Classic WoW Wiki talk:Featured article/Articles

This is the page for nominating articles for addition and removal from the featured articles list. Previous nomination discussions can be found on Talk:Main Page/FA/Previous nominations. Please add new nominations at the end of the page, and link the article in the title!

Netherwing
The article itself needs a bit of work, but I think it could be a good FA =) -- 22:22, 18 April 2007 (EDT)


 * Oppose. This article actually needs a lot of work. It doesn't have a bold title, it has capital letters where they shouldn't be, it doesn't have a picture but does cite one as a source (which by itself is already kinda weird) and lacks a lot of lore info. My three suggestions are: 1) wait until 2.1 comes out watch as more and more information on the Wing becomes available.. 2) improve the article and 3) please don't nominate articles for FA if they 'need a bit of work' (which is an understatement in this case). Featured articles should display WoWWiki's finest work, which this article really isn't (yet).[[Image:IconSmall BloodElf Male.gif]] APΘLLΘ (ZEUS)  02:52, 19 April 2007 (EDT)


 * Oppose Stressing what Apollo said: ...needs a lot of work. -- 03:02, 21 April 2007 (EDT)
 * Changing my stance to neutral, as it doesn't hold any special importance above any other faction page. -- 01:55, 13 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment I've given Netherwing a big update, and merged in stuff from the nether drake article. It needs fleshing out, but should be a readale guide now. 22:51, 21 April 2007 (EDT)
 * An update on this - the only problem is that too many red links makes this unusable atm. 13:39, 5 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Support. Comprehensive and tidy - though could do with more of an introduction. 19:49, 16 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Still opposing, but for a different reason. This article now encompasses an awesome guide, however there is no lore information at all. Can't someone dig through all the quest dialogs and come up with something decent?[[Image:IconSmall BloodElf Male.gif]] AMBER (RΘCK)  08:11, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Oppose: I agree with AMBER (RΘCK) . --[[Image:IconSmall_Deathknight.gif]] Buraisu  ( Talk ·  Contr ) 10:34, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Teron Gorefiend
This article might need a little clean up, but this is a great character with lots of lore behind him. He is the focus of (imo) the best BC quests, and he is boss in the newly released Black Temple.
 * Oppose. The article has no references, doesn't clarify why Gorefiend ended up in service of Illidan, has a section which contains only one sentence and lastly it has images that say "(before patch 2.1)", but doesn't clarify what the post-patch 2.1 situation is.[[Image:IconSmall BloodElf Male.gif]] APΘLLΘ (ZEUS)  17:13, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. Definately needs an overhaul, but could certainly be a future candidate. 05:30, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment.It doesn't clarify what the post-patch 2.1 situation is? yes it does. Read the text of the last pic.-- 20:39, 5 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Neutral: needs to be cleaned up and reworked in some areas. --[[Image:IconSmall_Deathknight.gif]] Buraisu  ( Talk ·  Contr ) 10:41, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Gem
I am new to the whole FA thing. However I find this article well laid out, and extremely useful. I'm not sure exactly the qualifications required to become a FA, so I thought I would just nominate and see what others think 14:40, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Support. Useful, useful, useful. Three hoorays for this article.[[Image:IconSmall BloodElf Male.gif]] APΘLLΘ (ZEUS)  05:08, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose Useful... and not much else. It's more of a link farm than anything that could possibly be improved, except with the addition of more gems, or a patch changing the existing ones. -- 05:14, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - note that this page is already linked on the sidebar. 05:23, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose The very first paragraph is basically wrong: A gem is generally an item that can be placed into a socket of another item to give that item additional bonuses, powers and/or procs. A gem is not an item that can be placed into a socket, but may be an item that can be placed into a socket. It was supposed to be called a jewel. Strictly speaking, a gem is a raw ingredient from mining or prospecting. -- Fandyllic (talk &middot; contr) 7:10 PM PDT 24 Oct 2007


 * Support: I agree, it is useful and would make a good FA. --[[Image:IconSmall_Deathknight.gif]] Buraisu  ( Talk ·  Contr ) 10:50, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

What Wrath of the Lich King is NOT
Feedback? :P -- 19:51, 8 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Support - I am very amused. It's definitely different from the sort of articles I've seen here before, but seems pertinent to the immediate post-BlizzCon 07 WoW fan environment. -- 19:48, 14 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Oppose: - Fanfic, silly, and speculation articles do not belong as featured articles, regardless of quality.-- 20:04, 15 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment - I like it, but I worry that it could become a focus for vandalism. 20:01, 16 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Oppose: Per Sandwich. -- 21:22, 16 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Support: Many People Blaming this Game Sucks Its a fun artical and its NOT Vamdalism Dragonnagaofthewater 19:53, 1 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment - He did not say it WAS vandalism, he said because it has no factual grounding it could easialy BE vandalized. -- 17:22, 3 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment - Ok But it Can be become a focus on Vandalism but we dont know yet because it isn`t featured Yet.


 * Oppose: No. [[Image:IconSmall_Deathknight.gif]] Buraisu  ( Talk ·  Contr ) 10:54, 15 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Oppose I love this one too much too see it vandalized! Perhaps if it could be made uneditable, to preserve it's originality from random people trying to "improve" it, then I would accept this. -Ose 22:03, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Human
The article has a good length, information, and screenshots (though missing a WoW race shot). 20:23, 16 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Support: I agree with K i r k b u r n . --[[Image:IconSmall_Deathknight.gif]] Buraisu  ( Talk ·  Contr ) 11:10, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Though a picture or two could be fixored. --Sky (talk | con | wh ) 23:16, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Tauren
Less well known info for many, Taunka link renews interest. Tribes need broken link work though. 20:32, 16 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Support: I agree with K i r k b u r n . --[[Image:IconSmall_Deathknight.gif]] Buraisu  ( Talk ·  Contr ) 11:10, 15 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Support: I agree with Kirkburn and Tauren Tribes section now has order. Zakolj 21:17, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Needs fair use issues done with. --Sky (talk | con | wh ) 23:18, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Night elf
Lots of info, well laid out. Could do with one or two extra screenshots though. 20:33, 16 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Support: I agree with K i r k b u r n . --[[Image:IconSmall_Deathknight.gif]] Buraisu  ( Talk ·  Contr ) 11:10, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Support: Night Elves have some of the best lore of all the races. --Ose 17:23, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Death Knight (hero class)
Though most of it is still speculation (and will be until someone gets to the point to make one), there seems to be a lot about the Death Knight (that will be) in-game. I think this is the biggest piece of info since the announcement of Outland and the new races - everyone seems to be talking (and debating) a lot about what to expect...so why not put it on the front page, eh? --Joshmaul 07:31, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose Just not good enough yet by the fact that we have nearly nothing on it; how runes work, what the other spells will be, etc. Iirc, it already is featured on the front page in the news box, just not in the FA box. -- 01:52, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose It seems that, at this point, a lot of information about this new hero class is still in speculation rather than fact. It would be great if there are solid info present. Maybe some time in the future when there are more confirmed information - Constarcy, US: Fenris  2:30PM Aug/28/2007

Siege weapon
There have been worse suggestions. It is coming in WotLK. It is one of my favorite topics and I wrote most of it. Who does not like siege?-- 20:44, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Oppose. There is not enough in-game info, maybe it will be good enough when the expantion comes out and you know for sure about them and how they are played. It is too much of a bullet-pointed list, too.-- 20:44, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * What the fuck? You propose an article, only to oppose its nomination afterwards? I don't get it. Oh, and yeah; naturally I opposse because this article is not elaborate enough.[[Image:IconSmall BloodElf Male.gif]] AMBER (RΘCK)  09:17, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Temporery Oppose :Just not Enough Game Info lets wait until it comes out K? Dragonnagaofthewater 21:16, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Roleplaying Age
Roleplaying age - It'd help alot of roleplayers figuring out there Age, Weight and Height for other Races -- Chaosweaver 12:48, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Interesting - but part of the problem would be the fan-aspect of the article. At the moment it is essentially a personal article - for featuring it needs citations and to be less "personal". 22:08, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Dragonflight
Why not? They are neutral and have good lore--FireMaster 14:57, 23 October 2007 (UTC)


 * What? -- 22:01, 24 October 2007 (UTC)


 * A specific dragonflight, perhaps? 22:06, 24 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Of course!--FireMaster 13:36, 25 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Support: I would like to turn this into a nomination for all five major Dragonflights. Red Dragonflight, Blue Dragonflight, Green Dragonflight, Bronze Dragonflight, and Black Dragonflight. --[[Image:IconSmall_Deathknight.gif]] Buraisu  ( Talk ·  Contr ) 11:28, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Agreed, those are obvious candidates. --Ose 22:05, 20 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Neutral Eh... Much as I love Warthok, maybe not... --Sky (talk | con | wh ) 23:19, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Alterac Valley
Seems like one of the better articles. -- Fandyllic (talk &middot; contr) 3:43 PM PDT 24 Oct 2007
 * Support If we make this one featured, we might actually get some more people to understand this place, resulting in a more fun fight with more honor than "PUSH FW FFS NOOBS!!!111oneoneone". Atleast thats how I feel Alliance on my battlegroup acts :P --Ose 21:08, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Neutral Needs to be finished with updating since patch. --Sky (talk | con | wh ) 23:17, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Uther the Lightbringer
Come on, who doesnt think so? He has great lore, he is in WarCraft 2 and 3 and plays a significant role, without him there would be no paladins! He appears in WoW for a time. His page is organized and well put together, it seems a good candidate. -- Melean 03:39, 4 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Support Uther is really lore rich and he is the best paladin ever. Literally. :) -Mantriox/Talk/Contributions 21:34, 5 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Support I agree it is a very good article about a very important character. Zakolj 21:39, 5 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Support: Sounds good. --[[Image:IconSmall_Deathknight.gif]] Buraisu  ( Talk ·  Contr ) 11:38, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Uther is made of win, seriously! --Pimmeh 08:41, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Clean article, good info, good lore, good guy. Got my vote --Ose 20:58, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Even if the Horde desecrates his tomb, some of us still feel kinda bad about it...heh heh heh. *ahem* Sorry. --Joshmaul 21:36, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Sure. Seems well written. -- 23:04, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Zul'Aman
Quite relevant, as it is "the thing" right now. Seems pretty well organized. -- Ose 20:55, 20 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Support: I just wanted to Nominate it myself. Zakolj 21:08, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Support: Likewise. --Joshmaul 21:34, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment It's listed on the popular links to your left. --Sky (talk | con | wh ) 23:02, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Opposed: Its a popular link, hardly needs a FA. --Pimmeh 20:59, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
 * comment: Its hotlinked in the front page as well, btw!--Pimmeh 08:29, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: The link will eventually be done away with once the Sunwell patch sees the daylight (no pun intended). Besides, the side links and FA serve different purposes. The side links are to provide easy access to popular articles, while the FA shows off WoWWiki's finest work. There's no problem with sidelinked articles being featured.[[Image:IconSmall BloodElf Male.gif]] AMBER (RΘCK)  07:29, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Frostmourne
Very good lore, plus it's going to be relevant concerning the upcoming expansion. -- Ose 21:36, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Nicely done page, regardless of relevancy or background. --Sky (talk | con | wh ) 23:04, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Ashbringer
Very good lore, plus it's going to be relevant concerning the upcoming expansion. -- Ose 21:36, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Ashbringer is already featured. :) --Sky (talk | con | wh ) 23:02, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Atiesh, Greatstaff of the Guardian
Very good lore, plus it may become relevant when Naxxramas returns in the upcoming expansion- -- Ose 21:36, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose Not good supporting reasons, for one, and two, not really enough to feature it with. --Sky (talk | con | wh ) 23:04, 3 December 2007 (UTC)