Talk:Fodmodmadtol

Fodmodmadtol FAC Vote (2/0/2)

Please remember to sign your votes with 4 tildes ( ~~~~) and update the vote tally when you vote.

Support

1. Self-nomination. I think it's nifty. :P Fodski 01:25, 3 May 2006 (GMT)
2. It's good enough for me. Not perfect - where it's not disordered it's generic - but not enough to dissuade me from thinking it worthy of feature. ~Gruen2alk 10:23, 6 September 2006 (GMT)

Oppose

Neutral

1. Well-written, but needs more information to tie everything else together; it's a bit confusing. Ceo \ rant \ rave 02:46, 3 May 2006 (GMT)
2. Agree with the above, though I think a better term would be "chaotic". Perhaps if the sections were rearranged so they moved more naturally from one to the next it would help. Kajal 01:14, 30 July 2006 (GMT)
3. Solid start but it needs a fair bit of improvement in transitions from one subject to another, and a few of the sentences give me the feeling you're heading off on tangents (re: what Ceo said)... otherwise, not half bad. (( Pacitalkia )) Time sent: 05:13, 13 October 2006 (GMT)

Comments/Questions

• Why is the article named Fodmodmadtol but addressed in the lead section as "Fod" and its extended name? Ceo \ rant \ rave 02:46, 3 May 2006 (GMT)