No edit summary |
Agent Charge (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
# Definitely a decent article, but not featured worthy truthfully. -{{RG}}{{User:Nerfblasterpro/sig1}} 17:10, August 8, 2013 (UTC) |
# Definitely a decent article, but not featured worthy truthfully. -{{RG}}{{User:Nerfblasterpro/sig1}} 17:10, August 8, 2013 (UTC) |
||
#: {{RG}} {{User:NovaFlare/sig}} 23:07, July 10, 2013 (UTC) |
#: {{RG}} {{User:NovaFlare/sig}} 23:07, July 10, 2013 (UTC) |
||
+ | # No way ready. In Him,<br>[[User:Agent Charge|<font color="darkgrey">'''Agent'''</font>]] [[User talk:Agent Charge|<font color="lightgrey">'''Charge'''</font>]] 07:08, August 13, 2013 (UTC) |
||
;Technical MoS Check (QCG members only) |
;Technical MoS Check (QCG members only) |
||
* Incorrect ordering of sections, see [[BP:MOS]] {{RG}} {{User:NovaFlare/sig}} 23:07, July 10, 2013 (UTC) |
* Incorrect ordering of sections, see [[BP:MOS]] {{RG}} {{User:NovaFlare/sig}} 23:07, July 10, 2013 (UTC) |
Revision as of 07:08, 13 August 2013
- Nominated by: Dino2012! FEAR ME!!! ROAAAR!!! 17:01, July 10, 2013 (UTC)
- Nomination comments: Has alot of good content.
Vote score: ±0, Technical Check: Not OK
- Support
- Make Class 1 instead (this counts as an oppose to FA, but a support for C1)
- Object
- It's definitely a huge improvement over what we had. However, there are some things:
- Starting a sentence with "And" isn't great grammatically speaking
- Since it's currently on S@H, it's generally a practice for an FA to have all additional prices filled out
- Mentions that it's the largest LOTR set twice, which is a bit redundant
- No mention of minifigures at all in the set, or the brick-built Ent, which does take up a significant portion of the pieces in the set
- Definitely a decent article, but not featured worthy truthfully. -NBP 17:10, August 8, 2013 (UTC)
- NovaFlare 23:07, July 10, 2013 (UTC)
- No way ready. In Him,
Agent Charge 07:08, August 13, 2013 (UTC)
- Technical MoS Check (QCG members only)
- Comments