Soon as that nose thing is gone.—Semi-humourless Dan 00:24, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
  5. --Eyrezer 02:14, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
  6. Though I think there are more worthy subjects to be featured, apparently that has nothing to do with FA. This is a well written article which meets all the criteria. Green Tentacle (Talk) 09:57, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
  7. Now that it has more pictures, I'm happy with it. —Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 10:00, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
  8. "If he is worthy, I shall weep for him!" but I cannot deny it is. - Skippy Farlstendoiro 10:03, 20 February 2007 (UTC) (weeping).
  9. Imp 00:48, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
  10. Wow. I'm in. Cutch 23:24, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

  • Infobox image needs a proper source. --Imp 23:57, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Maybe I have no sense of humour, but that nose bit is POV (rule 2). Otherwise this is indeed a fine article on a, er, crying, talking mountainy thing. Green Tentacle (Talk) 00:12, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
    • I fail to see how that is POV, whilst we have speculation that certain ships are from certain manufactures based purely on their design. .... 00:13, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
      • That's kind of a moot point, though. --Imp 00:16, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
        • However hilarious the nose is, it must go. Sorry. *Cull ducks a tomato* Cull Tremayne 00:19, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
          • Nose thing is grudgingly gone. .... 00:31, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
  • I can't see this thing on the front page. I think there are many better articles that need featuring more desperately. Besides, the article subject is stupid (yes, yes, I'm a Stradleyist) and could give newcomers a bad impression of Star Wars. - Sikon 09:16, 20 February 2007 (UTC) Overridden by Inquisitorius - Wookieepedia:Inq/Mount Sorrow (!) 02:43, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
    • Not a valid objection. .... 09:21, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
      • Valid or not, I stand by it. - Sikon 09:24, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
        • I stand by Sikon, strong as ever. Star Wars has held strong against many barrages- Ewoks, Jar Jar, Episode II- but everything has it's limit. Sure, one day it's Mount Sorrow, but the next, we have little mount sorrows and laughing birds popping out from our @sses. It's gotta stop somewhere, and it's gotta stop here. Darth Maddolis 09:46, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
          • So...is this a new objection? If so, it should be in-line with all other objections, and if so, tell me so I can take it to the Inq to get struck. .... 09:47, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
            • I think people should take KEJ on Farfalla up there as an example: "Probably the most un-Jedi Jedi ever, and basically a ridiculous character in an already weak and silly comic series... but the article's good enough." Featured articles are the best articles, not the most "Oh gee, this subject's so cool!" articles. Indeed, the subject of the article should be irrelevant. - Lord Hydronium 09:53, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
              • I'm sorry, Sikon, Maddolis, but I'm with the Inquisitors. I dislike the Mount as much as you do, but I do respect the work of the writers (mainly Thefourdotelipsis I think). As I understand it, this is about the featured article, not the featured subject of the article. Maybe Boushh is cooler than Sorrow, but Boushh's article isn't better than this. I offer my (non-Inquisitorial) support to Mt Sorrow article, and I can only hope not having to do it again. - Skippy Farlstendoiro 08:41, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Comments

  • This is, without a doubt, the best article ever written about a sentient mountain that cries. -- Darth Culator (Talk)(Kills) 00:04, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
  • I'm putting this in Comments because I'm not sure it's a valid objection, but it seems a bit short. - Lord Hydronium 09:53, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
  • I would have thought so too, but under even the reformed FA rules, length is not a problem. As long as it's not a stub or anything ridiculously short. .... 09:54, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Wookieepedia:Featured_article_nominations/Mount_Sorrow"