The article was not promoted by Ian Rose 10:07, 16 September 2013 (UTC) [1]. reply
Rapunzel (Disney) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
I am nominating this article for featured article status because, after spending several months proofreading, referencing and completing it, I now believe that it is of substantial quality. I strongly believe that it is the most sophisticated Disney-related fictional character article on Wikipedia. Changedforbetter ( talk) 04:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) reply
Comment: This is a nice article but the infobox—with its "Species: Human | Gender: Female | Title: Princess etc"—is, frankly, extremely silly. Those sections are better off for an animal's or an officeholder's infobox, not a cartoon character's. It also provides an overly WP:INUNIVERSE perspective. I feel removing the infobox would improve the article, but even if you disagree you should at least trim it significantly.— indopug ( talk) 10:26, 5 September 2013 (UTC) reply
Misunderstanding, nothing to see, move along please ladies and gentlemen. Bencherlite Talk 02:12, 6 September 2013 (UTC) reply |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
Comment - infobox:
Ruhrfisch comments (leaning to reluctant oppose) I saw this on television recently and found the article was at FAC, so I will make some review comments. By the way, concerning the "I will wait until the actual review process begins" comment above, I would say the FAC review began with Indopug's first comment above.
The article was not promoted by Ian Rose 10:07, 16 September 2013 (UTC) [1]. reply
Rapunzel (Disney) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
I am nominating this article for featured article status because, after spending several months proofreading, referencing and completing it, I now believe that it is of substantial quality. I strongly believe that it is the most sophisticated Disney-related fictional character article on Wikipedia. Changedforbetter ( talk) 04:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) reply
Comment: This is a nice article but the infobox—with its "Species: Human | Gender: Female | Title: Princess etc"—is, frankly, extremely silly. Those sections are better off for an animal's or an officeholder's infobox, not a cartoon character's. It also provides an overly WP:INUNIVERSE perspective. I feel removing the infobox would improve the article, but even if you disagree you should at least trim it significantly.— indopug ( talk) 10:26, 5 September 2013 (UTC) reply
Misunderstanding, nothing to see, move along please ladies and gentlemen. Bencherlite Talk 02:12, 6 September 2013 (UTC) reply |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
Comment - infobox:
Ruhrfisch comments (leaning to reluctant oppose) I saw this on television recently and found the article was at FAC, so I will make some review comments. By the way, concerning the "I will wait until the actual review process begins" comment above, I would say the FAC review began with Indopug's first comment above.