The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 23:47, 28 April 2018 [1].


Tracer (Overwatch)[edit]

Nominator(s): Soulbust (talk) 08:00, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the character Tracer, from Overwatch, a 2016 video game developed by Blizzard Entertainment and related Overwatch media. She is arguably the game's most popular character, being featured in the game's animated media, digital comic series, in its marketing, and the game's cover art. I believe the Tracer article has been edited and developed to FA standards; it has gone through a GA review, a peer review, and 2 copy-edits. While Tracer is occasionally referenced in media nowadays, and the possibility of further changes to Overwatch is open, for all intents & purposes, the Tracer article is virtually comprehensive when it comes to relevant material. This is my first attempt at a FAC nomination, so I'd just like to especially thank anyone who helps out (or has helped out) with this process in advance, and I'll definitely receptive to any feedback. Best wishes, Soulbust (talk) 08:00, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Soulbust: This isn't showing up on the main FAC page. I think you forgot to list it there. JOEBRO64 19:21, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@TheJoebro64: Thanks for the heads up, but I really don't know what else to do though. Like I thought I had followed the 5 steps under "Nomination procedure". I see it listed here. Is it supposed to show up elsewhere? Soulbust (talk) 14:18, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Whoops, I see it now. Guess it missed my eye. JOEBRO64 19:07, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by TheJoebro64

I'll be posting some comments in a bit. From a glance this article looks pretty clean. JOEBRO64 21:26, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Round one:

More to come. JOEBRO64 19:43, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NB re: noting publishers in ((cite web))—this is actually incorrect usage. WPVG does it by habit, but the |publisher= field is more for books or as a non-italicized |work= field. Otherwise |work=Polygon should be sufficient. (not watching, please ((ping))) czar 00:59, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by David Fuchs

Oppose for now. The article is a solid foundation, but it needs a lot of love.


Comments
Just a couple for now, but:

Soulbust (talk) 18:41, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

some more comments:

Coord note[edit]

I'm afraid that having been open over six weeks this nom has stalled without any consensus to promote developing, so I'll be archiving it shortly and you can if you choose renominate after two weeks have passed and outstanding review comments have been addressed. As a first-time nominator, Soulbust, you would be eligible to participate in the FAC mentoring scheme if you'd like to give it a try. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:46, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.