| abstract
| - One of our best, if not the best, quest guides in my opinion. It is long and very detailed, well written, has plenty of images (if only all quests were like that) and overall is a nice read, whether you have not, have or are doing the quest. It is also new content and putting it on the main page will give players a good idea of the wiki's quality. ("Wow, is that guide already this good? These guys are sure great.") To prove that, while I was taking images for the quest, a player actually approached me and asked what I was doing and when I said that I was making images for the wiki and planning to do a cleanup on the quest guide, he sincerely thanked me for it and thanked the wiki for the great guides (and other articles/images) which have always helped him. A bit off-topic, but you need to know.
* Support - (wasn't that obvious?) As nominator. Fswe1 06:28, September 3, 2011 (UTC)
* Support - It is a very nice quest guide. Hofmic Talk 06:45, September 3, 2011 (UTC)
* Support - This is the true result of collaboration. It's brilliant. --クールネシトーク 13:02, September 3, 2011 (UTC)
* Oppose - Not yet, It's still full of grammatical and factual errors, we don't know the drakan fight inside out yet, so we can't say for sure the max hits, the cache glitch still exists which makes some of the pictures look ugly, there's way too much trivia which blabbles on about worthless non-trivial stuff... I think we need to give it a month or so until we nominate it. File:Broav pet.png Rhys Talk File:Completionist cape.png 15:55, September 3, 2011 (UTC) There may be some overlooked typos, but I did not witness any severe grammatical errors or factual errors. Can you give an example? Fswe1 17:37, September 3, 2011 (UTC)
* Support - It is a very detailed guide considering how long the quest has been in the game for. the quest is lots of fun too. File:King Roald chathead.png King TALKWer den König nicht ehrt, ist nicht Lebenswert. 17:40, September 3, 2011 (UTC)
* Oppose - The last part of the article seems very disorganized, and most of the article is written in short, simple sentences. Honestly not the kind of writing that should be featured. Suppa chuppa Talk 17:45, September 3, 2011 (UTC) Re-arranged the battle part, I was planning to anyway. Had some trouble with the collapsible table though... help. Fswe1 18:33, September 3, 2011 (UTC)
* Support - It's a great quest, and a very well written guide in my opinion. Ff7hb 18:35, September 3, 2011 (UTC)
* Strong oppose - First, this quest was released four days ago and it is being edited pretty frequently, so it is unstable. It is incomplete and needs more info, especially on development and release. I'd suggest looking at the Cook's Assistant section and summarizing info from the [[The Branches of Darkmeyer/Pre-release|pre-release]] article. The quality of writing could also use some improvement. For example, "the quest" sounds really redundant near the end of the lead section. In addition, what is the point of having the official description, when you can and already have summarized it yourself in a more encyclopedic manner? The trivia section could use some cleanup, and includes some non-notable info and speculation. The references are bare URL's, and need to be more descriptive. Smithing (talk | contribs) 19:46, September 3, 2011 (UTC)
* Oppose - It is a good article, but I agree with Smithing. New articles shouldn't be featured articles as they are constantly edited and usually change quite a lot, as this one still will. File:Hunter cape (t).png Sentra246File:Blue hallowe'en mask.png 03:35, September 4, 2011 (UTC)
* Changed to Support - Good article now that the newness is gone. File:Hunter cape (t).png Sentra246File:Blue hallowe'en mask.png 23:51, October 8, 2011 (UTC)
* Hell no - Do the supporters even understand what a good article is? While it does have good info, the content is a bit mixed, and it is in no way at all a superior piece of writing. No offense, but for the most part it could have been written by 5th graders. We want superior writing for featured articles. That is the whole point. And too much trivia needs to be fixed up. --Degenret01 22:59, September 4, 2011 (UTC) I uhm... don't go to school where you come from... How old would a 5th grader exactly be...? =/ Fswe1 06:39, September 6, 2011 (UTC) 10/11. Suppa chuppa Talk 06:40, September 6, 2011 (UTC) Oh, OK. Consider be a bit older. Fswe1 06:41, September 6, 2011 (UTC)
* Support - Very well written in a short matter of time, decent images by me, Fswe1 and Battleben, very good walk-thru. My friends in-game have even complimented on how well-written the article is. --File:Spined helm.png SpineTalkFile:Book of knowledge.png 03:41, September 5, 2011 (UTC)
* Support - It is a fantastic article. Adam SavageFile:Speech cursor.png 00:24, September 6, 2011 (UTC)
* Oppose - While it is a very good article, i think it could be much better. Giving the fight with vanescula a seperate section, seperating the gaining status section between tiers and such would improve it hugely. After that is taken care of i would strongly support though.
* Support - Now that its cleaner i support this :D. Its a great article. Wahisietel (Talk) File:Quest map icon.png 17:06, September 8, 2011 (UTC)
* Support- I love that quest and i love the article just as well File:Zaros symbol.png Antistaggy File:Zamorak godsword.png 12:31, September 11, 2011
* Support - The quest is suitibly epic, and there was a lot of build up and antisipation to Branches of Darkmyre. I think it would be something nice to put on the front page. Scaper12123 20:22, September 11, 2011 (UTC) I may be wrong, but you seem to be supporting this because of the quality of the quest, not the quality of the article. Featured articles are meant to be the best articles of the wiki. Smithing (talk | contribs) 22:48, September 12, 2011 (UTC)
* Neutral - While yes, it is a good article, I'm gonna have to go with Smithing on this one and say that FA is for the best we have to offer, not just well done ones.--Touhou FTW 04:25, September 14, 2011 (UTC)
* Comment - The "newness" of the article is now gone and since there have been days the article remained untouched at all, I kindly ask those that used the now dead argument "too new and edited too frequently" to reconsider. Fswe1 12:28, September 25, 2011 (UTC) Closed - File:Yes check.svg This article will be featured. 22:54, October 15, 2011 (UTC)
|
![[RDF Data]](/fct/images/sw-rdf-blue.png)