Changes: Brickipedia:QC/Sulfurix

Revision as of 16:55, 12 August 2011

Brickipedia →

Quality Check Group

→ Sulfurix

Sulfurix was recently granted Class 2 status after it's proposal here. I would argue that the description definitely needs a rework- it needs to actually describe the minifigure, not just list similarities and differences between others. And the background says its name is derived from Sulphur, but there really should be some sort of source to prove that. Also it had incorrect categories and a minifigure gallery even though there was only one valid variant listed (all have been since removed) NightblazeSaber 08:39, June 10, 2011 (UTC)

Remove Completeness Status

- nxt 11:14, June 11, 2011 (UTC)

Restore Completeness Status

There is now some added content. •myk 21:28, July 15, 2011 (UTC)
Seems complete to me. -N B P 16:55, August 12, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Not voting either way, currently I would vote for a removal, but I think it could probably be easy to fix it up. NightblazeSaber 08:39, June 10, 2011 (UTC)
Fixed up spelling/grammar. Also, as for sulphur, I presume it is there because sulphur and sulfur are alternate spellings (British and American). Kingcjc 13:18, June 10, 2011 (UTC)
Agreed per NHL. I don't own this minifigure, but I'll see what I can do to improve the description.

Byzantium 3000![[Special:Editcount/Byzantium 3000|Special:Editcount/Byzantium 3000 edits!]] 17:07, June 10, 2011 (UTC) Darn. I gave that article the C2. Sorry about that guys. :( (Why do I always get humiliated for this......) Skdhjf^(Talk!) 15:10, June 10, 2011 (UTC)

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 ;Restore Completeness Status
 #{{RG}} There is now some added content. {{User:Mykheh/sig}} 21:28, July 15, 2011 (UTC)
+#{{RG}} Seems complete to me. -{{User:Nerfblasterpro/sig1}} 16:55, August 12, 2011 (UTC)
 ;Comments
 * Not voting either way, currently I would vote for a removal, but I think it could probably be easy to fix it up. {{User:Nighthawk leader/sig}} 08:39, June 10, 2011 (UTC)