Zelda Wiki:Featured Article Nomination/Archive

=Previously Featured Articles=

{{hide|header=Warping (April 30, 2009)|content= Finally a lengthy page not concerning characters or games. Informative and concise enough to be a resource for all of the series applicable titles. Interesting to read and get the whole picture of the function as gaming progressed. As a bonus, it could serve as an example of what other articles spanning throughout the series could be.{{:User:Axiomist1875/sig}} 04:29, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

{{Support}} {{Oppose}} {{neutral}} }}
 * 1) I'm for it. It' got a nice amount of images, very lengthy in size, nicely laid out, etc. I think this would make a great featured article. {{:User:Alter/sig}} 16:40, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) The article is well written and very detailed. Refreshing, considering it is not concerning characters or games. Totally feature worthy.{{:User:Mandi/sig}} 22:28, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
 * 3) The article is written well, decent length, and has plenty of details. Considering it isn't concerning any of the characters or games, this is very good. {{:User:Kybyrian/sig}} 04:47, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
 * 4) Decent length, good grammar usage, and very good referencing. Regardless of not being a character or place it is deserving of being featured in it's own right. --Nathan 06:38, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * 5) A few months ago this article was scrappily written and badly laid out, however the work that has been put into it by some dedicated editors has made it great. The images are relevant and good quality, the content it well written and everything is covered. Definitely featured material. {{:User:Melchizedek1866/sig 12:08, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * 6) This article is written extremely well with few/no mistakes. It's unique in being that it isn't just a normal enemy/character/dungeon/game/etc., rather it describes how warping is used throughout the series. Shnappy 07:41, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
 * 7) The article has more than enough info! It is well written and provides a complete explanation of all varieties of warping in every game. EzloSpirit 00:57, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
 * 8) I think it is a good detailed read and it has good grammar and punctuation--Link6767 23:13, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * 9) The article is well written with lots of detail and great pictures. It is worthy of being a featured article. - ShellShocker 12:19, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
 * 10) The author worked hard on it. It's a pretty full article. Make it happen. Noble Wrot 04:58, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

{{hide|header=Sacred Realm (February 14, 2010)|content=

Although it was mostly written by one single member, this page has become an article to be proud of. Excellent writing skills detailing every single appearance of the Sacred Realm, well-placed pictures that go along with the section involved, and it's got sources to back up almost every single statement. Truly an outstanding article. Dany36 20:59, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

{{Support}} {{Oppose}}
 * 1) This page is worthy of being featured because though it has been mostly brought up to date by one individual, there are many who laid the groundwork for that up scaling. It also has become quite a page to behold as opposed to its original version, which is great for a page about such an important piece of Zelda Lore. -- Xizor 02:00, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) I am pleased with how it turned out, and it looks very nice with the references in place. -- Link87 13:25, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 3) This is exactly the caliber of article that ought to be featured. The read never seemed redundant, references are exactly where they need to be, the layout with the images is even impressive. Congrats to the writers for such an amazing feat, it's truly become a valuable resource for LoZ fans seeking info on the Sacred Realm. {{:User:Axiomist1875/sig}} 02:10, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 4) I'll throw my chips on this one. It reads nicely, isn't repetitive, and has good images/layout. It does seem to be a little biased when it comes to the timeline, but it may just be me. Anyway, good page. {{:User:Alter/sig}} 03:30, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 5) Yeah. This page is well written, organized nicely, not to mention more than enough references.{{:User:Mandi/sig}} 06:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 6) This one is lengthy, not repetitive, informative, and whatever theories contained on the page are backed up with plenty of references. Considering it's one of the more important pieces of Zelda lore, it's remarkable.Ganondorfdude11 18:40, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 7) Is well written, well set out, images are great quality, and everything is thoroughly referenced. {{:User:Melchizedek1866/sig 04:14, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 8) The article has superior flow and readability, with precisely-cited references, for a Zelda region that still hasn't been properly explored in the games! {{:User:Cipriano 119/sig}} 01:08, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
 * 9) This article has really seen a lot of overhaul and fixing from what I've seen in its history. We can't deny how great it's become, and I think it would be a wondrous addition to the featured lineup. Very informative to the readers, and a great long article to show off ;) But in all seriousness, I give this my full support.{{:User:Neo/sig}} 18:09, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * 10) Vote number ten! As stated above, the article is lengthy, a "good read", and just down right impeccable.  This is the kind of article ZW needs, and should be a good role model for what other articles should be like.  Also, it shows editors what we mean by "quality", and should give other wikis a "run for their money!" {{:User:Austin2862/sig}} 04:55, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) I can't really support this one. It is way too story like. It's wording is too overly elaborate, it's way too dramatized, and it still seems like it is too wordy. It needs some serious work before it should be featured.{{:User:Matt/sig|~}} 18:37, February 14, 2010 (UTC)

{{neutral}} The article is really well written, especially for being mostly a single users work. However, something that annoys me, and it annoys me really overall at ZW, is the quotes and references. As I mentioned here: http://www.zeldawiki.org/Talk:Sacred_Realm I feel that quotes that are referenced in the article should simply be in the article, not at the bottom creating more work for the reader. The article references them many times. The best example I can give is when The Great Deku Tree says blah blah... your interpreting for the reader what the GDT said instead of just quoting me what he said. It would cut out usless sentences of explaining it and replace it with quotes. As a reader, it's annoying you are making me do extra work and interpreting quotes for me. Nathanial Rumphol-Janc 07:38, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I understand what you are saying, but that's how all articles are on the wiki, that's not anything unique. And all it takes is a simple click of the mouse to go straight to the quote, that's why we put the link in the text. And as far as interpreting it, that's for people who may not understand the actual quote or may misunderstand its meaning. There's really no way to change those things, those are given for any article on the entire wiki. We're actually making less work for readers I would have thought by helping them understand what the quotes mean and by not making a mess of the main text by putting them in the references section where they are a simple mouse-click away. Link87 15:14, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I am well aware that's how all articles are done, and I find it too annoying. This place isn't for that discussion - I suggest taking it to that pages talk page where I brought it up. Nathanial Rumphol-Janc 16:24, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * This is about the article's merit though, not about precedents. I respect that you don't like the reference precedent, but that has nothing to do with this article's merit. Link87 18:09, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't think a featured article needs to necessarily be 100% perfect. It can have some work that might still need to be done, but there is nothing objectively wrong with this page at all. --Xizor 23:40, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes and no Xizor. To me if were going to feature something, it should be as close to perfect as it can be, don't you agree? You wont "feature" a section of your site unless it is close to perfection, right? Same case as I view articles. Nathanial Rumphol-Janc 09:17, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * No article, or anything for that matter, is going to be 100% perfect Nathan. This is about as close as it gets, and to expect it to be absolutely perfect is unreasonable. Link87 16:46, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

}}

{{hide|header=Bomb (March 13, 2010)|content=

Bomb
Not so long ago, this article was an embarrassment to Zelda Wiki. It was nothing but an unorganized mess. Axiomist asked me one day if I could improve it, so I've worked hard to take what I know about bombs, and what others knew that I did not, and I built this article up to meet the standards for a featured article. It is informative, to the point, has appropriate images, and has tons of references. I took it pretty seriously. I believe that this article, along with any others about themes and subjects that have endured throughout the Zelda series, is very important to the Wiki, and it would be nice to see others in the shape it's in now. I've had plenty of help putting it together, so it's mostly rock solid. The enemy lists at the bottom of the page are a little arrangement I came up with and Axiomist organized to be tidier. Lists like these will show up on other item pages, so consider this a ground-breaker. Noble Wrot 20:41, 22 November 2009 (UTC)


 * 1) The bomb article seems to have ignited a ZW reorganizing revolution, finally the obvious format for dividing articles is being thrown out for a more aesthetically pleasing layout. This has gone from one of the ugliest sloppiest content dumps to a well structured page-suitable to be the mold for many other rashly grouped subjects.  23:47, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) I'm all for it. The page looks nice, and has a good amount of images. However, some parts of it look a little bit messy, but I'm not sure that can be changed. I'll try to add some info from the Tingle games to it and make it complete. Again, great page! 06:28, December 16, 2009 (UTC)
 * 3) For a phoenix-like story, this article is not too shabby. This is a complete insight into one of the cooler Zelda weapons and as the role model of the enemy list for future similar articles, this page gets my vote. 07:57, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * 4) I like it. It's well written, well organized, has a nice gallery and a lot of good references. Definitely feature worthy. 06:26, December 29, 2009 (UTC)
 * 5) Excellent article that details every kind of bomb that has appeared in every Zelda game to date along with well-placed pictures and references to top it all off. Dany36 18:45, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 6) It's well done. I think we've really cleaned it up and made it into a functioning article. It has my vote! And Dany, your argument looks a LOT like a supporting one... 20:15, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 7) Great article, information is all correct, and it even inspired my topic for my next article at ZeldaInformer. Needless to say, a great piece of work. Nathanial Rumphol-Janc 07:28, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 8) I never knew there could be so much concise information about Bombs in one place. This article is "the bomb". =P --Xizor 06:05, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * 9) At first I was thinking no when this was first proposed. It was missing information and some information was downright false, particularly about the Tingle Bomb. Now though everything seems to be in order and a few bumps were smoothed over. Still room for improvement of course, but I'm comfortable supporting it now. 15:38, March 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * 10) Good article. "Someone has set us up the bomb!!!" -  S.B.44    [T] |undefined 01:17, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

}}
 * 1) I don't know. I think it could use some sections on the games, and not just the kinds of bombs. I once tried to do that for the article, but then I lost everything and didn't bothered to try it again. Though I do suppose it's been improved a bit, I think it's needs more. The Goron Moron 07:51, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Vote negated due to opposition guidelines. This would make sense as a Neutral Comment. --Xizor 06:05, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

{{hide|header=Sage (May 9, 2010)|content=

Sage
With the work of the Zelda Wiki community, this article has become a well written, and informative page. Quite an accomplishment to everyone who contributed. 04:28, 19 March 2009 (UTC)


 * 1) It seems to me to be rather well organized. And it has a very appealing overall layout. And it certainly fits the other criteria. 23:37, March 28, 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) I would vote for this one because it goes more in depth in Sages than Rauru's page does. --Skermefaten 23:51, 2 April 2009 (UTC)Skermefaten
 * 3) Very good article, articulate, and an excellent example of what subject directories could be with the links to the main article and well written summaries on each topic. All images are relevant, clear and useful. And a solid mix of references to boot. 03:14, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * 4) Very organized, and quite easily read. It flows well, and the pictures couldn't be placed onscreen any better or more relevantly. →Kochjr 21:18, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
 * 5) Well written and organized, it really delves into all of the Sages and it more than qualifies for featured status.--Kresh64 22:04, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
 * 6) I think it was very nice and showed more info.--Link6767 20:54, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * 7) I think this was a good article, written well and good info. A very good article. Well written. 11:48 May 8, 2009
 * 8) I think sages are a pretty cool guy. Eh seals Ganon and doesn't afraid of anything. -  S.B.44    [T] |undefined 02:12, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
 * 9) I think that it is well written, along with a lot of great information. Nice job. User: Psychoboo13
 * 10) I like it. Has a lot of good information and images.  16:27, 9 May 2010 (UTC)


 * 1) I really can't give this my approval. What is there is well written, but there are, as has been noted in the neutral comments, some clearly missing aspects to it. While what we have is really good, it's not the full and complete picture. I simply can't ignore that and be neutral, or support it. The article is not complete, and thus I gotta say no. Nathanial Rumphol-Janc 07:08, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

{{negated}} }}
 * I've spotted what I consider to be quite a large omission in this article; there's barely any mention of Princess Zelda's role as the crucial Seventh Sage (or Maiden) in ALttP, OoT and FSA. I'd suggest that this needs to be rectified, or at least discussed here, before this becomes Featured. 19:49, 4 May 2009 (UT
 * The current content is great - however it is lacking as Adam mentions. It is up to featured standard but needs more I feel. I feel there needs to be more pictures; namely Fado, Medli, Makar and Laruto, with some more details on them. Furthermore, an example of this lacking is in the Twilight Princess section, which no where mentions them residing in the Arbiter's Ground's Mirror Chamber. Adam is right that it needs more 'Zelda' and may be worth covering the Sage-Oocca relationship potential, under theory of course.There is also lots of blank space. {{:User:Melchizedek1866/sig 07:39, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree with Adam and Mel, the current content and organization is great, but perhaps a bit more information on Zelda's role would definitely sway me to vote for the page. Link87 22:10, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The article needs some more references and quotes from the Japanese versions of the games to highlight version discrepancies between the sages' roles. First, they were not Princess Zelda's tutors in the Japanese version of TP.Ganondorfdude11 07:54, 4 June 2009 (UTC) - Voted negated as it is not a valid opposition - it's more neutral. Just suggests more things to add to the article, of which, all the mentioned has been added.{{:User:Melchizedek1866/sig 09:14, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

{{hide|header=Fishing (November 30, 2010)|content=

Fishing
One notable aspect of Zelda Wiki is our method of placing similar content from varying games into fewer articles. Fishing is an article representing that, our inclusion of references, relevant images, cross referencing related pages, up-to-date info, and despite having brief how-to sections; the article never seems dominated by with a guidish style. Fishing is certainly worthy of being the standard for all other mini-game articles to follow. 06:14, 30 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 1) I'll go for it. It's been edited by many users, is very detailed, and has a lot of good info without being excessive. --Xizor 07:34, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) This article is well written and has sufficient references. Deserving of being featured. 22:35, October 30, 2009 (UTC) 22:35, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 3) This one looks pretty good to me. Detailed without being overwhelming, well organized, ample references, layout that is appealing to the eyes. Everything you'd look for in a featured article. 18:37, February 14, 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) This article is not just detailed, but it is also a major event in many Zelda games.&#123;&#123;SUBST:User:supermariosuperfan/sig}} 15:28, 6 August 2010 (EDT)
 * 5) Lots of helpful information, not repetitive. Perfect for a featured article. HelmarokKing 17:25, 16 October 2010 (EDT)
 * 6) I'll be quick. This article is lengthy, detailed and has perfect images. Deserving of featured page definately! Pokemainiac 04:35, 27 October 2010 (EDT)
 * 7) Gets my vote. Looks well done and has a lot of information and pictures.  18:52, 31 October 2010 (EDT)
 * 8) Very informative, had plenty of information that I had not previously known, and the writing flows smoothly. Well done! Masta Sword 20:04, 20 November 2010 (EST)
 * 9) This article is very detailed with a guidance of all the types of fish that exist. Zeldarules8 09:23, 25 November 2010 (EST)
 * 10) This article is pretty good. Its got lots of references, is at a good length, gives a ton of information, and more. Very deserving of being featured. Danton12396 21:39, 30 November 2010 (EST)


 * 1) I guess I'll be the jerk and strike at this article at nine votes. Looking at it, it's still no different than when I left my neutral comment over a year ago. It feels quite messy, and I think more content needs to be consolidated here and from other articles. It's great as it is, but I think featured articles should be judged on individual potential rather than an across-the-board status, and this article could be a lot better. 19:08, November 25, 2010 (UTC)


 * First off, I want to support this, because I think the article's great. But I'm still concerned about the status of this article alongside others (mainly Fishing Hole). I know others have shared these concerns, which have mainly been discussed here and here. The two key suggestions were either to create a Fishing template which could be used on various different article (e.g. Fish, Fishing Rod, Fisherman) to unite the information, or to merge Fishing with Fishing Hole. Personally, I think either or both would be good, because as it stands I'm not entirely happy with the way the information on the subject of Fishing is distributed. I've held back on adding Merge templates for the moment, as that would disqualify this article... 13:10, 30 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm with Adam. It's a very good article, but it's a little messy when it comes to related pages. There may be some merging that needs to be done first. 15:35, October 30, 2009 (UTC)


 * Both articles have been extensively reworked since the last comments on those talk pages, I'll make the case to merge the Fishing Rod content into Fishing, and get that template going. I think a sidequest article would help diversify our featured articles, so they don't look like Featured Characters :p 02:48, 31 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 1) yay! i love fishing! ...er, i mean feature this article. its cool.
 * * Vote negated due to opposition guidelines at the top of the page. 18:52, 31 October 2010 (EDT)

}} {{hide|header=Hyrule Castle (August 29, 2011)|content=

Hyrule Castle
A staple of just about any Zelda game, always beautiful, the article is no exception. It covers all the appearances of the castle. It goes into detail but doesn't go so far as to dull you out halfway through. You're engaged in reading it the whole way. And the ample supply of images makes it easier on the eyes to get through the whole thing. It, of course, has a lot of references to support it, making it that much better. Also, a rare treat, the gallery at the bottom has many beautiful views of various incarnations of the castle. 02:33, February 16, 2011 (UTC)


 * 1) I'll go for this one. Plenty of references, nicely written AND lots of visual aid with the images. 8D Dany36 22:51, 15 February 2011 (EST)
 * 2) I'll support as well. It is a fantastic article, well written with great pictures. Vyselink 21 February 2011
 * 3) This article has incredible depth and detail, impeccable grammar and syntax, and above all an abundance of high quality images. The placing of some images makes for somewhat of a lack of visual text flow, but overall its a very good read and definitely worthy of Featured status. 08:29, 22 February 2011 (EST)
 * 4) What more can I say that hasn't already been said. Zelda4life 20:11, 18 March 2011 (EDT)
 * 5) This article references ALL appearances of Hyrule Castle in depth, covering a broad topic well and fluently. Alibi 18:42, 9 May 2011
 * 6) This would be a very wonderful article to be shown on the Featured Article on the main page. Hyrule Castle defines many things, such as the Hylian Family and the Hero of Time/Link, the impending dangers it usually faces, and how it shows the rule of Hyrule, and it's other neighbours, depending on whatever game it appears in. Hylian Historic 17:46, 11 May 2011
 * 7) this article is outstanding and referes to most of hyrule--Ruchq 12:30, 26 June 2011 (EDT)ruchq
 * 8) This article is very detailed. It is well written, correctly edited and revised, and covers its topic very well. Danton12396 14:42, 9 July 2011
 * 9) Go for it. The article looks nice and it pretty much covers everything from what I have noticed! 16:29, 25 August 2011 (EDT)
 * 10) I'll give it the final approval. Hyrule Castle serves as a unique article in my opinion, considering its status as both a recurring game location and as a dungeon. An article like this would be excellent as the next Featured Article! --Sephichan125 02:13, 29 August 2011 (EDT)

How did it take this long for this article to get approved? Hell, I voted for it in FEBRUARY!!! Vyselink 20:00, 29 August 2011 (EDT)

}}

{{hide|header=Four Sword (21 December, 2011)|content=

Four Sword
Like most of the major weapons and items in the series, the Four Sword page has received an outstanding article. With amazing amounts of information, great image usage and plenty of references, I for one say this page is now worthy of featuring. 11:01, 21 November 2010 (EST)


 * 1) The information, as said above, is fantastic, well written, interesting, and full of a lot of knowledge on the subject. There was a lot of things in the article that I found that interested me and helped clear any confusion I had on the subject. DEFINATELY deserves to be featured.  12:38, 1 December 2010 (EST)
 * 2) The information is very in-depth and interesting. The article is a good length for the topic. It gives all the information needed and more. This article definitely deserves to be featured. Danton12396 16:39, 1 December 2010 (EST)
 * 3) I think this article is definitely well-written.  18:21, 21 January 2011 (EST)
 * 4) This article is truly one of the more impressive one here on Zelda Wiki. Extensive information covering all possible questions one might have, combined with excellent image use make this article a legend in itself. --HyperLink12 19:24, 23 July 2011 (EDT)
 * 5) This article is very well written and clearly explains the role the Four Sword plays in the plot of each game it is featured in. Vulpix001  16:37, 27 July 2011 (EDT)
 * 6) Before I read this article I knew nothing about the four sword. Now I know practically everything!This article contains tons of information, with no typos to be seen. That's why I vote for this article. --17:00, 21 October 2011 (EDT)Person777 17:00, 21 October 2011 (EDT)
 * 7) While I do think this article could use minor trimmings to cut down the verbosity, this article is tautly referenced, attractive, and reads smoothly. Excellent nomination.  00:42, 25 November 2011 (EST)
 * 8) The information is well detailed. It seems fit. --Triphoria 21:29, 20 December 2011 (EST)
 * 9) An overall well written article that is thoroughly detailed and informative, and plentiful in references. The "Appearances" section in particularcontains certain storytelling elements, but no article is perfect. It can always be fixed in the future. This article has been a pending nomination for over year; it's time to finally push it through!  08:42, 21 December 2011 (EST)
 * 10) Well written piece that is filled with citations and tons of interesting tidbits. Very extensive and an overall great job. Feature this! LegendZelda 13:25, 21 December 2011 (EST)


 * 1) I think the four sword has great design and cool powers. I mean, what other item can turn Link into 4 copies of himself? Besides, it is the main weapon in one of my favorite zelda games, the minish cap. Four Swords is also good, but I like mc better. Therefore, I nominate this article. "Link4569 16:19, 11 January 2011 (EST)" Personal like has nothing to do with the article in question. 01:02, January 12, 2011 (UTC)

}}