Call of Duty Wiki:Requested Featured Articles

This page is for requesting a featured article. To nominate an article for featured status put   on top of the requested page and add the name of the page and why you think it make good featured article status below the line on this page.

Previously featured articles

 * December 2008 - Mile High Club
 * January 2009 - German Military
 * February 2009 - Nacht der Untoten
 * March 2009 - Barrett .50 Cal
 * April 2009 - One Shot, One Kill
 * May 2009 - Verrückt
 * June 2009 - Crew Expendable
 * July 2009 - Hunted

Qualifications

 * Article must be written in third person and must be completely unbiased.
 * Article must contain at least one image.
 * Article must be no shorter than fiver paragraphs in length, preferably longer.
 * Article must be categorized and sourced where needed.
 * Article cannot have been featured previously.

Voter qualifications

 * Voter must be a registered user who has either accumulated 50 edits on this wiki, or has proven that they otherwise know what they are doing, per COD:IAR (policy pending).

Requests for Featured Status
Please post below this line

Shi No Numa
I nominate Shi no Numa for our featured article because that article has tons of pictures, info, and other things on our new favorite map. Also, the other Zombie maps have been featured, so this one deserves some spotlight too. 21:30, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Support - As I said above.

Neutral - Remove the Popular culture section as it is basically trivia and the rest has no proof. If this is done I will change my vote to support.
 * Changed to Support -- 16:22, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Changed to Oppose after re-reading this.-- 00:14, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Neutral ' - I would be delighted to change to support if the 'Parts of Nazi Zombies story' were removed and put on the Zombies page. Can I do that? I believe it belongs there more than Shi No Numa.
 * Changed to Oppose. I really can't see this as a featured article. At the moment it is one big mess of text. It has hardly any images. There are many errors in the text. This, In my opinion, does not deserve featured article status. It need so much work.

Callofduty4 |    What you after?  19:42, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - It may have the content needed for it to be featured, but the delivery is all wrong. In its current state, it's not featured article quality. Just to name some of the things wrong, the references section has only one line which is far from the desired format for a reference, the ordering of the sections is wrong, many things in the trivia section are either not trivia in the first place or are unnotable and generally useless, and things that aren't supposed to be capitalized are capitalized.

I will try to fix up the article, but as of now, I oppose. 00:13, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - Like previous reasons, it's too unorganized to be a featured article. Give it more time and perhaps it'll be "cleaner." Then it will be a great candidate. CirChris -Here to help! 22:47, 6 July 2009 (UTC) july 15th 20 Oppose - I do not think this article deserves to be the featured article. Geography14 2009

Support - the article needs a little work but thats ok, I think it can be featured. Cod1 What up  5:38, 7 July 2009

Support - I've noticed the article has been worked on a little, it should be a lot better by the end of this month to be featured. I counted 12 pictures and 3 videos on the page which is great. The only problem I have with it is I agree with with Sgt. Chiafriend that the ordering of the sections is wrong. Other than that there is a lot of information on the page. E.TALE 19:46, 9 July 2009 (UTC) user does not have 50 mainspace edits -- 23:02, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Russia
I nominate Russia for featured article, as it is very long, extremely informative, and unfortunately lacking on the CoD side, however, I PROMISE to work on that part. I will start right now, actually.

Support as nominator (reasons above) Callofduty4  |    What you after?  20:29, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
 * greatly expanded COD aspect of article. Callofduty4  |    What you after?  21:17, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Neutral - Until the necessary changes are made.-- 23:02, 9 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Added even more cod info Callofduty4  |    What you after?  09:45, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - It is all Wikipedia, none of it is our work. We can't feature it. 00:43, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - I have to agree. The far majority of the article is copied from Wikipedia, and only small bits of the copied areas are relevant to the game. Featuring someone elses work as it being our own article is a no-no. 19:57, 10 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Actually, it's not a big deal, wikipedia's content can be used by anyone as long as wikipedia is credited, which it is in this case.-- 01:57, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I know that it's just fine when it comes to legality, but I meant that it's cheesy to feature an article when most of it is copied from somewhere else, and especially when our topic has little or nothing to do with the majority of the article. 22:38, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - As said before, the vast majority of the text is from Wikipedia. While there isn't anything wrong with that, it's quite simply not original. We'd be better off featuring something else that would have more to do with the series. 00:24, 12 July 2009 (UTC)