Bloons Wiki:Featured Article Nomination

Please see the Voting Policy before voting.

Post pages that you wish to nominate for featured status here. Ineligible votes will be struck through until fixed (if it can). Comments can be added as well.

Voter Requirements

 * You cannot nominate or support two or more articles simultaneously.
 * You must be registered and have at least 25 mainspace edits.
 * Please sign your vote(s) and/or comment(s). If you don't, your vote will get deleted.

Article Requirements

 * The article must demonstrate proper spelling, punction, grammar, etc.
 * The article must have a relatively long length; it cannot be a stub article.
 * The article must be "clean" and free of spam, vandalism, and disorganization.
 * Article can be featured once per year.
 * Once an article is nominated, it will be protected to prevent any last minute changes.

2011

 * November 1 - November 30: Monkey Glue
 * December 1 - December 31: B.F.B

2012

 * January 1 - May 31: Road Spikes
 * June 1 - June 30: Snake River
 * July 1 - July 31: Tack Shooter
 * August 1 - August 31: Out of the Box
 * September 1 - November 30: Dragon's Breath
 * December 1 - December 31: Bloonchipper

2013

 * January 1 - October 3: Ceramic Bloon
 * October 4 - May 27, 2014: Bloons Super Monkey 2

2014

 * May 28 - August 6, 2020: Bloons Monkey City

2020

 * August 6 - Incumbent: Spiked Balls

These templates/images can used for voting

Support: 2
Well structured article, very informative, looks pretty, and overall makes a good candidate for next month's featured article. Anomalous13 (talk) 08:05, May 28, 2014 (UTC)

It is an article which is neat and has a reasonable amount of images to support the descriptions. Also, there is no unnecessary text/image/space (except that hole mentioned by AlthaBlade, but it can't be dealt with because it's a template). I believe it is good enough to succeed Bloons Monkey City as a featured article. 210577bloons (talk) 07:48, September 1, 2014 (UTC)

I think the bloonchipper article should be the featured article in honor of it being scrapped in BTD6 (the dartling gun, mortar, and engineer are returning). R.I.P. Bloonchipper, May 30, 2012- June 14, 2018. JackTheStampeder (talk) 22:16, July 27, 2018 (UTC)

Neutral: 1
There is a hole in the beginning. Also, it does not appear in BTD5. Who added that? 15:37, November 29, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose: 2
As nice as the article appears to be, there's a gaping hole between the introduction and the upgrades as well as the fact that there are quite a few similar pages of a similar or greater quality (e.g. Tack Shooter) and thus, it lacks uniqueness. Although there is no rule against it, this article has been nominated previously not so long ago and to have a brand new article to be featured out of the 1,100 or so pages out there would be more optimal in my opinion. AlthaBlade (talk) 09:16, May 28, 2014 (UTC)

Comment: All tower articles are meant to have the same structure, so how can a tower article can be unique? Sure the Tack Shooter has more information, but it has already been featured so I chose an article similar in quality. Banana Farm is a good choice, but it needs some serious cleanup.

Bloonchipper has been previously nominated, it has never been featured. As such, that would still make it a "brand new article". -- Anomalous13 (talk) 09:43, May 28, 2014 (UTC)

Reply: The Bloonchipper article [ has been featured previously] during December 2012. ~ AlthaBlade (talk) 12:50, May 28, 2014 (UTC)

There is incorrect info in the infobox. The Bloonchipper doesn't appear in BTD5. Anonymoustyd (talk) 03:26, July 9, 2014 (UTC)

Support: 1
Although the article lacks a proper upgrade table like in the Bloonschipper article, it is filled with a lot of useful information across a few of the most popular bloons games and contains a lot of information on how the farm works economically ingame and thus, acts as a nice refence. As well as the fact that the article is essentially devoid of vandalism, I nominate this article to be featured. AlthaBlade (talk) 08:30, May 28, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose: 2
While the article does provide a lot of information, it could really use some cleanup. For example: Some images have awkward placing, there are too many quotes on the top of the article (one quote is enough if you ask me), some of the trivia should go into the tower's strategies, the upgrade paths aren't in tables (making an unclean appearance). Anomalous13 (talk) 09:04, May 28, 2014 (UTC)

It is still somewhat incomplete by means of images. The BMC article gives better overview of itself in very precise and concise detail. ~

Support: 2
I like this article because the path explanations are long and useful, and the article overall has a lot of good information overall. HaapsaluYT | Contributions 16:11, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

I like the organization of that article too. It is a perfect example of how a tower article should be written. Highly organized. Qwertyxp2000 II (talk &#124; contribs) 21:33, 26 January 2021 (UTC)