Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Pikachu/archive2

Pikachu
It meets my FA standards. Raichu 00:24, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
 * "Pikachu is most famous for being the "face" of the Pokémon franchise, perhaps being the most widely recognised around the world. " - perhaps others can comment on this as well, but this may need to be backed up somehow, but I'm not sure. Also, the article has a stub tag on it.... Just another star in the night T 00:33, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Object - According to the tag at the bottom, the article is still a stub. Uberlemur 01:09, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
 * From Stub, "A stub is an article that is too short, but not so short as to be useless. In general, it must be long enough to at least define the article's title, which generally means 3 to 10 short sentences." I am removing the stub. Alvin6226 01:25, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
 * The stub marking seems to have been far out of date. This certainly is not a stub. — Cuivi é  nen  T, Monday, 15 May 2006 @ 01:35 UTC


 * Object. The article is close to FA standards, but has a few minor issues. The article does not have enough footnoting, and could use with a few more references. Also, the prose is lacking in a few respects, its needs to have its grammar and spelling checked and corrected. Overall, an extremely good Pokémon article, but not quite yet of featured quality. RyanG e rbil10 04:00, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Object The cultural impact, the most important area of Pikachu to a non-fan is in stub form. This article is not finished being tidied, and the relevant project is against this move. Celestianpower has already noted his wish to nominate himself, when he feels ready. Not that I'm saying this isn't allowed, just that we're not officially putting it up. Cheers, H ig hway Rainbow Sneakers 06:56, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Object - referencing issue, cultural impact very thin. Various other stylistic issues. Will be an FA someday, but not today. --Cel es tianpower háblame 09:58, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Object: - WP:LEAD is pretty poor - lots of Weasel words (eg "probably, the most popular") a fair dose of repeating itself, some needless references to the editor's other favourite Nintendo games. --  Alfakim  --  talk   22:04, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Object. Wow, lotta problems here. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:46, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * The cultural impact section is still a bulleted list.
 * The biology section is written from an in-universe perspective (my fault; I mostly wrote it myself a long time ago).
 * The "in the anime" section is headed up with a decorative image (can we replace it with a screenshot of Pikachu and Ash?)
 * Game names aren't always in italics.
 * This is far from brilliant prose; particularly in the anime section, paragraphs often start off talking about one thing and end talking about another.
 * Object I was happy with Bulbasaur by the end, and Torchic was ok, but this just isn't FA quality. Staxringold 19:53, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak object. There could be better linking- like in Biology, various electrical concepts aren't linked like they could be. Some of the wordings bother me: "Pikachu is the only Pokémon in Ash's huge party that has been with him in every series, although a Phanpy he rose from an egg joined him after he travelled around Hoenn." Or: "Many of the Pokémon animated shorts with all-Pokémon dialogue have featured Pikachu as the main character, often as the main voice of reason. " Also, some concepts are casually thrown in without explanation or linking (like a "Phanpy"). In general, the order of the sections feel haphazard and mixed together. (Why is anime Pikachu's diet in that section? Why does a description of in-game pikachus separate the anime and manga sections? etc.) --maru  (talk)  contribs 06:10, 20 May 2006 (UTC)