Zelda Wiki:Featured Article Nomination

Getting Involved

Discussion Center

Image Requests

Help Guide

Here, users can nominate and vote for Zelda Wiki's next featured article. Any article worthy of being featured exemplifies the Wiki's quality standards, and goes above and beyond what is expected in a normal encyclopedia entry. Featured articles should:

1. Have exceptionally fluid American English grammar and spelling.
2. Be lengthy, yet detailed.
3. Be well organized (as in subdivisions).
4. Cite sources, and cite them properly.
5. Be properly categorized.
6. Contain the most up-to-date information possible.
7. Have no template requesting improvement, merging, deletion, or any template that may in some way state the article is not of excellent quality. In this respect, there should be no duplicate of the nominated article, nor should the article be a duplicate of another page.
8. NOT be copied from Wikipedia, or from any site that does not run the Wiki, under any circumstances!

For help on the correct format used to add nominations or votes, see the Featured Content Help.

Rules:
Scoring and conditions for passing a nomination:

1. All nominations start with an initial score of zero.
2. A supporting vote adds 1 to the score.
3. An opposing vote subtracts 1 from the score.
4. An article needs to achieve a score of +5 within 4 months of the nomination date in order to be featured.
5. A nomination automatically fails if the score drops to -3.

Voting:

1. You may only vote once on any particular article.
2. You may not vote on any articles you have nominated.
3. Votes should be added beneath the relevant header (either support or opposition), with # at the beginning of the line. The current score must be updated to reflect this new vote.
4. Supporting votes should include a brief message stating why the article should be featured.
5. Opposing votes must specify how the article fails to meet one or more of the qualifying criteria described above.
6. All votes MUST be signed using ~~~~ If you do not sign, your vote WILL NOT be counted!

Current nominations

Sage

File:Sage.png

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.User:Mandi/sig 04:28, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Support

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.User:Matt/sig 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. User:Axiomist/sig 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.User:Supermann61 11:48 May 8, 2009

Opposition

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)

Neutral Comments

• 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. User:Adam/sig 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:Melchizedek/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)

Negated/Retracted Votes

• 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:Melchizedek/sig 09:14, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Twinrova

File:Twinrova.png

Matt pointed this one out to me recently, and now that it's complete with full references, I think it definitely meets (or exceeds) all the requirements. A very well put together article about one of my favourite bosses of OOT! User:Adam/sig 18:32, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Support

1. Well, the article is well written and organized, and has lots of references. It looks interesting enough to be featured. User:RupeeLord/sig 19:37, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
2. This is another one that was basically a stub when I got here. Now it is so much bigger, better. And with cool pictures we didn't have we back when. A very good article indeed. Plenty of references now. That's good. Must be featured.User:Matt/sig 20:01, May 2, 2009 (UTC)
3. Very well written, very well laid out, and plenty of references. It is very well sized and has great pictures. This one is a must-feature in my opinion. Shnappy 15:06, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
4. It is well written and has good pictures. It has references and is looks very interesting. It is 'featured worthy'. Well done to everyone who wrote it. - ShellShocker 09:46, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
5. I vote this gets up. There doesn't seem to be an issue about the section and it gives a lot of info about Twinrova. - AtrumLevis  (My Talk Page) (My Contributions) 23:09, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
6. Well organized, has enough references. Needs to be featured.User:Mandi/sig 06:26, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Opposition

Neutral Comments

1. I think it is a GOOD passage but cloud need more detail about them...--Link6767 19:02, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
2. I think the page needs just a little bit more work before becoming featured, although it's well on its way. A little bit more info for MM and OoX will earn my vote. —Alter  ^{{T C B H }} 06:53, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
3. I feel some of the things are a little... off. Take the Majora's Mask section. It's rather small, and a little bit misguided. Maybe I am being a stickler with these featured articles, but if a article is to be featured it should be pretty much 100% true to the facts. They played a pretty big role in MM, yet are barely mentioned in passing. Nathanial Rumphol-Janc 07:49, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Negated/Retracted Votes

Twinrova is sooooo easy. I hate her! Gammadiologist 20:00, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

• Vote negated due to opposition guidelines at the top of the pageUser:Mandi/sig 22:02, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Sacred Realm

File:Triforce.jpg

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

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:Axiomist/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. —Alter  ^{{T C B H }} 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:Melchizedek/sig 04:14, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Opposition

Neutral Comments

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)

Tingle

This article is very lengthy and well-written, and has plenty of images, all of which are nicely placed. There are also several sources. I think this would make a great featured article, seeing as how many people have contributed to (and vandalized) it. —Alter  ^{{T C B H }} 03:18, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Support

Opposition

1. Nothing against Tingle, I love the guy. I think the article overall just isn't as informative as it could be. There is very little information on the Tingle's own games, which to me isn't acceptable even though they never made it stateside. Not only that, I can't help but feel certain areas of the article are underwritten, and it may be do to the general distaste for the character (that is, people not really wanting to work on this article as much as others). I may need to give this piece some personal loving, but I just don't think it's ready. Maybe next month. Nathanial Rumphol-Janc 07:12, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Neutral Comments

Featured Articles

The featured articles are listed in this format:

• Name of Article (Date it became featured)

Articles that have been disqualified are in the format:

• Name of Article (Date it became featured) (Date disqualified)

• The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess (N/A) (May 27, 2008)

• Zelda Timeline (N/A) (May 27, 2008)

• Ganon (N/A)

• Boomerang (N/A) (October 14, 2008)

• Stalfos (July 7, 2007)

• ZeldaInformer (August 1, 2007) (June 12, 2008)

• Lake Hylia (October 2, 2007) (November 24, 2008)

• Zant (October 16, 2007)

• Dark Link (November 5, 2007)

• Link (December 15, 2007)

• Princess Zelda (January 28, 2008)

• Link's Crossbow Training (February 13, 2008)

• Dodongo (February 15, 2008)

• Moblin (February 18, 2008)

• Majora's Mask (Boss) (March 8, 2008)

• Pedestal of Time (April 6, 2008)

• Triforce (May 17, 2008)

• Midna (June 12, 2008)

• Master Sword (June 17, 2008)

• Gerudo (July 21, 2008)

• Darknut (August 30, 2008)

• Golden Goddesses (October 15, 2008)

• Veran (November 24, 2008)

• Goron (March 12, 2009)

• Warping (April 30, 2009)