Brickipedia:Featured Article Nominations/2507 Fire Temple

Articles for Rating → Featured article nominations → Archive → 2507 Fire Temple

This page is an archive. Please do not modify it.

Nominated by: User:Cligra/Sig
Nomination comments: This is a pretty amazing article, and I don't see any reason why it should remain C1...

Per nomination comments. User:Cligra/Sig
I'd like to see a Ninjago FA myself before the theme is retired. Berrybrick 00:12, October 26, 2012 (UTC)
NovaHawk 00:16, October 26, 2012 (UTC)
~~Jeyo~~ Lord Vladek Talk The Forge 01:52, October 26, 2012 (UTC)
(feeling lonely being only non-QCG :p) Yarr, per BB --User:CzechMate/czech 06:00, October 26, 2012 (UTC)
Per Berry. The artcile is amazing. User:Darth henry/Sig 04:41, October 31, 2012 (UTC)

I'd like to see a bigger gallery. If this is going to be FA, then I think it needs it. –Agent Charge 05:48, October 27, 2012 (UTC)
Oh, and it doesn't say when it was released worldwide. –Agent Charge 05:49, October 27, 2012 (UTC)
I'm quite tempted to strike this as invalid: A gallery is by no means a necessary part of an article, and actually, the best FAs have small galleries, because, like this one, the relevant images have been moved to the descriptive text. I DO agree a worldwide release date would be nice, but we don't actually have access to that information in this case. User:Cligra/Sig
The smaller the gallery the better to me- saves people from being hit a massive useless image wall. (If Wikia actually ever bothered to fix our broken semantic extension, we'd be able to have a nice "additional images" link on pages which would lead to more images....) NovaHawk 06:01, October 27, 2012 (UTC)

'black piraka clawed feet'? Not everyone may know what a piraka is (I don't. I think it's BIONICLE, but I'm not 100% sure).
Is the launcher of the dragon the big or the small type–it doesn't say
Is 'storey' the British spelling of 'story'?
The end of the description repeats content that's been already covered (and I can't be bothered to change it).

I still think that the gallery could have more photos. I'd like to see individual photos showing the side parts, and more views of the entrance.

Are the minifigure descriptions supposed to be on this? I personally think that it should just go on the minifigure page.

–Agent Charge 06:43, October 27, 2012 (UTC)

It didn't say that when I wrote it. Somebody changed it. I'll fix it.
Why does it matter? Not everyone may know that there are different sizes. Plus, this set was released before the shorter part so if anyone actually cared about a stud of length they could figure it out for themselves.
That is what people call a typo. It's usually a quick and easy fix, and also easy to miss.
I'm not seeing it. If it's that big of a problem to you, I'm sure you can be bothered to fix a line.
And per Cligra on the photos. But if it's that big of a deal, try finding some. I have never found it very easy to find decent images of Ninjago sets and minifigures that don't come directly from LEGO. The Minifigure Gallery is proof of that.
I do agree with you here, actually. But there isn't anything in the MoS that states they can't be there and there are probably hundreds of other set articles that do have descriptions for the minifigures. I do still do it though, especially in sets that include variations on minifigures released elsewhere, for easier reference. Berrybrick 14:10, October 27, 2012 (UTC)

@Point 3- no, it isn't. (I'm getting a bit sick of reverting it back to storey actually ;) ) We're meant to be using British spelling per the MoS. NovaHawk 05:24, October 31, 2012 (UTC)

I'd like to see all the additional prices added if it's to be FA, and also the episodes should probably be linked to. NovaHawk 23:45, October 25, 2012 (UTC)
- Done. (well, at least all the prices I could manage. :P) User:Cligra/Sig
  - Added in the rest (except for South Korea, who don't appear to have it on their shop site). NovaHawk 00:16, October 26, 2012 (UTC)