Old discussions

This page is an archive of past FA nominations.

Old votes

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.

Please use {{Archive}} instead.

Star Wars

Support

1. As Nominator. Currently contains no redlinks, and all sets (past, present and known future) are listed in a well-organised order. NovaHawk 03:36, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
2. Agree Agree with Nighthawk. Kingcjc 10:42, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
3. Jedimca0^{(Do or Do Not, There is No Try)} 15:22, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

1. I see there is much support for this article. But it is only a list of links. What should be put on the main page? --Bahnpirat 09:07, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Comments

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.

Please use {{Archive}} instead.

Brickipedia News

Support

1. As Nominator. —Unsigned comment by LegoManiaCrossovers1002 (talk • contribs).

Oppose

1. There is already a news section on the main page so, it would be redundant. MarioGalaxy2433g5 10+ {talk/contribs/Logs} 21:59, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
2. Same as MarioGalaxy NovaHawk 22:11, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Comments

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.

Please use {{Archive}} instead.

7101 Lightsaber Duel

Support

1. As Nominator. —Unsigned comment by LegoManiaCrossovers1002 (talk • contribs).

Comments

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.

Please use {{Archive}} instead.

Lego Batman the Videogame

Support

1. As Nominator. —Unsigned comment by LegoManiaCrossovers1002 (talk • contribs).

Oppose

1. Too short and not very good article. --Bahnpirat 09:07, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
2. Same as Bahnpirat NovaHawk 09:46, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Comments

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.

Please use {{Archive}} instead.

2009

Support

1. Should be a good way to start the year, and list is well up to date NovaHawk 00:55, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Comments

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.

Please use {{Archive}} instead.

Castle (+3)

Support

1. Coupon11 19:31, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
2. --GERMAN77 Come To TalkContribsTemplate:Color 04:05, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
3. --LegOtaku (talk • contr) 06:52, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Comments

• Great page, Lot's of work.--Coupon11 19:31, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.

Please use {{Archive}} instead.

Classic Star Wars (±0)

Support

1. User:FerrariBricks/Sig
2. User:Cpatain Rex/sig 18:56, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Needs to be updated with the new theme infobox, and the minifigures part of the infobox will probably have to be placed somewhere else. Other than that, I would be happy to support NovaHawk 22:15, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
   • Only still opposing until we figure out what to do with the minifigures now :) NovaHawk 00:53, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
     • Need to figure out what to do with minfigures still, but I also agree with LegOtaku now too- sorry NovaHawk 07:15, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
2. The article is actually just a list. --LegOtaku (talk • contr) 06:52, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Comments

• Very well planned out. Sets are categorized into the year they were released in User:FerrariBricks/Sig
  • Nighthawk: Infobox has been replaced, minifigures have been archived on my test page (to be retrieved later), but can you tell me how to resize/make the image small in the infobox on my talk page. User:Cpatain Rex/sig 06:11, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.

Please use {{Archive}} instead.

Space Police III (+2)

* Detailed pictures. Great list of creatures/sets.

Support

1. --User:Coupon11/sig 21:12, September 1, 2009 (UTC) (Nominator)
2. Looks pretty good to me! -Nerfblasterpro 19:02, September 6, 2009 (UTC)
3. A really great page. Deserves a nomination/award! Velociraptor78 19:48, September 8, 2009 (UTC)
4. We've all Been Working on this for months! This Deserves To Be elected--Crotocall 23:15, September 15, 2009 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Currently little more than a list. --LegOtaku (talk • contr) 21:51, September 5, 2009 (UTC)
2. Agreed. And much of the first paragraph talks about the videos, not the sets or the history of the theme NovaHawk 02:43, September 16, 2009 (UTC)

Comments

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.

Please use {{Archive}} instead.

7775 Aquabase Invasion

• Nominated by: User:LegOtaku/sig 08:56, December 16, 2009 (UTC)
• Nomination comments: Well-researched set article and one of the longest.

(+4 Revs/+1 Users/+5 Total)

Support

1. NovaHawk 04:16, December 23, 2009 (UTC)
2. It is long, and contains all of the needed info. Ajraddatz _Talk 04:33, December 23, 2009 (UTC)
3. Ok, support now. :) Good article, long, interesting (Thought gallery was neccessary). -Nerfblasterpro: It's Nerf, or Nothing! 01:41, December 24, 2009 (UTC)
4. User:Cpatain Rex/sig 02:33, December 24, 2009 (UTC)
5. A wonderful article for this wiki. GG 360 19:42, December 30, 2009 (UTC)

Object

Comments

• This set doesn't seem to have a gallery, but neutral, pretty long, good pics. Like I said, the one thing it lacks is a gallery, only 3 pics included. -Nerfblasterpro: It's Nerf, or Nothing! 19:45, December 17, 2009 (UTC)
  • Well, a gallery is actually not a required feature of an FA. --User:LegOtaku/sig 13:25, December 20, 2009 (UTC)
• Needs to have other prices filled in (if available), a quote from LEGO.com if one can be found (it was released in 2007 so it should have a shop description somewhere). Also, for the sentence "This is the only set that contains the huge round window pieces colored in light blue. Another rare piece is the transparent tunnel whose only other appearance is in 7894 Airport.", maybe the pieces in question can be linked to? NovaHawk 04:19, December 20, 2009 (UTC)
  • Done. -User:LegOtaku/sig 13:18, December 20, 2009 (UTC)

Approved as featured article 23:36, December 30, 2009

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.

Please use {{Archive}} instead.

Pirates

• Nominated by: User:LegOtaku/sig 08:56, December 16, 2009 (UTC)
• Nomination comments: This is already a GA and I think it contains enough information, that is also presented well enough, to become a FA.

(+3 Revs/+2 Users/+5 Total)

Support

1. I think It's a good one! :) - Nerfblasterpro: It's Nerf, or Nothing! 19:42, December 17, 2009 (UTC)
2. Apart from liking the toy line, I love this article. It is well written, and with lots of info on it. Ajraddatz _Talk 04:31, December 23, 2009 (UTC)
3. User:Cpatain Rex/sig 02:33, December 24, 2009 (UTC)
4. I think is a wonderful contribution to brikipedia!! - User:nicolay12 (UTC)
5. Nicely done page, although there are four red links. User:Samdo994/sig209:01, December 31, 2009 (UTC)

Object

Comments

Approved as featured article 17:26, January 3, 2010 (UTC)

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.

Please use {{Archive}} instead.

Pepper Roni

• Nominated by: User:Boidoh/sig 02:00, December 16, 2009 (UTC)
• Nomination comments:

(-4 Revs/-1 Users/-5 Total)

Support

Object

1. Does not have an appearances section, needs to have infobox filled out more (theme/appearances), years in infobox need to be linked, could do with a few more links in the text as well. Speculation section should also either not be included or sound a bit more neutral. NovaHawk 08:20, December 16, 2009 (UTC)
2. I inserted a few links and sectioned the text, but the article is still lacking, e.g. an appearances section, it doesn't even state if this is a video game-only minifigure or not. There could be a section that summarizes which parts are used. All in all, it doesn't feature most of the information that could still be added. Brickipedia has better articles to offer. User:LegOtaku/sig 08:37, December 16, 2009 (UTC)
3. I write a nice long speech about how this article shouldn't be on FA status, but it is easier to just second everything said above ;) Ajraddatz _Talk 04:30, December 23, 2009 (UTC)
4. Per Ajraddatz. User:Cpatain Rex/sig 02:33, December 24, 2009 (UTC)
5. Not suitable. User:Samdo994/sig209:01, December 31, 2009 (UTC)

Comments

Try a GA nomination first. --User:LegOtaku/sig 07:21, December 18, 2009 (UTC)

• How many RV votes are needed for a removal? (couldn't find this anywhere) NovaHawk 02:57, January 16, 2010 (UTC)

Vote to remove nomination (rev only)

• Remove - It seems clear that the article is unsuited for FA status. -- --User:LegOtaku/sig 17:37, January 3, 2010 (UTC)
• Remove - Per LegOtaku NovaHawk 22:39, January 3, 2010 (UTC)
• Remove - I would rather just have this off. It's been here since the beginning of forever. :P -Nerfblasterpro: It's Nerf, or Nothing! 01:44, January 12, 2010 (UTC)

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.

Please use {{Archive}} instead.

Crusaders

• Nominated by: User:LegOtaku/sig 08:56, December 16, 2009 (UTC)
• Nomination comments: Content-wise this article is pretty much complete. It may need some reorganization though.

(-1 Revs/0 Users/-1 Total)

Support

Object

1. It could use a bit more organization... Ajraddatz _Talk 15:43, December 31, 2009 (UTC)

Comments

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.

Please use {{Archive}} instead.

Black Knights

• Nominated by: User:LegOtaku/sig 08:56, December 16, 2009 (UTC)
• Nomination comments: Content-wise this article is pretty much complete. It may need some reorganization though.

(+3 Revs/+5 Users/+8 Total)

Support

1. Great looking page with very detailed info --Clone Commander Fox 19:55, December 23, 2009 (UTC)
2. Seconded. User:Samdo994/sig209:01, December 31, 2009 (UTC)
3. Yay Olde Castle. AM I allowed to vote here?User:BobaFett2/sig2 02:04, January 8, 2010 (UTC)
4. NovaHawk 07:51, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
5. -Nerfblasterpro: It's Nerf, or Nothing! 12:08, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
6. Looks great, but could use a few more pictures... =\ Construction Worker Do you need help? 00:26, January 22, 2010 (UTC)
7. --Lcawte 16:39, February 13, 2010 (UTC)
8. User:Cpatain Rex/sig 18:25, February 13, 2010 (UTC)

Object

Comments

• Could do with an updated infobox. Sorry, I don't have time to really look at it/fix anything up now. NovaHawk 10:39, December 16, 2009 (UTC)
  • Fixed it, fixed Lego to LEGO, and updated some links. :) -Nerfblasterpro: It's Nerf, or Nothing! 19:56, December 17, 2009 (UTC)
• Can someone explain the question mark just above the "See Also"? If this needs to be verified, it should be. NovaHawk 07:54, January 6, 2010 (UTC)
  • Fixed, I removed the sentence since the set is not related to the Black Knights in any way. --User:LegOtaku/sig 08:16, January 6, 2010 (UTC)
• It would be great if this article had a longer lead section, which is what will be shown on the man page. --User:LegOtaku/sig 08:16, January 6, 2010 (UTC)
  • I agree that a longer lead would make it just a bit better, but the article overall looks pretty good to me. NovaHawk 07:51, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
  • Worked hard on fixing this page. -Nerfblasterpro: It's Nerf, or Nothing! 00:34, January 17, 2010 (UTC)

Approved as featured article 23:30, February 15, 2010 (UTC)

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Hogwarts Nominated by: User:LegOtaku/sig 08:56, December 16, 2009 (UTC) Nomination comments: Provides a collection of information that may not be found anywhere else and has considerable content. (+4 Revs/+4 Users/+8 Total) Support NovaHawk 23:48, January 18, 2010 (UTC) User:Cpatain Rex/sig 06:14, February 17, 2010 (UTC) Great! Clone Commander Fox 17:52, February 17, 2010 (UTC) User:Samdo994/sig2 12:53, February 22, 2010 (UTC) Awesome!User:BobaFett2/sig2 -- WHAT?!?! User:Eddlikeshotsauce KABOOM 16:26, March 18, 2010 (UTC) Ajraddatz Talk 14:44, March 20, 2010 (UTC) -Nerfblasterpro: I PRESS SMASH BUTTON! 15:19, March 20, 2010 (UTC) Object Comments I know, that this article still has a GA nomination going. But I think its quality level is sufficient for FA. --User:LegOtaku/sig 08:56, December 16, 2009 (UTC) I think this article needs some more images included, it looks somewhat bare... User:Samdo994/sig209:01, December 31, 2009 (UTC) ** I agree with Samdo, it could use a few other images NovaHawk 07:51, January 9, 2010 (UTC) Approved as featured article 01:02, March 21, 2010 (UTC)

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. LEGO Duck Nominated by: -Nerfblasterpro: I PRESS SMASH BUTTON! 13:53, February 13, 2010 (UTC) Nomination comments: Though it does not go with the manual of style too well, it is still a very good article with an image of a set from the 1930s, plus descriptive information. (-4 Revs/-2 Users/-6 Total) Support Even though the article does not have much content,it is still pretty unique.-- WHAT?!?! User:Eddlikeshotsauce KABOOM 16:25, March 18, 2010 (UTC) Object This would not even pass as GA. In particular, it does not meet 4, 8 and possibly 2. (btw, nominators are not allowed to vote.) --User:LegOtaku/sig 15:44, February 13, 2010 (UTC) Sorry, it's just too short. NovaHawk 21:49, February 13, 2010 (UTC) Way too short!!! Clone Commander Fox 17:51, February 17, 2010 (UTC) Per Nighthawk User:CaptainJag/sig1 05:43, February 27, 2010 (UTC) User:Cpatain Rex/sig 01:32, March 5, 2010 (UTC) Per above. Ajraddatz Talk 15:50, February 22, 2010 (UTC) To short to even be complete. —Unsigned comment by BobaFett2 (talk • contribs). Comments It's very short.User:BobaFett2/sig2 14:57, February 15, 2010 (UTC) Vote to remove nomination (rev only) NovaHawk 02:51, March 5, 2010 (UTC) Ajraddatz Talk 13:55, March 5, 2010 (UTC) User:LegOtaku/sig 14:38, March 20, 2010 (UTC) Just get it out of my sight! :P -Nerfblasterpro: I PRESS SMASH BUTTON! 15:19, March 20, 2010 (UTC)

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. 6195 Neptune Discovery Lab / Aqua Dome 7 Nominated By:User:BobaFett2/sig2 01:19, April 22, 2010 (UTC) Nomination Comments (+3 Revs/+4 Users/+7 Total) Support As nominator.User:BobaFett2/sig2 01:19, April 22, 2010 (UTC) I too am impressed, although have no complaints with the article. Great job :) Ajraddatz Talk 01:23, April 23, 2010 (UTC) Lookin good, you cookin with gas now ? Gladiatoring 13:12, April 25, 2010 (UTC) Well written, everything seems great.User:Mackmoron11/sig 18:35, April 25, 2010 (UTC) NovaHawk 04:42, April 28, 2010 (UTC) User:Samdo994/sig2 14:03, April 28, 2010 (UTC) -Nerfblasterpro: I PRESS SMASH BUTTON! 14:46, April 28, 2010 (UTC) Object Comments I don't know, but this appears to be as perfect as the page will get. I would like any feedback about it because I worked really hard and love the set.User:BobaFett2/sig2 01:19, April 22, 2010 (UTC) Wow, I'm impressed :) It's improved a lot even since it made it as a GA. The only reason I'm not supporting is the "For this section in a list form, go here." section. The wording just sounds fairly unprofessional, and I can kind of understand the reason for putting it on a subpage due to the length, but maybe a scrollbox would be better in this case? Also, just a minor thing, but it might be a good idea to break the text up with some images (with captions)- some people may not bother reading the article if they see so much text altogether. But the content itself and all the different views of the set looks great to me. Also, no luck on finding other country's prices for the infobox? Guess it can't be helped since the set was released 15 years ago, but it would be good just to be complete (but still ok if you can't). NovaHawk 04:38, April 22, 2010 (UTC) Sure. I can do the images to break it up. I'm not sure about the list thing; LegOtaku opposed the Power Miners FANom because it was a list, are the admins OK with using a scroll box?User:BobaFett2/sig2 20:16, April 22, 2010 (UTC) Yay, this looks really great. But I second the notion to break up the description with the images. I will also rewrite the notes section. --User:LegOtaku/sig 07:17, April 26, 2010 (UTC) I did break up the description with images.User:BobaFett2/sig2 22:18, April 26, 2010 (UTC) Or did you want a different way of breaking them up?User:BobaFett2/sig2 22:36, April 26, 2010 (UTC) I think a slight tweak might be good. If you take a look at some Wookieepedia FA's, the image layout is in a diagonal pattern a lot of the time (ie aligned left, aligned right, aligned left, etc) Two random examples I clicked were Battle of Teth and Cody Sunn-Childe. So basically moving the middle or the top and bottom images to the left would have me 100% in support of the article, but I'm happy to support it now. NovaHawk 04:42, April 28, 2010 (UTC) Woah, now it's cooking! Yeah, I think the images might be good.User:BobaFett2/sig2 13:08, April 28, 2010 (UTC) Approved as featured article 14:30, April 30, 2010 (UTC)

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. 10210 Imperial Flagship Nominated by:User:BobaFett2/sig2 13:49, April 28, 2010 (UTC) Nomination Comments:This may seem to hasty a nomination, but the article was already good status. It only needed a few more touch ups and some added detail, and voila. I have this LEGO set, and again believe the there isn't more to add. If you have any magazine pages or catalog pages pertaining to this amazing LEGO set, please upload them and include them in the article. (+2 Revs/+3 Users/+5 Total) Support User:Samdo994/sig2 14:15, April 28, 2010 (UTC) I wouldn't say this isn't worthy of a nomination, but I can't say it is the best FA I've ever seen. Weak support. Nerfblasterpro: I PRESS SMASH BUTTON! 14:46, April 28, 2010 (UTC) In agree with Nighthawk, but sure. User:Mariofighter3/sig3 01:43, May 1, 2010 (UTC) Per above; a great article about a great set! Ajraddatz Talk 22:06, May 5, 2010 (UTC) Looks good... may need links to the minifigs (or a page for the minifigs) --Clone Commander Fox 01:53, May 8, 2010 (UTC) Yeah "Admiral's Daughter" and "Admiral" really should be created. NovaHawk 08:43, May 8, 2010 (UTC) Ok, a bit per NBP, but I'm happy enough to support it NovaHawk 00:34, May 11, 2010 (UTC) Object # Now tagged with {{Redbricks}} due to an excessive number of redlinks. This needs to be fixed if the article is to pass at all, regardless of vote count as it does not meet FA requirements. NovaHawk 05:01, April 29, 2010 (UTC) Comments Needs a See also section, but overall looks good! User:Samdo994/sig2 14:03, April 28, 2010 (UTC) Oh yeah, thanks for the suggestion, I'll add one!User:BobaFett2/sig2 14:04, April 28, 2010 (UTC) Oh, sorry. I'll get to it after homework today.User:BobaFett2/sig2 20:47, April 29, 2010 (UTC) I finished off the redlinks and added more content, so I'm waiting to see his reply.User:BobaFett2/sig2 01:44, May 1, 2010 (UTC) Phew, NHL no longer opposes.User:BobaFett2/sig2 21:10, May 3, 2010 (UTC) I added the minifigure articles is it good now?User:BobaFett2/sig2 13:02, May 8, 2010 (UTC) Looking better, although the cook and lieutenant could probably do with links as well. The sentence "Over each cannon port is a blue flap, which can be lifted. The cannons are of the new kind, which can fire, (US only , as all other countries already used firing cannons in the past.) unlike their predecessors" could really do with a cleanup too- is it saying that the sets with firing cannons weren't sold in the US before this one? NovaHawk 07:38, May 9, 2010 (UTC) It's saying that they weren't sold in the US before 2009 except for one year (I think when Pirates was released), after which COPPA banned them.User:BobaFett2/sig2 21:26, May 10, 2010 (UTC) Approved as featured article 01:16, May 15, 2010 (UTC)

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Power Miners Nominated by:User:BobaFett2/sig2 16:03, March 24, 2010 (UTC) Nomination Comments:This is a great article, I have worked on it with Agent Chase and Mariofighter3 Re-Nominated by: -Mariofighter3: Brickfliming now in session! 15:04, May 23, 2010 (UTC) Re-Nomination Comments: I have renomated this so I can make sure the article may meet the two objector's sugjestions. (±0 Revs/+7 Users/+7 Total) Support I have been helping Boba get this to Featured stats.--Agent Chase: :Agents in Action! 16:25, March 24, 2010 (UTC) -Nerfblasterpro: I PRESS SMASH BUTTON! 18:18, March 24, 2010 (UTC) Per above. Ajraddatz Talk 18:26, March 24, 2010 (UTC) User:Samdo994/sig2 19:28, March 24, 2010 (UTC) What's wrong with it? Nothing Commander Code-8 08:07 March 27, 2010 (2010) Maybe another external link --Clone Commander Fox 12:10, May 2, 2010 (UTC) Very informative and contains almost everything Power-Miners related!--Munchman14 21:39, May 22, 2010 (UTC) Object Well, how about making the "New pieces"-list an actual informative text as in Divers or Dragon Masters, instead of giving the reader just a list of obscure numbers? Oh, and a larger lead section would also be nice (remember that this is the part that goes on the main page.) :) --User:LegOtaku/sig 15:57, April 6, 2010 (UTC) Per LegOtaku- for a GA, fair enough, but to be an FA, it needs to be basically perfect NovaHawk 02:00, April 9, 2010 (UTC) Comments Yep, you have. I really hope this works. What about the not added colors of the other parts? User:Samdo994/sig2 19:28, March 24, 2010 (UTC) When it says [[Part xxxxx]] (Color), it's because that part first came as that color from that theme. If it just has [[Part xxxxx]], it's because the part is entirely new. Great to see that there are so many supports.User:BobaFett2/sig2 20:36, March 24, 2010 (UTC) Ugh I new this would happen. I don't want to change the list of parts because it took my so long to make the pages and list.User:BobaFett2/sig2 22:06, April 6, 2010 (UTC) Didn't think that this would work. Well, can you help me, anyone? I don't know much about the theme.User:BobaFett2/sig2 20:58, April 9, 2010 (UTC)

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. 6986 Mission Commander Nominated by:User:BobaFett2/sig2 01:07, May 18, 2010 (UTC) (+3 Revs/+2 Users/+5 Total) Support It seems well writenUser:Mackmoron11/sig 01:43, May 18, 2010 (UTC) Nerfblasterpro: I PRESS SMASH BUTTON! 15:57, June 15, 2010 (UTC) User:Ajraddatz/sig 21:48, June 22, 2010 (UTC) NovaHawk 06:27, June 24, 2010 (UTC) By process of elimination of the other "candidates" really. W:User:Kjhf/sig Oppose # First of all, in the first paragraph, the {{clear}} needs to be removed and the image repositioned, because that white space is weird. Also, I'm not sure why we have Dutch prices- is this intended for a substitute of Euro pricing since the set is pre-Euro? (that isn't an oppose reason, just wondering). But, on the whole, I'm sorry, I just don't think it has what it takes to be an FA. Take a look at FA's like Castle, Pirates and 6195 Neptune Discovery Lab / Aqua Dome 7. They're much longer and more descriptive. Not all articles have the potential to become FA's (which is one reason why we have GA's and completeness), and I don't think this one can. In it's current state, I'd support it for GA, but not FA. Sorry. NovaHawk 23:36, May 18, 2010 (UTC) #Just doesn't really "wow" me. Could use some work. -Nerfblasterpro: I PRESS SMASH BUTTON! 18:26, May 25, 2010 (UTC) # I agree on the points of Ajr. and Nerf. I mean, really, most of the nominations from you, boba, are all Space Related. Can't we have something like a movie theme's something to be a FA or GA? -Mariofighter3: Brickfliming now in session! 22:30, May 25, 2010 (UTC) Comments It could use more of a neutral point of view in areas. Ajraddatz Talk 01:14, May 18, 2010 (UTC) Okay, I'll fix it.User:BobaFett2/sig2 01:29, May 18, 2010 (UTC) Fixed.User:BobaFett2/sig2 01:31, May 18, 2010 (UTC) Pirates is awful short for a theme. The dutch price is there because it's a price.User:BobaFett2/sig2 23:49, May 18, 2010 (UTC) Ok, nvm. -Mariofighter3: Brickfliming now in session! 22:42, May 25, 2010 (UTC) Thank you for understanding MF3.User:BobaFett2/sig2 22:51, May 25, 2010 (UTC) Yes!!!!User:BobaFett2/sig2 17:45, June 15, 2010 (UTC) Approved as featured article 23:01, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Orient Expedition Nominated by: -Mariofighter3: Brickfliming now in session! 21:22, June 9, 2010 (UTC) Nomination comments: I worked work very hard on this for a while. Follows MoS, has correct spelling and grammar, has enough length span for an FA theme, everything seems good. Thanks Boba for helping me and encouraging me. Tell me if anything is wrong, because I'll change it in a heart beat. Thanks. (+3 Revs/+2 Users/+5 Total) Support User:BobaFett2/sig2 22:21, June 9, 2010 (UTC) -Nerfblasterpro: I PRESS SMASH BUTTON! 17:06, June 16, 2010 (UTC) User:Ajraddatz/sig 21:48, June 22, 2010 (UTC) User:Samdo994/sig1 11:43, June 23, 2010 (UTC) NovaHawk 06:27, June 24, 2010 (UTC) Object Comments Approved as featured article 23:01, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. 8098 Clone Turbo Tank Nominated by: User:Cpatain Rex/sig 01:39, March 5, 2010 (UTC) Nomination comments: Well, I know that it is not yet released, and it needs a description from LEGO.com, but it won GA status, and I thought that it might be viable as a FA. Just wanted to see what everyone else thought. (+4 Revs/+2 Users/+6 Total) Support I actually like this article, it seems very complete and nice. If the fact that it is unreleased is a problem, then we can wait and re-nominate after it comes out. Ajraddatz Talk 13:54, March 5, 2010 (UTC) Even though Nighthawk has a huge point, this artcle is VERY describtion, so per Captain Rex :) User:Mariofighter3/sig321:22, March 5, 2010 (UTC) This article is great (with the shop description it will be even longer!)--Clone Commander Fox 00:57, March 18, 2010 (UTC) It's a great article and it tells the world that we have the inside scoop on stuff.User:BobaFett2/sig2 21:34, March 26, 2010 (UTC) User:Samdo994/sig1 09:57, July 13, 2010 (UTC) Knew it could be better. And so Cpatain Rex's legacy lives on.... -Nerfblasterpro: Can you believe it's only been a year? 13:00, July 13, 2010 (UTC) User:CaptainJag/sig1 19:12, July 16, 2010 (UTC) Object # I just don't think we should have an FA on an unreleased set. Things may change in the future, making the information false. We're not 100% sure about the tactical droid, so the information in incomplete. And, it's not following the MOS with not having a shop description. I know one has been released yet, but I still think that it should have one if it's to be an FA. I'll be happy to vote for it after it's released though and everything's sorted out with it. NovaHawk 02:49, March 5, 2010 (UTC) # Per Nighthawk. User:CaptainJag/sig1 03:46, March 5, 2010 (UTC) #Totally agree with Nighthawk!-- WHAT?!?! User:Eddlikeshotsauce KABOOM 16:20, March 18, 2010 (UTC) BOR Strike- objection (set not released) has been addressed for over a week, and objector has been absent on page for over a week NovaHawk 23:45, July 14, 2010 (UTC) What they said. -Nerfblasterpro: I PRESS SMASH BUTTON! 15:19, March 20, 2010 (UTC) #We can't Feature this when it hasn't been released! I may be new to Brickipedia, but I know how Featured articles work Commander Code-8 08:03 March 27, 2010 (UTC) BOR Strike- objection (set not released) has been addressed for over a week, and objector has been absent on page for over a week NovaHawk 23:45, July 14, 2010 (UTC) Comments Removed support vote Rex due to nominators not being allowed to vote for FA noms NovaHawk 02:49, March 5, 2010 (UTC) After re-reviewing this page, it definetely could be an FA, but it has not yet been released. I say it should be an FA in about 6 months or so, but not yet. -Nerfblasterpro: I PRESS SMASH BUTTON! 21:39, March 23, 2010 (UTC) But having it before it is released says to the world: Look here, Brickipedia has the inside scoop! Either way, it can be made better. -Nerfblasterpro: I PRESS SMASH BUTTON! 18:18, March 24, 2010 (UTC) I see this set on Ebay, they say they ship it to you in a few days, so they say it's not being pre-ordered. The sellers are from Japan and Netherlnads, maybe it was released there. This set has been released in Australia already (I've seen it at Target), so would that help get it FA? It hasn't been listed on the LEGO Star Wars website or LEGO Shop@Home Australia yet, however.--S•h•o•b•y•4 (Talk•Edits•Contribs) 02:59, July 3, 2010 (UTC) Since the set is now available in stores, I'll let it run for at least a week, see if anyone knows of any changes that need to be made to the set, and if people want to strike their opposing votes due to it being unreleased. NovaHawk 04:40, July 3, 2010 (UTC) Approved as featured article 07:56, July 18, 2010 (UTC)

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Boba Fett Nominated by: NovaHawk 06:34, May 9, 2010 (UTC) (+4 Revs/+4 Users/+8 Total) Support 's Good.User:BobaFett2/sig2 12:32, May 9, 2010 (UTC) I made the clone wars info on him. Try to correct it if you know more on the topic. --Clone Commander Fox 23:10, May 10, 2010 (UTC) Good. Kingcjc 16:07, May 23, 2010 (UTC) Nerfblasterpro: I PRESS SMASH BUTTON! 15:57, June 15, 2010 (UTC) Nice. User:Ajraddatz/sig 21:48, June 22, 2010 (UTC) --Lewis Cawte (Talk - Contact) 06:14, July 2, 2010 (UTC) Might as well, nah. It's awsome now! -Mariofighter3: Brickfliming now in session! 12:59, July 12, 2010 (UTC) User:Samdo994/sig1 10:00, July 13, 2010 (UTC) User:CaptainJag/sig1 19:45, July 23, 2010 (UTC) Object #It is looking good, but there is one problem: The Clone Wars. There is no mention of him in the Clone Wars, which was a huge milestone for Boba. -Mariofighter3: Brickfliming now in session! 13:00, May 9, 2010 (UTC) #Needs more references. -Legocity200 21:46, June 29, 2010 (UTC) (Stricken per BOR vote) Comments I disagree. BobaFett2 is from Episodes 4-6. He is barely mentioned in the 2nd and 3rd episodes. I think that you are thinking of Jango Fett.User:BobaFett2/sig2 13:11, May 9, 2010 (UTC) Incorrect my old friend! He did, but you would have to watch the Second Season finale of Star Wars: The Clone Wars to see him. -Mariofighter3: Brickfliming now in session! 13:34, May 9, 2010 (UTC) Oh, sorry I don't watch clone wars. Hey MF3, will you work with me on an article to get to FA?User:BobaFett2/sig2 13:35, May 9, 2010 (UTC) There is no mention of him in the Clone Wars because he's never appeared in the LEGO TCW line, therefore isn't relevant to this article. I could also go on about him for ages in the Legacy Era, but it just isn't relevant, and also per this. NovaHawk 22:19, May 9, 2010 (UTC) Nighthawk: The only reason I said what i did because there is a subtheme for the Clone Wars. He did take place, only not in the sets. You see where I'm getting at? -Mariofighter3: Brickfliming now in session! 22:36, May 16, 2010 (UTC) Not to be a jerk but this is a LEGO Wiki and if it's not LEGO it's not really necessary.User:BobaFett2/sig2 22:39, May 16, 2010 (UTC) Kind of, but there isn't a Clone Wars variant of him, therefore he isn't related to the Clone Wars as far as LEGO goes. Maybe when LSW3 comes out he might be in it an TCW content can be added then NovaHawk 22:46, May 16, 2010 (UTC) I don't think I can support this yet. We are going to get alot of info after summer, especially with the release of LSW3. I won't object, but I can't support yet. I will think on my decision. -Nerfblasterpro: I PRESS SMASH BUTTON! 18:28, May 25, 2010 (UTC) @Legocity200: We don't really have a referencing policy here, and there's no criteria that it should be referenced to be an FA. We have tried to do figure out some way to reference things before (there are at least two forums I can remember which talked about how to reference things, but the problem is that a lot of the times, the information comes from first-hand experience with a set, etc, and there isn't a place online which can truly back it up. Sometimes links to reviews can help, but not always. NovaHawk 03:38, July 1, 2010 (UTC) Do you want to point out where exactly you want references at least? NovaHawk 04:40, July 3, 2010 (UTC) This article cannot pass until you get at least one more BOR member. It's a bit sad... BobaFett2 12:16, July 3, 2010 (UTC) Well it can now :) However there's an outstanding objection. But, I've tried asking what needs referencing (above), and referencing is not a part of the FA criteria (and none of the other FA's ave any/many references). The originaly objector has also been absent on this page for over a week (BP:BOR, rule #2) Would a BOR member be able to review the vote and see if it should be stricken? (I can't really give a neutral opinion since I nominated it) NovaHawk 03:22, July 13, 2010 (UTC) Hmm shouldn't the Maquette be in the gallery of variants too? User:Samdo994/sig1 10:00, July 13, 2010 (UTC) The maquette isn't an actual minifigure, and isn't produced by LEGO (made by Gentle Giant). I wouldn't put it in personally, but I wouldn't be opposed to it being in there. NovaHawk 10:12, July 13, 2010 (UTC) Now it can be FA again!User:BobaFett2/sig2 12:11, July 13, 2010 (UTC) Not with outstanding opopsing votes (see above comment) NovaHawk 23:55, July 22, 2010 (UTC) I think you should remove LEGOcity's oppose because it doens't make sense.User:BobaFett2/sig2 00:02, July 23, 2010 (UTC) As the nominator I'm not really comfortable doing that, as I may not be seeing it from an objective standpoint. However attempts to address this issue have been going for over 3 weeks, (first comment on July 1), and still no response. NovaHawk 00:05, July 23, 2010 (UTC) I think he's gone for a while. From a different viewpoint, his comment doesn't make sense. You have enough references/sources.User:BobaFett2/sig2 00:06, July 23, 2010 (UTC) Removal of opposition vote from Legocity200 (BOR only) Remove Vote taking place under rule #2 of BP:BOR NovaHawk 05:27, August 2, 2010 (UTC) I forgot I was BOR :). I think his vote is ungrounded so let's get rid of it!User:BobaFett2/sig2 12:39, August 2, 2010 (UTC) Agreed. -Mariofighter3: Brickfliming now in session! 18:12, August 8, 2010 (UTC) Keep Approved as featured article 04:20, August 9, 2010 (UTC)

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was to be put through as an FA 5988 Pharaoh's Forbidden Ruins Nominated by:User:BobaFett2/sig2 19:34, August 21, 2010 (UTC) Nomination comments: A long article, detailed description. MF3, there is nothing in the MOS saying you need to describe the minifigures. (+3 Revs/+7 Users/+10 Total) Support #User:BobaFett2/sig2 19:34, August 21, 2010 (UTC) (Nominators not permitted to vote in FAC) Good detail ----- It's Magic - Kingcjc 19:50, August 21, 2010 (UTC) Maybe we should add international prices, or are those not available? User:Cpatain Rex/sig 19:58, August 21, 2010 (UTC) --Lewis Cawte (Talk - Contact) 20:05, August 21, 2010 (UTC) --Secretam Lots of nice pictures. Good writing also. User:Ajraddatz/sig 01:23, August 22, 2010 (UTC) --User:Captain Jag/sig 05:50, August 22, 2010 (UTC) User:Samdo994/sig1 12:52, August 22, 2010 (UTC) Gladiatoring 14:15, August 27, 2010 (UTC) --User:FreddyderHamster/sig 20:06, August 28, 2010 (UTC) NovaHawk 00:29, August 29, 2010 (UTC) Object # Looking good. However, I found a fair few spelling mistakes (mainly with "heiroglyphs->hieroglyphs"), don't know if there are any more. Also added and bolded UK name to stop it from being US-centric. But, the reason I'm opposing is that the "background" section is incorrectly used. "Background" refers to "in-universe" stuff, eg, "descripition" would be about the set itself (parts, accessories it had, etc), "background" would be for how it fits into a story (eg, if it's a scene from a movie, a brief description of the scene). "Largest set" stuff should be either in the description or notes. Other than that, I wouldn't be opposed to it at all. NovaHawk 05:45, August 22, 2010 (UTC) Comments Im still not fixed on that image at the bottom. it lookes better centered but would prob be better in teh galelery? Otherwise, very concise article. ----- It's Magic - Kingcjc 19:47, August 21, 2010 (UTC) MovedUser:BobaFett2/sig2 19:48, August 21, 2010 (UTC) International prices are not available (at least I don't know where to find them). Okay will you un-oppose if I remove the backgruound section.User:BobaFett2/sig2 12:34, August 22, 2010 (UTC) Also the spelling mistakes have been fixed by samdo.User:BobaFett2/sig2 12:35, August 22, 2010 (UTC) Changed the background section to universe stuff.User:BobaFett2/sig2 12:36, August 22, 2010 (UTC) Approved as featured article 12:21, August 29, 2010 (UTC)

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. BIONICLE Nominated by: User:Samdo994/sig1 12:34, August 15, 2010 (UTC) Nomination comments: Very long and detailed, looks good enough for an FA. (+3 Revs/+2 Users/+5 Total) Support User:BobaFett2/sig2 12:55, August 15, 2010 (UTC) User:Ajraddatz/sig 01:07, August 22, 2010 (UTC) Not a fan but a it reak good. -Mariofighter3: Brickfliming now in session! 01:58, August 22, 2010 (UTC) Nice detailed article. ----- It's Magic - Kingcjc 16:55, August 23, 2010 (UTC) --User:FreddyderHamster/sig 12:34, August 27, 2010 (UTC) Object #Redbricks tagUser:BobaFett2/sig2 14:51, August 24, 2010 (UTC) # Because those other sets really need to be listed. There's not much stopping the article from having a permanently complete list since there aren't any more BIONICLE sets coming out in the near future. NovaHawk 00:11, August 28, 2010 (UTC) Comments Is this all original content? Just wondering because I think at one point the article was copied straight from somewhere else. NovaHawk 01:14, August 17, 2010 (UTC) I'm not so sure I would compare to the Wikipedia Article. I noticed that the Space article is nearly the exact same as the Wikipedia one (LEGO Space) even with links to brickset instead of pages.User:BobaFett2/sig2 01:16, August 17, 2010 (UTC) The Release history part is, I wrote it freely. User:Samdo994/sig1 11:55, August 17, 2010 (UTC) Don't like BIONICLE at all , but this article is well put together, just the other day I created the theme http://lego.wikia.com/wiki/Games , so I know theres some content missing from the article on there, other than that its got my vote , but I'll leave it off for now :) Gladiatoring 16:58, August 23, 2010 (UTC) Fixed spelling per MoS ----- It's Magic - Kingcjc 00:46, August 30, 2010 (UTC) Approved as featured article 13:47, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. 7676 Republic Attack Gunship Nominated by: User:Cpatain Rex/sig 09:25, August 22, 2010 (UTC) Nomination comments: Did my best to complete it completely. :) What do you guys think? (+3 Revs/+2 Users/+5 Total) Support No worries, I added it.User:BobaFett2/sig2 17:34, August 22, 2010 (UTC) --Lewis Cawte (Talk - Contact) 08:36, August 23, 2010 (UTC) User:Ajraddatz/sig 22:11, August 28, 2010 (UTC) User:Captain Jag/sig 08:31, August 29, 2010 (UTC) I can't say I fully support it, but it is definetely qualified. -Nerfblasterpro: Can you believe it's only been a year? 19:16, September 5, 2010 (UTC) Object #I hate to object but it's missing a list of rare/unique parts.User:BobaFett2/sig2 12:44, August 22, 2010 (UTC) Oh. my bad, I didn't know that that was a necessary part of articles now. I'll work on it. User:Cpatain Rex/sig 17:20, August 22, 2010 (UTC) This isn't necessary at all. NovaHawk 22:34, August 22, 2010 (UTC) # Due to the parts being added, should now be tagged with {{redbricks}}, so cannot pass in this state. NovaHawk 22:49, August 22, 2010 (UTC) Done. User:Cpatain Rex/sig 05:37, August 23, 2010 (UTC) Comments Looking like a great article, but I don't have enough time to review it at the moment. Got rid of a fair few typos, punctuation errors, etc, might want to just check there aren't any more. I'll get to reviewing this as soon as I can (which may be a while) NovaHawk 11:11, August 22, 2010 (UTC) NHL: Yes it is. It's in the notes section.User:BobaFett2/sig2 12:41, August 23, 2010 (UTC) Fixed spelling per MoS ----- It's Magic - Kingcjc 00:46, August 30, 2010 (UTC) Yeah, does anyone know why all of the "center"s and "color"s have suddenly become "centre" and "colour"? I've seen this on a lot of articles lately, and I don't like it... User:Cpatain Rex/sig 05:52, August 30, 2010 (UTC) BP:MOS. centre and colour are the British English counterparts. ----- It's Magic - Kingcjc 10:39, August 30, 2010 (UTC) When did this happen? User:Cpatain Rex/sig 23:23, August 30, 2010 (UTC) It was running for about 5 months, and closed a couple of days ago when the vote was significantly to the British side. You actually voted on it (for US) (archive here) NovaHawk 23:31, August 30, 2010 (UTC) Oh...that's too bad. Well, I don't plan on changing how I type to fit that so, If it needs to be changed, I don't plan on contributing to that standard. Sorry, User:Cpatain Rex/sig 23:45, August 30, 2010 (UTC) Your not meant to say taht, your jsut meant to not do it without saying <_< ----- It's Magic - Kingcjc 23:57, August 30, 2010 (UTC) Maybe so, but at least this way you'll know. User:Cpatain Rex/sig 00:27, August 31, 2010 (UTC) Approved as featured article 03:31, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. 8097 Slave I Nominated by: User:Cpatain Rex/sig 19:20, August 27, 2010 (UTC) Nomination comments: cleaned up, added all the info etc. about as large and well thought out as the 8098 article. (+3 Revs/+2 Users/+5 Total) Support Boba: It is not needed. It is a waste of time because it is a reason we have the invenory tab made. Other than than it sweet article! Nice work Rex. :) -Mariofighter3: Brickfliming now in session! 02:29, August 29, 2010 (UTC) User:Captain Jag/sig 08:31, August 29, 2010 (UTC) NovaHawk 05:25, August 31, 2010 (UTC) Clone Commander Fox 16:58, September 4, 2010 (UTC) -Nerfblasterpro: Can you believe it's only been a year? 19:19, September 5, 2010 (UTC) Object # I think it needs a notes section for rare/unique parts. Since it hasn't been voted upon, and since this is an FANom, I think it's a requisite (even if not for GAs).User:BobaFett2/sig2 19:45, August 27, 2010 (UTC) Comments Looking good. Only thing I have against it is the section talking about an ep6 Han being included in an ep5 set. I'm pretty sure Han went into the carbonite in ep5 with the same clothes as he was wearing when he came out of it in ep6 :) But I'm not sure how to reword that section. Other than that, I'm happy to vote for it. NovaHawk 01:00, August 29, 2010 (UTC) Removed. I don't exactly know what I was meaning there except maybe that it was a little strange that they would include the new Han and carbonite, but someimes when I'm wring these things late at night, even I don't know where I'm going with it.... User:Cpatain Rex/sig 00:21, August 30, 2010 (UTC) Fixed spelling per MoS ----- It's Magic - Kingcjc 00:46, August 30, 2010 (UTC) Approved as featured article 03:31, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. 6973 Deep Freeze Defender Nominated by:User:BobaFett2/sig2 23:11, August 27, 2010 (UTC) Nomination Comments: Just got the set, it rocks, added some pics, cleaned up my previous description. (+3 Revs/+3 Users/+6 Total) Supports # As nominator.User:BobaFett2/sig2 23:11, August 27, 2010 (UTC) (Nominators not permitted to vote in FAC) Gladiatoring 15:23, August 28, 2010 (UTC) Looking Good ----- It's Magic - Kingcjc 20:24, August 28, 2010 (UTC) User:Ajraddatz/sig 22:10, August 28, 2010 (UTC) User:Captain Jag/sig 08:31, August 29, 2010 (UTC) -Nerfblasterpro: Can you believe it's only been a year? 19:19, September 5, 2010 (UTC) # NovaHawk 03:31, September 14, 2010 (UTC) NovaHawk 09:01, September 17, 2010 (UTC) Object Comments Fixed spelling per MoS ----- It's Magic - Kingcjc 00:46, August 30, 2010 (UTC) Sorry, I know I just voted, but that whole "Ice Planet Babe" thing is still bugging me. Maybe it could be named something a bit more neutral? NovaHawk 03:34, September 14, 2010 (UTC) It links to Ice Planet Female or something like that. It only says Ice Planet Babe once and that is just to show that that's one of it's names. Is that good?User:BobaFett2/sig2 03:42, September 14, 2010 (UTC) Approved as featured article 19 September 2010 (UTC)

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was Failed Nomination 8095 General Grievous' Starfighter Nominated by: User:Cpatain Rex/sig 05:49, August 30, 2010 (UTC) Nomination comments: I think that it's a fairly well-written article and it has all the required stuff the be a FA. What do you guys think? (-2 Revs/-1 Users/-3 Total) Support Object I don't think that it is long enough. It is a great article, and I don't see what else you could squeeze in there, but it doesn't seem featured material to me. User:Ajraddatz/sig 23:32, August 30, 2010 (UTC) Per above. Definitely a contender for GA, but I don't know about FA. Main oppose reason though is it needs UK spelling fixes per MOS. You may not type like that as you've said above, but it's against the MOS to use US spelling in mainspace articles, so I'll just keep opposing for that reason if necesasry (sorry). NovaHawk 04:55, August 31, 2010 (UTC) So be it. I'll stop nominating. User:Cpatain Rex/sig 08:39, August 31, 2010 (UTC) Fixed spelling the other night.... ----- It's Magic - Kingcjc 10:30, August 31, 2010 (UTC) PA User:Captain Jag/sig 05:11, September 5, 2010 (UTC) Comments I'm not sure if it's long enough.User:BobaFett2/sig2 14:36, August 30, 2010 (UTC) Quality over quantity. ----- It's Magic - Kingcjc 14:59, August 30, 2010 (UTC) It's a smaller set, there's less to write about. Still has all the necessary parts. User:Cpatain Rex/sig 23:24, August 30, 2010 (UTC) I'm neutral on this one. -Nerfblasterpro: Can you believe it's only been a year? 19:19, September 5, 2010 (UTC)

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was Failed Nomination 8189 Magma Mech Nominated by: User:Agent Fuse/sig 19:51, September 18, 2010 (UTC) Nomination comments: (-3 Revs/0 Users/-4 Total) Support Object Waaaay tooo short. -Mariofighter3: Open your Heart! 20:39, September 18, 2010 (UTC) per MF3. Also uses US spelling. NovaHawk 00:09, September 19, 2010 (UTC) Unfortunately it is so. I'd suggest a larger set next time you nominate it. Also, you could add some more text and nominate it for GA (and change spelling US->British)User:BobaFett2/sig2 12:49, September 19, 2010 (UTC) Sorry, just not qualified for FA yet, but I would recommend putting this one up as a GA. -Nerfblasterpro: Can you believe it's only been a year? 23:46, September 19, 2010 (UTC) Comments Vote to remove nomination (BOR only) Keep Nomination Remove Nomination NovaHawk 00:39, September 26, 2010 (UTC) User:BobaFett2/sig2 11:38, September 30, 2010 (UTC) -Mariofighter3: Open your Heart! 03:16, October 2, 2010 (UTC) Nerfblasterpro: Can you believe it's only been a year? 15:14, October 5, 2010 (UTC)

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was Failed Nomination 10188 Death Star (-1 Revs/-1 Users/-2 Total) Nominated by: Darth Platypus 00:46, November 26, 2010 (UTC) Nomination comments: This has much description, and it is an interesting page. Support Object Per below.User:BobaFett2/sig2 03:12, November 27, 2010 (UTC) Per below- and above User:Captain Jag/sig1 18:05, December 3, 2010 (UTC) Comments Looks good, but could use a longer Background section, since the Death Star is of major importance to the Star Wars Episode IV to VI line. User:Samdo994/sig1 15:59, November 26, 2010 (UTC) I agree, and will support if the information on it and what it does in Star Wars is expanded. User:Ajraddatz/sig 21:03, November 26, 2010 (UTC) I expanded it a little, but I might need a little bit of help with it. I'm not always the best at expanding articles :/ Darth Platypus 02:11, November 27, 2010 (UTC) Why not nominate it for good article instead? User:Ajraddatz/sig 15:36, December 20, 2010 (UTC) Would still need a longer Background section. User:Samdo994/sig1 12:44, December 21, 2010 (UTC) Could use some images too NovaHawk 07:20, January 8, 2011 (UTC)

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. 7327 Scorpion Pyramid Nominated by: User:BobaFett2/sig2 16:35, November 24, 2010 (UTC) Nomination comments: I just got this set. It was epic. Anyways, if you oppose, please give a reason and what I can improve. And then check back here after a day, and it should be fixed. (+3 Revs/+9 Users/+12 Total) Support I removed the == Minifigures == section, since it is the same as the == Minifigures included == section. Others than that, maybe an image in the text would be good, but it's okay for an FA, I guess. User:Samdo994/sig1 16:46, November 24, 2010 (UTC) What sort of image? We don't have any catalog ones, and people always move other images to the gallery section.User:BobaFett2/sig2 16:47, November 24, 2010 (UTC) It looks like a great candidate to me, although it should have the spelling changed to UK. I could even do that... User:Ajraddatz/sig 05:16, November 25, 2010 (UTC) I want it so bad. It looks awesome, it sounds awesome, and without any questions, it should be a featured article. Tahupirate Out! Great article. User:Captain Jag/sig1 18:02, November 26, 2010 (UTC) User:Agent Fuse/sig 22:15, December 6, 2010 (UTC) Wonder full article User:See ya sunday/sig Coooooooooooooool Greeny1 It's a well written article and layed out well, so I don't see why not. User:SKP4472/sig2 21:01, January 23, 2011 User:Agent Swipe/sig1 - Down with vandalism 23:17, February 22, 2011 (UTC) It's got my vote! I might get it myself. -Nerfblasterpro: Can you believe it's only been a year? 19:22, January 31, 2011 (UTC) --Cligra 23:34, March 15, 2011 (UTC) Although a shot of the interior would be really nice NovaHawk 05:26, March 17, 2011 (UTC) Object # Ok, first of all, good to see a new candidate (it's been a while), and this one can certainly get there, great work getting it to how it is now. However, spelling is US, not UK (eg "gray"), so does not comply to the MoS. Also, there are 6 redlinks in there, so should probably be tagged with {{redbricks}}. And the text looks a little plain- maybe some links in there and also possibly move an image or two into the body of the text from the gallery? NovaHawk 00:12, November 25, 2010 (UTC) Comments Where would you suggest the image to go? I'll do the redlinks tomorrow.User:BobaFett2/sig2 03:39, November 25, 2010 (UTC) Somewhere where there is much text, like the Description. Just see which image of the gallery fits. User:Samdo994/sig1 16:42, November 25, 2010 (UTC) How bout I wait for a catalog image to place there?User:BobaFett2/sig2 17:05, November 25, 2010 (UTC) I've added the picture of the set in there, when we get a catalog one we can replace it. User:Captain Jag/sig1 18:02, November 26, 2010 (UTC) Is it possible for this to pass? MF3 is inactive.User:BobaFett2/sig2 19:55, January 16, 2011 (UTC) The colours of the parts are not accurate to the real names. Lego lord 01:44, February 27, 2011 (UTC) I changed some of the colours but I forget what the official name is for dark tan. Lego lord 06:37, February 27, 2011 (UTC) Fixed up the colours. Lego lord 03:53, March 3, 2011 (UTC) Approved as featured article 05:26, March 17, 2011 (UTC)

{{archive |result=Failed Nomination |content=

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was Nomination Failed 8096 Emperor Palpatine's Shuttle Nominated by: User:Tatooine/Template:Tatooine/Sig 23:45, April 4, 2011 (UTC) Nomination comments: Great content; I believe this article has all the requirements for an FA. Vote score: -2, Technical Check: Currently OK Support I think that with just a little work, this will make an exemplary FA. --Cligra 00:27, April 16, 2011 (UTC) I have added some more information. User:SKP4472/sig2 16:59, April 17, 2011 (UTC) Object Needs more sections, the minifigures don't need to be listed since we already have minifigure galleries. User:Lego lord/sig.1 I believe it's definitely GA quality, not so sure about FA, and not really sure if it has potential to go any further. But of course minifigures need to be listed- they're part of a set. If you say there's already an image of it, then why don't we just have a single image of the set instead of an article with text? NovaHawk 23:53, April 4, 2011 (UTC) I don't think its FA. It needs a grammar check/rewrite, just going over it , to make it more encyclopeadic. User:UltrasonicNXT/Signature 15:17, April 30, 2011 (UTC) Not yet, just needs some more work. Per Nighthawk leader. -Nerfblasterpro: Can you believe it's only been a year? 18:39, May 4, 2011 (UTC) Technical MoS Check (QCG members only) Comments NHL: The article is already a GA. :P User:Tatooine/Template:Tatooine/Sig 23:56, April 4, 2011 (UTC) I know, I'm just saying it definitely deserves its current status :) NovaHawk 00:22, April 5, 2011 (UTC) Alright. Although, I still think it deserves FA status. ;) User:Tatooine/Template:Tatooine/Sig 00:27, April 5, 2011 (UTC)

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. 7675 AT-TE Walker Nominated by: User:Tatooine/Template:Tatooine/Sig 05:32, May 17, 2011 (UTC) Nomination comments: Content has an FA status. Vote score: +4, Technical Check: Currently OK Support So. much. detail. Excellent article. User:Captain Jag/sig1 05:58, May 17, 2011 (UTC) It absolutely deserves this designation. Have read it in entirety and it is well constructed. User:Fudgepie/sig 02:58, May 19, 2011 (UTC) Can't find anything wrong with it. NovaHawk 00:01, May 29, 2011 (UTC) If NHL supports, there isn't even a need for the remainder of the vote :P User:Ajraddatz/sig 00:15, May 29, OMG yes. User:Cligra/Sig Object Technical MoS Check (QCG members only) Comments Sorry whoever struck my vote.:( I wasn't thinking straight.(Busy busy busy...) User:Tatooine/Template:Tatooine/Sig 06:03, May 17, 2011 (UTC) Approved as featured article 00:21, May 30, 2011 (UTC)

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was Failed nomination Yoda Nominated by: User:Captain Jag/sig1 02:43, May 17, 2011 (UTC) Nomination comments: Vote score: +2, Technical Check: Currently OK Support No reason to object, seems very well constructed. -Nerfblasterpro: Always supplying the boomsauce... 02:44, May 17, 2011 (UTC) Have read it in entirety and appears to deserve this designation. User:Fudgepie/sig 02:54, May 19, 2011 (UTC) Looks good. User:Ajraddatz/sig 02:56, May 19, 2011 (UTC) Per all above. :) User:SKP4472/sig2 19:40, June 9, 2011 (UTC) Object GA: Definitely. FA: I'm just not sure it's good enough, sorry, just my opinion. Also, the second note in the "Notes" section is a bit vague- Pretty sure the two variants have different types of material for their heads. NovaHawk 00:41, May 26, 2011 (UTC) Per Above. Doesnt seem ready for FA status. User:Tatooine/Template:Tatooine/Sig 19:24, May 28, 2011 (UTC) Technical MoS Check (QCG members only) * Spelling at the bottom of the "In the Video Games" section. For completeness, the LSW3 bit could do with some expansion (nothing about his abilities, etc). I might try and do it if I have time. NovaHawk 00:41, May 26, 2011 (UTC) Can you do that? (I don't have LSW3 so I have no idea what he can do). User:Captain Jag/sig1 21:00, May 29, 2011 (UTC) Will try and get it done in about 4 hours or so. NovaHawk 00:03, May 30, 2011 (UTC) Done (4 weeks later exactly :D Sorry about that) NovaHawk 23:43, June 27, 2011 (UTC) Comments I've changed the note on the bottom. Since I have both versions, I think I've made it clearer. User:Fudgepie/sig 00:07, May 29, 2011 (UTC)

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Anakin Skywalker Nominated by: NovaHawk 23:33, June 27, 2011 (UTC) Vote score: +8, Technical Check: Currently OK Support Great content - FA ready. User:Tatooine/SigT 23:41, June 27, 2011 (UTC) User:Ajraddatz/sig 15:36, June 28, 2011 (UTC) User:Fudgepie/sig 15:44, June 28, 2011 (UTC) User:SKP4472/sig2 16:49, June 29, 2011 (UTC) User:Darth henry/Sig1 User:Cligra/Sig User:Nerfblasterpro/sig1 20:33, July 9, 2011 (UTC) --R2-D2 (user) 13:46, July 14, 2011 (UTC) Object Comments Approved as featured article 06:06, July 15, 2011 (UTC)

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was Failed nomination 4842 Hogwarts Castle Nominated by: User:Mr brick guys/Sig 04:51, July 7, 2011 (UTC) Nomination comments: Vote score: -1, Technical Check: Currently OK Support --User:Mr brick guys/Sig 06:38, July 8, 2011 (UTC)I nominated it because it was my favourite set. --R2-D2 (user) 13:49, July 14, 2011 (UTC)(No nominator may vote for his nomination.) Object Good article perhaps, but definetely not featured. - User:Nerfblasterpro/sig1 20:33, July 9, 2011 (UTC) Technical MoS Check (QCG members only) Comments This is definitely ready for "Complete", but I'm not sure if its quite FA material yet. User:Cligra/Sig

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was Failed 10217 Diagon Alley Nominated by: JSquish 00:53, July 26, 2011 (UTC) Nomination comments: Vote score: +2, Technical Check: Not OK Support Needed a bit of fixing, but other than that, it's great! User:SKP4472/sig2 08:28, July 29, 2011 (UTC) Not bad. User:Cligra/Sig User:Ajraddatz/sig 23:14, August 7, 2011 (UTC) User:Nerfblasterpro/sig1 16:25, August 10, 2011 (UTC) Object I'd put it as a good article. Doesn't exactly seem featured to me. In my opinion, the formatting needs to be reworked a bit. Also, the problem isn't exactly a lack of content; rather, it's more about the clarity of the article. For example, this sentence,(Costing $199.99 and containing 2025 pieces, 10217 Diagon Alley was a major architectural undertaking and an attention to detail never before seen in the Harry Potter theme and is the largest Harry Potter set to date.), is rather long and doesn't get the point across in an effective manner. I'll see what I can do to fix this, but I'm afraid I don't exactly have the time to undertake this immediately. User:Fudgepie/sig 03:50, August 16, 2011 (UTC) Full of subjectivity. Examples: " Diagon Alley was a major architectural undertaking and an attention to detail never before seen in the Harry Potter theme", "it was released inbetween (<typo) the 2010 re-releases and the 2011 re-releases and already (<it's been out for ages in some places) received very good reviews.", "exemplifies the quality and creativeness that is involved in LEGO merchandise", "The amount of accessories included in the set are also very good additions to other models in addition to livening up the set itself." NovaHawk 04:48, September 9, 2011 (UTC) Technical MoS Check (QCG members only) A lot of spelling errors, also does not comply with using British English. NovaHawk 03:22, September 10, 2011 (UTC) Comments

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was Nomination failed Alpha Team Nominated by: User:Mr. Minifigure/sig Nomination comments: Vote score: -3, Technical Check: Currently OK Support Good article I know it was former FA but it is now an official featured status. User:Mr. Minifigure/sig(No nominator may vote for his nomination.) User:SKP4472/sig2 08:27, July 29, 2011 (UTC) Object Not really a great article, just a large one. User:Cligra/Sig The lead section is really short. User:Mykheh/sig 05:18, August 8, 2011 (UTC) per others. -User:Nerfblasterpro/sig1 17:01, August 12, 2011 (UTC) Appears to be more of a list than an article. User:Fudgepie/sig 03:40, August 16, 2011 (UTC) Technical MoS Check (QCG members only) Comments Sohuld this be closed? User:Mr. Minifigure/sig 01:00, September 11, 2011 (UTC) Yes (no supporting votes in over a month, failed to reach required score). NovaHawk 01:04, September 11, 2011 (UTC)

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was Failed 7030 Squad Car Nominated by: User:Mykheh/sig 21:27, August 7, 2011 (UTC) Nomination comments: For a small set, I believe this article is ready to become an FA. Everything here is filled out as completely as possible. Vote score: -3, Technical Check: Currently OK Support Object Per what I said on chat, just too small a set and it restates a lot of the same stuff over and over. -User:Nerfblasterpro/sig1 23:59, August 8, 2011 (UTC) Agreed. User:Fudgepie/sig 03:52, August 16, 2011 (UTC) Per NBP. User:SKP4472/sig2 07:48, August 28, 2011 (UTC) Technical MoS Check (QCG members only) Comments

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was Failed 7573 Battle of Alamut Nominated by: Agent Swipe(talk) 23:14, August 15, 2011 (UTC) Nomination comments: I think this is a good article for this Vote score: -3, Technical Check: Currently OK Support Object Perhaps for GA, but maybe not for FA. User:Fudgepie/sig 19:22, August User:Cligra/Sig I agree that it is a nice looking article, but I don't think a 5 line description really quialifies it for FA standards. Also I feel that the "real Alamut" section should be removed- this set is based on the Prince of Persia Alamut, and doesn't really have anything to do with the real-life location. This info should definitely be mentioned on a Prince of Persia's "Alamut" article, but I don't think it's really appropriate here. NovaHawk 03:22, September 10, 2011 (UTC) User:SKP4472/sig2 06:16, September 15, 2011 (UTC) Technical MoS Check (QCG members only) Comments

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was Unsuccessful Kit Fisto (1) Nominated by: Crazed Penguin talk Maniac, Pyscho, Crazy, just Crazed! 05:45, September 15, 2011 (UTC) Nomination comments: I think It's a Great article, It has info on Kit and his LEGO apps. Vote score: -7, Technical Check: Currently OK Support Object Just don't think it's got the potential to be FA material, GA yes, but not FA. NovaHawk 06:06, September 15, 2011 (UTC) Per NHL. User:SKP4472/sig2 06:16, September 15, 2011 (UTC) Could use a good read over- This head is has multiple..., ...the player must also additionally collect... (also and additionally?), and the code of "CBR954" at Dexter's Diner, however could be purchased as normal- there is probably more errors than that, I haven't had a good read through it. User:Captain Jag/sig1 07:07, September 15, 2011 (UTC) Definitely needs reworking. Background should be expanded since it's practically a copy-and paste job from the corresponding page on Wookieepedia. User:Fudgepie/sig 18:14, September 17, 2011 (UTC) Per NHL. And the rest also have agreeable points. User:UltrasonicNXT/Signature Per others --Berrybrick (Talk) 10:10, September 30, 2011 (UTC) Agreed per others.--Munchman14 00:43, October 4, 2011 (UTC) Technical MoS Check (QCG members only) Comments Like you both sid I know Kit Fisto well so I'm gonna edit now. --Crazed Penguin talk Maniac, Pyscho, Crazy, just Crazed! 06:58, September 15, 2011 (UTC) As a neutral admin/member of the QCG, I'm closing this request as unsuccessful. It isn't going to pass and there's no need to keep this open any longer. User:Ajraddatz/sig 18:20, October 5, 2011 (UTC)

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was Successful Miniland (Windsor) Nominated by: - Kingcjc 21:10, September 24, 2011 (UTC) Nomination comments: I did lots of writings and found lots of pictures and so here you go. Not sure how stuff aimed more at sets and figs apply to this article, but nevermind. Vote score: +5, Technical Check: Currently OK Support As sad as this sounds, the reason I want this to win is just because I know you want it. :P Still a great article though, fun to read! :D User:Nerfblasterpro/sig1 19:20, September 26, 2011 (UTC) Per NBP. Also, I'm really sorry Cjc about the screenshots, I can't find the video anywhere. Over the half term I will search again for you, I haven't given up yet. :) User:SKP4472/sig2 19:30, September 26, 2011 (UTC) I suppose I'll support, but there are a few things I've noticed which definitly aren't proper "American" English, but I don't know about "English" English. Just things like not having a comma in between the second to last object and the "and". Also, in the galleries, there are periods after what are clearly not sentences, such as "The London Eye.". Again, I'm not sure if this is improper "English" English, so I'm not going to do anything to the MoS check. --Berrybrick (Talk) 21:00, September 26, 2011 (UTC) This is proper English, and this wiki technically uses English English per some forum a while ago. User:Ajraddatz/sig 23:19, September 26, 2011 (UTC) I know, that's why I said that I wouldn't dare touch the MoS check, because I wasn't sure if it was proper English English. I'm pretty sure the fragment sentences aren't, but I don't know about the commas. --Berrybrick (Talk) 10:27, September 27, 2011 (UTC) You only put a comma before the and if there are three or more items in the list. So "me and you" and "she, me, and you". User:UltrasonicNXT/Signature I'm also aware of that. My point is, that there is no comma between the second to last item in the list and the and when there are more than two objects. I mean that the lists there are something like this: Bacon, Lettuce <no comma here> and Tomato. Understood? --Berrybrick (Talk) 19:41, September 28, 2011 (UTC) (I thought I voted on this a couple of hours after it was listed :S). Looks amazing, great number of supporting images, bits of info in there that many people wouldn't normally know about, sourced where it needs to be. Only complaint I have is the same as Berrybrick's, there are a couple of minor grammar issues, so it'd be great if the were fixed up before it goes through. NovaHawk 22:57, September 26, 2011 (UTC) Yes. BF2 Talk 23:05, September 26, 2011 (UTC) per above - Great article. User:Ajraddatz/sig 23:18, September 26, 2011 (UTC) Ajr is going to be happy I'm starting to use these... User:Captain Jag/sig1 00:09, September 27, 2011 (UTC) Yes! User:Cligra/Sig Object Oppose Neutral (need to make that template) I'm going for Neutral Opposey sort of place. I think in some places it could to be slightly built up more (into paragraphs). It would be helpful to separate the real world - LEGOLAND info; in the first few paragraphs I got slightly confused whether it was talking about real world or LEGO. And I feel as though I'm confronted with an "image wall" when getting to the galleries. Some of these images should be embedded. User:UltrasonicNXT/Signature Technical MoS Check (QCG members only) Comments Actually Berrybrick, Your supposed to use English english. Plus it makes it easier for us to read. American english is too stupid. -- These are not the penguins you are looking for 21:53, September 26, 2011 (UTC) I realize that, I don't think you fully understood my post --Berrybrick (Talk) 23:13, September 26, 2011 (UTC) @NXT: I'm guessing you're using the Wikia skin, the "image wall" actually looks quite nice to me on Monobook (not saying it shouldn't be changed to accommodate everyone however) NovaHawk 00:08, September 28, 2011 (UTC) It really wouldn't make that much different - you'd get maybe one or two (at a stretch) embedded images, meaning you'd just get galleries with only one image in a line at the end. - Kingcjc 16:36, September 28, 2011 (UTC) Approved as featured article 06:50, October 2, 2011 (UTC)

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was Unsuccessful Kit Fisto (3) Nominated by:--Da Penguin with da Epic Skillz! Crazed Penguin talk 07:47, October 14, 2011 (UTC) Nomination comments: Defo. Vote score: -2, Technical Check: Currently OK Support Object --Berrybrick (Talk)