All of the following articles are both related (in that they are articles on major games in the Final Fantasy series) as well as in good quality, as they consist of mostly either featured or good articles).--TBCΦ
talk? 17:48, 4 October 2006 (UTC)reply
SupportWeak object;
Final Fantasy Adventure includes sections marked as stubs. All other articles are excellent, though.
Laïka 17:50, 4 October 2006 (UTC)reply
I've removed Final Fantasy Adventure from the above group of articles because: a) as you've mentioned, some sections are still stubs b) it really isn't a major game in the series.--TBCΦ
talk? 18:33, 4 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Then I'll support!
Laïka 20:12, 4 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Nomination was promoted on 15:04, 7 November 2006 -
rst20xx (
talk) 12:36, 12 August 2009 (UTC)reply
All of the following articles are both related (in that they are articles on major movies in the Halloween series) as well as in good quality, as they consist of featured articles.--TBCΦ
talk? 18:54, 4 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Support enthusiastically. All featured, and all in excellent shape.
Tuf-Kat 22:34, 15 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Nomination was promoted on 15:04, 7 November 2006 -
rst20xx (
talk) 12:36, 12 August 2009 (UTC)reply
Solar System
All of the following articles are both related (in that they are articles on major astronomical objects in the Solar System) as well as in good quality, as they consist of mostly featured or good articles.--TBCΦ
talk? 19:36, 4 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Support Well written and consistant.
Laïka 20:13, 4 October 2006 (UTC)reply
'Support Very good, but Saturn and Jupiter might need a little work to catch up to the others.
Tobyk777 06:14, 11 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Object on the basis that
Saturn and
Jupiter are in need of cleanup. Saturn has a cleanup tag and Jupiter's lead is wholly insufficient. Both are also underreferenced (as is
Neptune and maybe more).
Ceres (dwarf planet) and
Earth also too listy (i.e. need more organizing into paragraphs with a logical flow). I don't think they should all have to be perfect for this to be a FT, but those are some pretty major problems.
Tuf-Kat 22:45, 15 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Nomination was promoted on 15:04, 7 November 2006 -
rst20xx (
talk) 12:36, 12 August 2009 (UTC)reply
All of the following articles are both related (in that they are articles on major movies in the Star Wars eries) as well as in good quality, as they mostly consist of either featured or good articles.--TBCΦ
talk? 18:40, 4 October 2006 (UTC)reply
The Prequel triglogy are all FAs, wow. A new hope looks pretty good too. I am concerned about 5 and 6 though. They are fine articles but underreffrenced. I will support since 3 out of 6 are FAs and one is a GA. I also thought that certain member of the Star Wars project were trying to make all of these FAs. They will probably imporve more. I would love this to be a FT since I love Star Wars.
Tobyk777 06:12, 11 October 2006 (UTC)reply
I'll support too, though I agree with Tobyk777's comments about the underreferencing. They're all in pretty good shape - no trivia sections! and are generally cogent and without excessive fancruft.
Tuf-Kat 22:31, 15 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Nomination was promoted on 15:04, 7 November 2006 -
rst20xx (
talk) 12:36, 12 August 2009 (UTC)reply
All of the following articles are both related (in that they are articles on major games in the Final Fantasy series) as well as in good quality, as they consist of mostly either featured or good articles).--TBCΦ
talk? 17:48, 4 October 2006 (UTC)reply
SupportWeak object;
Final Fantasy Adventure includes sections marked as stubs. All other articles are excellent, though.
Laïka 17:50, 4 October 2006 (UTC)reply
I've removed Final Fantasy Adventure from the above group of articles because: a) as you've mentioned, some sections are still stubs b) it really isn't a major game in the series.--TBCΦ
talk? 18:33, 4 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Then I'll support!
Laïka 20:12, 4 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Nomination was promoted on 15:04, 7 November 2006 -
rst20xx (
talk) 12:36, 12 August 2009 (UTC)reply
All of the following articles are both related (in that they are articles on major movies in the Halloween series) as well as in good quality, as they consist of featured articles.--TBCΦ
talk? 18:54, 4 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Support enthusiastically. All featured, and all in excellent shape.
Tuf-Kat 22:34, 15 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Nomination was promoted on 15:04, 7 November 2006 -
rst20xx (
talk) 12:36, 12 August 2009 (UTC)reply
Solar System
All of the following articles are both related (in that they are articles on major astronomical objects in the Solar System) as well as in good quality, as they consist of mostly featured or good articles.--TBCΦ
talk? 19:36, 4 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Support Well written and consistant.
Laïka 20:13, 4 October 2006 (UTC)reply
'Support Very good, but Saturn and Jupiter might need a little work to catch up to the others.
Tobyk777 06:14, 11 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Object on the basis that
Saturn and
Jupiter are in need of cleanup. Saturn has a cleanup tag and Jupiter's lead is wholly insufficient. Both are also underreferenced (as is
Neptune and maybe more).
Ceres (dwarf planet) and
Earth also too listy (i.e. need more organizing into paragraphs with a logical flow). I don't think they should all have to be perfect for this to be a FT, but those are some pretty major problems.
Tuf-Kat 22:45, 15 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Nomination was promoted on 15:04, 7 November 2006 -
rst20xx (
talk) 12:36, 12 August 2009 (UTC)reply
All of the following articles are both related (in that they are articles on major movies in the Star Wars eries) as well as in good quality, as they mostly consist of either featured or good articles.--TBCΦ
talk? 18:40, 4 October 2006 (UTC)reply
The Prequel triglogy are all FAs, wow. A new hope looks pretty good too. I am concerned about 5 and 6 though. They are fine articles but underreffrenced. I will support since 3 out of 6 are FAs and one is a GA. I also thought that certain member of the Star Wars project were trying to make all of these FAs. They will probably imporve more. I would love this to be a FT since I love Star Wars.
Tobyk777 06:12, 11 October 2006 (UTC)reply
I'll support too, though I agree with Tobyk777's comments about the underreferencing. They're all in pretty good shape - no trivia sections! and are generally cogent and without excessive fancruft.
Tuf-Kat 22:31, 15 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Nomination was promoted on 15:04, 7 November 2006 -
rst20xx (
talk) 12:36, 12 August 2009 (UTC)reply