Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Castlevania titles
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The list was promoted 21:51, 5 February 2008.
Myself and some other editors have been tidying up and sourcing this list to improve the quality and believe it is ready for FL. Any comments or suggestions you may have to improve it would be appreciated.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Guyinblack25 (talk • contribs) 18:10, 25 January 2008
- Comment The lead is too short, and while it does have an interesting format, I'd prefer to see it look more like List of Final Fantasy media (which is a former FL). -- Scorpion0422 18:20, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually the format was modeled after List of FF media before it lost its FL status. May I ask what you would suggest to include in the lead and what benefits would be gained from the format switch? (Guyinblack25 talk 18:28, 25 January 2008 (UTC))[reply]
- Both look good, but I think the one for Final Fantasy looks more organized, ie. it's a lot easier to compare the original release dates. It's nothing I'd really oppose the article over though because the present format is a bit different, but perfectly acceptable. As for the lead, it should be a summary of the article, so it should be about a paragraph (6-8 sentences), since there is a main article for Castlevania. Basically, look at the FF one and see how you can model this one after that. -- Scorpion0422 18:53, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The lead has been expanded some. If it's not enough I'll look into finding some more content.
- The lead is sufficient enough now. Good work. -- Scorpion0422 19:50, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The lead has been expanded some. If it's not enough I'll look into finding some more content.
- Both look good, but I think the one for Final Fantasy looks more organized, ie. it's a lot easier to compare the original release dates. It's nothing I'd really oppose the article over though because the present format is a bit different, but perfectly acceptable. As for the lead, it should be a summary of the article, so it should be about a paragraph (6-8 sentences), since there is a main article for Castlevania. Basically, look at the FF one and see how you can model this one after that. -- Scorpion0422 18:53, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually the format was modeled after List of FF media before it lost its FL status. May I ask what you would suggest to include in the lead and what benefits would be gained from the format switch? (Guyinblack25 talk 18:28, 25 January 2008 (UTC))[reply]
(Guyinblack25 talk 20:27, 25 January 2008 (UTC))[reply]
- Support - Looks really good, extensively referenced, didn't think I'd see so much Castlevania content featured! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 21:52, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support - looks good. Nice work on this. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 21:57, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Looks great! Drewcifer (talk) 04:20, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.