Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Meta Knight/2
Meta Knight edit
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
- Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • • Most recent review
- Result: Delisted. GreenishPickle! (🔔) 10:44, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Article needs a bit update. The issues are also lacking about the character development/concept and design section, the appearances section needs to be rewritten a bit to be in order (there are also unsourced claim) and also some addition/expansion at the reception section. It absolutely needs help, especially when it doesn't have development section for the character. GreenishPickle! (🔔) 10:21, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
- Could you specify the unsourced claims? - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 13:54, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
- Rechecked, I guess there were no unsourced statement on appearance section, but still needed to be rewritten a bit to for its appearance to be in order. GreenishPickle! (🔔) 14:08, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
- The appearances seem like they are already in order of release. QuicoleJR (talk) 15:31, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
- Hmmm, not yet that good but besides that the article still has a lot of issues. GreenishPickle! (🔔) 18:00, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
- To be honest the only problem I'm seeing is the reception section is really small and might be worked better. The rewrite tag doesn't fit on there.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 08:26, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
- It doesn't have character development section thou GreenishPickle! (🔔) 11:04, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
- Might be a case where that info just isn't available. A lot of Nintendo characters are in that boat.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 14:02, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
- It doesn't have character development section thou GreenishPickle! (🔔) 11:04, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
- To be honest the only problem I'm seeing is the reception section is really small and might be worked better. The rewrite tag doesn't fit on there.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 08:26, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
- Hmmm, not yet that good but besides that the article still has a lot of issues. GreenishPickle! (🔔) 18:00, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
- The appearances seem like they are already in order of release. QuicoleJR (talk) 15:31, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
- Rechecked, I guess there were no unsourced statement on appearance section, but still needed to be rewritten a bit to for its appearance to be in order. GreenishPickle! (🔔) 14:08, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
- Comment This was already a keep in March of this year, I'm not sure how circumstances would have changed now? ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:29, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
- Probably because your only concern that time was only about notability. GreenishPickle! (🔔) 11:03, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.