UESPWiki:Featured Articles/Past Nominations

The UESPWiki – Your source for The Elder Scrolls since 1995
Jump to: navigation, search

This is an archive of past nominations for Featured Articles.

Page Archives
Archive 1: 2006-2007
Archive 2: 2008
Archive 3: 2009
Archive 4: 2010
Archive 5: 2011
Archive 6: 2012-2013
Archive 7: 2013-2014
Archive 8: 2015-2016


Sanguine as many of us know does not get much content or lore compared to the other Princes. I did a bit of an update earlier this year to give it a revamp. But its not I that needs credit for that but all the others that found information that truly fleshes out the page in ways I didn't even think of. Because of the work that several people have been put into this revamp as well as how fleshed out it is compared to where it was. I think its a page worthy of being nominated.

  • Support: As nominator --TheVampKnight (talk) 05:27, 22 December 2020 (UTC)<
  • Support: With how little lore there is on Sanguine, I like how people managed to come together and create this page.Zebendal (talk) 05:40, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose: The page is complete and the formatting is fine, but it doesn't stand out to me. It's not a bad article, but it's not one that I would hail above all others as the perfect example of an article. I think Lore:Namira is a far better article, and I don't feel that one deserves a featured status just yet. -MolagBallet (talk) 06:21, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose: I think the article could still use more work and general cleanup to be considered for Featured status. I just had a quick glance and had to outright remove a reference for being an inaccurate literal interpretation of the source material. The page is in a much better state than it was previously but I can't support it for FA. —⁠Legoless (talk) 10:22, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose: It contains several interpretations which are sub-optimal, lots of literal interpretations and straight out copy-pasted quotes. Rewriting could probably fix most of them. Examples: 1. The Sanguine red lipstick is a popular color and one of the examples of Sanguine's influence on Tamrielic culture. It is less interesting that it *can* be worn by Sanguine's worshippers, among others. 2. The Revelers of Sanguine may wear masks during any party, not just the "particularly heinous ones" (wrong interpretation of Speaker Terenus dialogue). The whole reference to the DB daily quest in ESO could be rewritten as an example of one occasion in which the uninvited person was ordered to be assassinated. 3. Attendants of Dibella were merely proposed by somebody to be invited during one party, there's no proof of them actually being invited nor this being some sort of tradition. 4. Cyrodilic Brandy is proposed as a suitable offering - likely, other bottles of spirit could do, too. 5. Stormhold's citizens didn't stay away from Sanguine's Demesne - one citizen simply said what kind of reputation the place had acquired... Tib (talk) 07:59, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
Consensus: Oppose. 3 - 2 —⁠Legoless (talk) 12:04, 2 August 2021 (UTC)


I would like to nominate Lore:Breton due to the stupendous work that has taken place on it, it has been overhauled by a large number of members of this community and is a perfect example of what a lore page on a race should be like, the formatting is amazing and the coverage of detail from all the games, no matter how obscure, is very thorough.

  • Support: As nominator. Imperialbattlespire (talk) 11:27, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Weak Oppose: I am slightly concerned that the page labels this image as a "druid". From my understanding, this is a Mage enemy from Daggerfall, and is only identified as a druid by Mark Jones on his archived website. If we are relying on developer commentary, that's fine, but it needs a UOL tag. Furthermore, I see that the page contains a list of Templar Knightly Orders which are most definitely not Breton-specific; for example, the Order of the Hour has a heavy presence in Cyrodiil. I haven't the time to review the full page but I would hope that there is not a trend here of trying to de-genericise existing Breton lore. I cannot support FA status for this page yet, not until these two concerns are addressed at least. —⁠Legoless (talk) 20:30, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
    • Comment: The first problem you raise can easily be fixed and I will do so. The second issue is not an issue in my eyes as the templar orders do not say they are exclusively Breton, the Order of the Hour is the sole exception in terms of being in other places, and even then, the page just mentions they're a part of Breton society and links to their lore page. Also I don't see the issue with "de-genericiseing" Breton lore if its all sourced, which in this case it is. Imperialbattlespire (talk) 20:50, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Support: I didn’t get the chance to contribute to this massive effort but a shoutout to all of those who did, (now do one for my poor dunmer) definitely one of the best race pages on the site now. Only really comparable to the Khajiit. Dcking20 (talk) 20:44, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Support: Given the work that has been put into this, not only fleshing out the Bretons, but the new updated article had very interesting lore about the Bretons that I didn't even know much about before. Several people made this happen, and if Imperialbattlespire didn't nominate it, I might have putted it up as a potential nomination category. As its been on my mind that maybe it should be up for nomination. This article of all the articles up for nomination consideration deserves a nomination. TheVampKnight (talk) 05:13, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Support: This article definitely sets a high standard for other pages like it. It's clear that a lot of work went into this. Everything from the formatting, images, and the plethora of information are all beautifully presented. Very commendable work! Noviier (talk) 19:12, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Support: The article is very informative and highly organized. It's one of those pages I go through sometimes because I just like to look at it, and it sets the bar high for lore pages. Big props to everyone, this hard work shouldn't go unnoticed and it deserves the recognition. --Vincentius1 (talk) 01:44, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Support:Bretons don't seem bland anymore after reading this article. Way to go team.--Zebendal (talk) 02:24, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
Consensus: Support. Generally supported. Imperialbattlespire (talk) 03:02, 27 April 2021 (UTC)


Hircine has gotten a major revamp for his lore page since the December 7, 2018, https://en.uesp.net/w/index.php?title=Lore:Hircine&diff=1890205&oldid=1887468 vs https://en.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Hircine. Compare it to the current page, it was previously a page with about 4 paragraphs and a only 3 artifacts transcluded for a total page worth of 6,271 bytes. Currently, Hircine's page sits at 61,053 bytes, now detailing Hircine's aspects, his cultural interpretations, a history section going from merethic to the fourth era, and there is also the amount of related supplemental material that has since been created alongside it that helps the page. For example, Hircine's page now links to the Great Hunt page, has been expanded from 3 artifacts to 6ish (technically 8), and links to many other associated pages such as the Bloodroot Forge that didn't exist before, therefore complimenting the page. I feel that the article lets the reader know that while Hircine represents the hunt, there is more to him as seen in sections such as his role in Reachmen beliefs.

  • Support: As nominator.Zebendal (talk) 23:48, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
  • Support: I support this, because of all the work that has been put into it.--TheVampKnight (talk) 05:41, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support: I support this. Not only it shows all the new lore related to Hircine but also is way clearer than before --Tyrvarion (talk) 12:11, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support: Very well written article. I support.Dcking20 (talk) 00:06, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support: Good work, really in-depth and great use of images from a variety of sources Imperialbattlespire (talk) 00:21, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support: Now that I've had time to look it over, I can see that the information presented is accurate and flows logically. This is an excellent example of what a Featured Article should look like. -MolagBallet (talk) 21:41, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Support: looks rather good now The Rim of the Sky (talk) 02:15, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Consensus: Support. Unanimous —⁠Legoless (talk) 12:52, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Skyrim:Simon Rodayne[edit]

A great little Skyrim NPC page with full in-game and technical documentation. This is a Creation Club article and I think it's a brilliant example of what needs to be done to document this new content in an older namespace. I think featuring a finished page like this would be a good way to encourage others to get involved in editing Creation Club pages.

  • Support: As nominator. —⁠Legoless (talk) 00:51, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support: Per nom. --AKB Talk Cont Mail 17:24, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose: I understand the desire to have more featured CC articles but this article doesn't have much on it, even if it is complete, many finished eso npc pages are on par and have the same amount of info for example. This is why the wiki could use a Comprehensive or at the very least Good Article system that so many other wikis have; this article is by no means bad, its just not featured material The Rim of the Sky (talk) 21:34, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose: I agree with The Rim of the Sky. The blank space speaks volumes. Retroambassador (talk) 16:47, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose: Ditto the above; it's complete, but it's not the sort of page I envision when I think of a featured article. -MolagBallet (talk) 16:56, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose: It works as a page, but it does not have the wow factor that featured articles are expected of. Zebendal (talk) 09:47, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
Consensus: Oppose. 4 - 2 —⁠Legoless (talk) 09:58, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Lore:Molag Bal[edit]

This page has undergone some major changes within the past year. The differences between the state of the article on the 11th of June, 2019 and the current revision are drastic. This page is laden with details, references and images that give a clear picture of who Molag Bal is, what he's like, and what his goals are. This page is a peak example of what a Daedric Prince's page should look like: it has detailed sections for different aspects of the Prince's involvement in history, his relationship with several other deities, elements of cult worship and a lavish description of his military and the Daedra that serve him. This article has come far since its conception. So much information from ESO was missing, and now the article is all fleshed out. We should hold it up proud as an example of a thorough article.

  • Support: As nominator. --MolagBallet (talk) 02:30, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Support: Pretty well done. Has the history properly formatted, minion, and is how Daedric Prince pages should look like.Zebendal (talk) 06:47, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support: Per nom. --AKB Talk Cont Mail 17:24, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment: I think it needs to be proofread a bit more and have some things moved around, I'll try to see what I can do The Rim of the Sky (talk) 21:34, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support: So many References... I love it! Retroambassador (talk) 16:52, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment Support: Great article, but I really dislike the intro. I think a list of all alternative names is better suited for its own subsection if it's this long. Looking at similar wikipedia pages shows they rather make a new page for alternative names (which I don't think is really useful here), but a subsection could categorize them in a structured way and give some context to each of the names.
Edit: It looks great now! --Ilaro (talk) 09:37, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Support: Very thorough and detailed article. It has everything you need to know about the various aspects of Molag Bal, not to mention plenty of references to back it up. --Oriwa Talk 22:42, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
  • Support: Even though I'm not to fond of Molag Bal for reasons, I support this because of the work put into it. --TheVampKnight (talk) 06:39, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
Consensus: Support. Unanimous —⁠Legoless (talk) 10:33, 22 December 2020 (UTC)


This page sprung up nearly overnight. Nchuthnkarst went from an empty stub to a complete public dungeon article over the space of about three weeks. It contains a full walkthrough with extensive imagery and a complex list of enemy types grouped by area. This dungeon has an insane amount of enemy variety so I find that table particularly impressive as far as documentation goes.

  • Support: As nominator. —⁠Legoless (talk) 00:51, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support: I'm biased, but I think this is how all public dungeon pages should look. It has everything you need to know about the dungeon. -MolagBallet (talk) 01:39, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support: Per nom. --AKB Talk Cont Mail 17:24, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support: This really showcases how a lot of information and images can be displayed and not look cluttered or overwhelming. - Thuraya Salaris (talk) 22:30, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support: Looks great, love the use of the table for enemies and where they are. As others have said, the layout is great. Imperialbattlespire (talk) 20:41, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support: Really good formatting, only place I can think of improving is the map section (I know there's some way to add pins in the location the esomap puts them, like in Online:Irrigation Tunnels#Maps) — Unsigned comment by The Rim of the Sky (talkcontribs) at 21:34 on 24 August 2020 (UTC)
Consensus: Support. Unanimous —⁠Legoless (talk) 08:09, 4 September 2020 (UTC)


If you've ever visited Milchar, you will know that this dungeon is intense. It is a massive sprawling complex with multiple surface entrances and lots of related quests. This article does an amazing job of turning this experience into a concise and informative dungeon page awaiting final review under OPRP. In my opinion it is a top tier Oblivion dungeon article; the maps are fantastic, it has good imagery, and the place has been thoroughly documented in its entirety. It even details the test cell XPMilchar.

  • Support: As nominator. —⁠Legoless (talk) 00:51, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support: Per nom. --AKB Talk Cont Mail 17:24, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support: A very detailed page with a walkthrough and everything! This page has everything you need to navigate the dungeon and to make sure you've looted all the fun bits and pieces. --MolagBallet (talk) 18:28, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support: Really nice article The Rim of the Sky (talk) 21:34, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support: love the maps, my ocd says the first map might need to be put on the right side but it still deserves my nom Retroambassador (talk) 16:50, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
Consensus: Support. Unanimous —⁠Legoless (talk) 08:09, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Oblivion:Jakben Imbel's House[edit]

This page is a favourite of mine. It kind of falls in between the scope of the OPRP and OBHRP projects since it acts as both a dungeon and a house. The page actually predates OBHRP and comes from a time before houses in Oblivion had their own individual articles. It has therefore acted as a template for a lot of those newer pages, and with good reason I think - it manages to serve as a useful walkthrough without resorting to overly verbose walls of text like a lot of house pages do. I think this is a great (and interesting) example of an Oblivion place page.

  • Support: As nominator. —⁠Legoless (talk) 00:51, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support: Agree with Legoless, doesn't suffer from walls of text like a lot of articles do, also has great coverage of items that can be found and lock levels. Imperialbattlespire (talk) 12:27, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support: Per nom. --AKB Talk Cont Mail 17:24, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support: Agreed! It's well organized and very detailed. Everything I would expect from a good place page. --MolagBallet (talk) 18:19, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support: Per nominator ~ Dwarfmp (talk) 20:48, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support: Very nicely organized :+) --Lilybit (talk) 21:03, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
Consensus: Support. Unanimous —⁠Legoless (talk) 08:09, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Online:Moon Hunter Keep[edit]

This page has sections explaining the bosses and their mechanics, as well as all the different sections of the dungeon, what's there and any mechanics present in those rooms. This article goes in-depth, and tells you everything you need to know about Moon Hunter Keep. I may be very biased in saying this, but every group dungeon page should look this way.

  • Support: As nominator. -MolagBallet (talk) 23:21, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment Support: A perfect example of what a group dungeon page should look like. It has all relevant information as well as a useful walkthrough guide, something which a lot of ESO dungeon pages lack. I am withholding my immediate support since I would like to see a Hard Mode section similar to e.g. Online:The Banished Cells I since that info is currently missing from the page. A link to Online:The Alpha Predator is fine for the walkthrough but I feel like we should be consistent with having a Hard Mode section. —⁠Legoless (talk) 00:31, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
    Edit: Took the liberty of addressing my own concerns so this is a support. —⁠Legoless (talk) 09:38, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support: Per nom. --AKB Talk Cont Mail 17:24, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support - Dcsg (talk) 20:44, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Very thorough group dungeon article, prime example of how they should all look. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 21:34, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Nice and tidy Retroambassador (talk) 16:54, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
Consensus: Support. Unanimous —⁠Legoless (talk) 08:09, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Online:Tree-Minder Na-Kesh[edit]

As the person nominating this article, I support this motion. It's a prime example of how an Online NPC page (particularly dungeon boss pages) should look. Her part in the related quest is summarized succinctly in the description of the article, all known and important information is present (achievements, dialogue, health values, difficulty, et. al), and, most importantly, her spells and abilities are listed and explained in full detail. The sections are neat, and the article possesses all the details necessary for understanding the fight against the tree-minder, as well as her role in the dungeon's story.

  • Support: As nominator. --MolagBallet (talk) 05:15, 9 April 2020 (GMT)
  • Support: --Unifrenchie (talk) 01:20, 21 April 2020 (GMT-6)
  • Support: Per MolagBallet. The main image is off-centre which is bugging me (fixed), but the article itself is exemplary. —⁠Legoless (talk) 00:31, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support: Per nom. --AKB Talk Cont Mail 17:24, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Support: Incredibly comprehensive article on a dungeon boss, wish we had more of these The Rim of the Sky (talk) 21:34, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support: It's great to see a dungeon boss with mechanics well defined in the article. multiple images is a plus as well. Retroambassador (talk) 16:40, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
Consensus: Support. Unanimous —⁠Legoless (talk) 08:09, 4 September 2020 (UTC)


The Argonian lore page was greatly expanded with the inclusion of murkmire lore and tells an origin story from helstrom ancestor lizards, to evolving with the aid of the hist into xanmeer dwelling people, and to their fall into their mudhut dwelling architecture. Architecture is noted, subraces are noted, their way of thinking, etc.

  • Support: As nominator. --Zebendal (talk) 05:37, 19 February 2020 (GMT)
  • Support: Agreed, the article is coherent and well-rounded. --MolagBallet (talk) 18:32, 19 February 2020 (GMT)
  • Support: The article adds a lot of info and is very well formatted for it --Unifrenchie (talk) 01:14, 21 April 2020 (GMT-6)
  • Support: The article has no visible spelling errors and is formatted well. Werewolfvampirre  (talk)
  • Support: Per nom. --AKB Talk Cont Mail 17:27, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Consensus: Support. Supported by all participants. --AKB Talk Cont Mail 17:27, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Lore:Imperial Legion[edit]

This has been featured before but that was 6 years ago, a lot of work has gone into this page since. I've been focusing on this particular lore page for the last 6 months and think it's high quality. https://en.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Imperial_Legion vs https://en.uesp.net/w/index.php?title=Lore:Imperial_Legion&diff=1411915&oldid=1411769 (2014)

  • Support: As Nominator --Imperialbattlespire (talk) 23:25, 7 February 2020 (GMT)
  • Comment: You did a great job working on this article and it's definitely close to being featured. However, before I vote, I'd still like to see some changes. While there are an excessive amount of sources on this page, I actually think it's still not enough. Many of the legions that are listed are not sourced or don't even have a description. The Artifact section is a bit small without describing why they are considered important for the legion and neither is there a source for any of them. Images are great, maybe some shuffling could make them even better (or pulling some of them from the gallery). Anyway, I'm confident that this one will be ready in a short while. --Ilaro (talk) 23:37, 7 February 2020 (GMT)
  • Support: I just noticed it's already been featured before, but it changed a lot and it's definitely worth being featured in its current state. --Ilaro (talk) 17:00, 8 February 2020 (GMT)
  • Oppose: There's precedent to revoke the status of a featured article and it be renominated, as was the case with Lore:Khajiit, which had insufficient votes in the nomination and was pushed anyway and later revoted. We also had a case where Daggerfall:Vampirism was nominated and a year later saw its status revoked because the article was significantly edited by KINMUNE to the point where it was clearly evident it wasn't the best it could be, and it never saw its status revisited in a nomination. Precedent clearly exists to revisit older FAs based on the quality of the article at the time versus the amount of work it needed to be updated. However, I don't see the case to be made here, and I'll explain.
We're not writing and reviewing an article about a no-longer-existing topic like the Legion's real-world Roman analog, which has a more or less set history to it to report on. This is an article for an ever-evolving game series. After so many years and lore developments brought on by ESO, Blades, etc, this article, as well as all of our other FAs particularly in Lore, will sooner or later become obsolete and need an update. That aside, any FA, even on Wikipedia, it is foolish to suggest once it hits FA it's in that perfect state where there's nothing further to be improved. There's always something. Great work was done by Imperialbattlespire and any other contributors, and their dedication to the article is worth noting, but it's already been featured and I see no reason to re-feature it, nor do I see a case to revoke and renominate like our prior precedent established. The article was in a really high-quality state as it was before ESO, Blades, etc and in our ever evolving TES lore there's always eventually going to be new information, so we can't even look at DF:Vampirism, a decades old game's article, and say "it was significantly improved so clearly it wasn't good enough then, because that information was static and just nonexisting.
Again, it's a very good article, and credit to everyone who puts their hard work into it. I'm not saying it shouldn't be a featured article, just that the fact that it evolved with the times as all articles do doesn't mean it needs to be re-featured because its original FA status has never been in question and it's always been a high quality article. -damon  talkcontribs 21:44, 8 February 2020 (GMT)
  • Support:Im of the mindset that just because it was featured before doesn't mean it cant be featured again. As future games expand more and more on lore, drastic changes will occur depending on how much information was added. A good example is the khajiit lore page which has had a huge amount of information added since the furstocks were portrayed in ESO:Elsweyr as well as khajiiti culture, but was a featured article prior to the expansion of lore.Zebendal (talk) 00:36, 9 February 2020 (GMT)
Comment: I hate to derail the nomination with a philosophical debate or anything silly, but while there's no reason why it can't be re-featured, there are reasons why it shouldn't. I'd prefer a one-time feature and that's it, because if we want to showcase the UESP's quality, we should be focusing more on expanding articles that need it and letting them be in the limelight. Not to downplay the work put into this article, but what's stopping everyone from polishing a couple of already great and already previously featured articles and nominating them over and over to feature instead of focusing on articles that need the love and are not great and showcasing what users can accomplish to improve articles that already need it? Featuring over and over the same Rolodex of articles doesn't showcase everything the wiki or even the series as a whole has to offer. Legion has had its limelight and it's time to move on and showcase other articles and other subjects. -damon  talkcontribs 01:12, 9 February 2020 (GMT)
  • Support: Seems like a very strong candidate. --AKB Talk Cont Mail 21:47, 18 February 2020 (GMT)
  • Support: Having helped ImpBat a little with this page on Discord, I can attest to just how much effort he has put into this project research-wise, and wiki-wise. I think the humongous diff between the old page and now speaks for itself, definitely worthy of a FA. Thal-J (talk) 23:25, 19 February 2020 (GMT)
Consensus: Support. Generally supported. --AKB Talk Cont Mail 18:59, 12 March 2020 (GMT)


One of the stronger articles I have found in the bestiary, and a very good candidate for featured status. We need more articles like this, and it serves as a good pointer for how to do lore articles, especially for creatures (a category we are steadily expanding, but there is still so much more to do). Also a good article to restart the nomination process for FAs, which slowed down for a spell.

  • Support: As nominator. --AKB Talk Cont Mail 22:13, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Support: This is what bestiary articles should strive to look like. It has my support.Zebendal (talk) 22:23, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Support: Nothing further of my own to add to the vote. -damon  talkcontribs 23:15, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Support: Honestly, this is a pretty solid article which really goes in-depth on the different aspects. The thing I like about this article the most is that instead of giving the different stages their own articles that are standard, it blends them together into a single place that covers the general topic, and even gives each section a segway to the next. It's really good! --Vincentius1 (talk) 17:39, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Support: I was meaning to write this page for many years, but it was the new info added by Legends which provided enough clarity on the life cycle to finally attempt it. I'm definitely happy with how it came out! —Legoless (talk) 20:40, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Support: Fantastically written and nice to look at. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 04:27, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
Consensus: Support. Supported by all participants. --Ilaro (talk) 07:32, 21 September 2019 (UTC)


This article is pretty much the golden standard for a lore persons page. For such a character with such a long history and many confusing inconsistencies and discrepancies, Echo did a really good job writing up the whole biography, and the usage of the related images is very well done.

  • Support: As nominator. —The Rim of the Sky (talk) 16:55, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Support: I'm gonna echo Rim's assessment. Not only is the article well-informed and properly organized, but it's also visually interesting. I also like the use of notes at the beginning of the sections for clarity. Although both the Arcturian Heresy and the Five Songs of Wulfharth are used as references way too much, some paragraphs could have one ref tag for these books, but instead, they have four to five at a time. I think there should just be one tag if that's the only reference, but there's probably a reason for it. Other than that the page deserves some recognition. --Vincentius1 (talk) 01:43, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Support: I'll take Vincentius' and Rim's word that the lore is sound, so my vote is mainly based on the page's writing/formatting/completeness, which all check out. —Dillonn241 (talk) 08:55, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Support: Neat article, it has my support.Zebendal (talk) 19:22, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support: Very high quality. --AKB Talk Cont Mail 20:43, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
Consensus: Support. Received overall support from participants. --AKB Talk Cont Mail 20:46, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Online:Vakka-Bok Xanmeer[edit]

A great example of a detailed place article. Complete with maps, npcs, and related quests. Whats not to enjoy from a article like this?

  • Support: As nominator. —Zebendal (talk)
  • Comment: I would like to support, but the page could use some formatting. The maps would be a lot more useful moved into their relevant sections. Also, the Denizens sections aren't that great looking. Perhaps change these to one or two sentences instead? If they are kept as lists, something needs to be done so they don't wrap around the images so oddly. —Dillonn241 (talk) 02:17, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
    • Without wanting to comment on whether they should or shouldn't actually be lists, I've at least fixed the formatting of the existing lists. It's a widespread problem that I haven't yet found a purely CSS solution for (nor has anyone at Wikipedia/MediaWiki), so in the meantime, there's the {{ListFix}} template. Robin Hood  (talk) 04:03, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Support: Though not the conventional type of article we've had featured in quite a while, it's rather good overview for an ESO location. Very reminiscent of the walkthroughs we had on many Skyrim dungeons. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 22:49, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Support: I'm still not liking the maps being at the bottom, but since the page is one of the most comprehensive ESO dungeon pages I've seen, I think it deserves recognition. —Dillonn241 (talk) 08:55, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose: Not because it's a bad article (it looks amazing and comprehensive), but it looks like it's not yet finished. The page is still listed as a stub, the "view on map" link doesn't go anywhere, and my biggest worry are the maps at the bottom of the page. They do not seem to correspond to the different sections above. Does Phosphorescent Cavern have a map? What's with the Treasure Room and Library? How is the Nexus connected to these? --Ilaro (talk) 10:31, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Above concerns addressed, supporting now. --AKB Talk Cont Mail 20:43, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
Consensus: Support. Supported by majority of participants. --AKB Talk Cont Mail 20:46, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Legends:Solo Arena[edit]

Extensive page with almost all information of this Legends gamemode. I don't think there is any other place you can find this info, especially because of the hard to acquire data. Incredibly useful for any player that would like to play some solo Legends gameplay. Still missing a reward section, but that might be impossible for the near future. --Ilaro (talk) 15:26, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

  • Support: As nominator. --Ilaro (talk) 15:26, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Support: Extremely comprehensive, some impressive work which really shows off the namespace. —Legoless (talk) 15:37, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Support: Pretty great article. Legends game space can get a little more recognition. * Zebendal (talk) 21:59, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Support: Perfect example of the ideal guide page, very informative, well written, and nice to read. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 22:49, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Support: Agreed with all of the above. It's a good example of a long/detailed Legends page. —Dillonn241 (talk) 03:39, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
Consensus: Support. Unanimous —Dillonn241 (talk) 03:39, 17 July 2019 (UTC)


With the recent expansion by Vincentius and the cleanup by Croaker, this page is looking very nice in appearance and complete in content. It provides a thorough overview of the city's history, with coverage for ESO, Arena, Skyrim, and a few periods in between from lore. The layout section summarizes all of the important features, including some names I hadn't heard of before for a mountain range (Ysgramor's Teeth) and the city districts.

  • Support: As nominator. —Dillonn241 (talk) 02:17, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment: I would like to see the ESO references specified. The using of "ESO events" should be minimal, esp. if we actually know where exactly the reference comes from. Tib (talk) 06:56, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
    • I pecked at those sections some more and they should be in order now. I opted to keep "ESO events" as a source for the damage that Sinmur inflicts on Riften because that damage is baked into the game and visible even if you don't touch the Rift's questline. Croaker (talk) 08:10, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Support ***I think the article is at the point where it is ready for such a nomination: --Zebendal (talk) 19:14, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support: It's an excellently done page. --The Sporkiest of Rats (talk) 00:49, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Support: Page is looking great for a featured article (which is desperately needed now). --Ilaro (talk) 15:26, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Support: Solid article. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 22:49, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
Consensus: Support. Unanimous —Dillonn241 (talk) 03:39, 17 July 2019 (UTC)


It is my great honor to propose Rock as a candidate for April 1st, 2019's Featured Article. This page has it all. It's clean, it has all you need to know about Rock written on it, and it is truly the epitome of the Online namespace. Rock is clean, concise, and detailed... Rock. This is truly what peak performance looks like.

  • Support: As nominator.MolagBallet (talk) 20:50, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Conditional Support: A discussion must first be had about the proposed merger with Online:Traps. —Legoless (talk) 22:46, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose: The page is being proposed to be moved to a subsection on a larger page. I see the attempt at humor here, but unless there's a compelling reason to keep it on its own subpage, the Traps page seems like the best place for it to be. As it is, most of the body of the article and the bottom note message is already there, so it seems like the better place for it to be and the redirect is most appropriate in my opinion. That makes this not worth being its own featured article, because it's likely to no longer be its own article. -damon  talkcontribs 22:50, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose: I don't think we should be using Featured Articles for April Fools. The fact that this was considered for April Fools is evidence of how pointless and ridiculous that page is. Since the suggested merge page is nowhere near done, and was not nominated, oppose. If this somehow passes, then I suggest it be accepted with the conditions that it does not get a star and does not get added to the list of past featured articles. —Dillonn241 (talk) 22:53, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment:I agree with the people above that this page should be merged with the Traps page. However, I do like the idea for it as a one day featured article for April 1. We shouldn't be so serious about this for that specific day. The strict protocols for page creations should not apply as strongly for a April 1 joke. --Ilaro (talk) 23:23, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Strong Support: Never have I seen an article so thorough and exquisite, do detailed and mesmerizing, so bold and revolutionary—truly, if any article is deserving of a featured status, it's this one. Anyone who says otherwise clearly doesn't have taste and flat out hates fun in all its forms. Not a bad April Fools article. However, I do think a good alternative would be to create a page just for the Pebble Pal pet, try out a template, and have it be featured. Either one could work well. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 23:42, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Support: Are we really going be such sticklers that we'd pass up a perfectly good April Fools joke? The page will be gone soon anyway, seeing as it obviously needs to be merged with Online:Traps, which has been the procedure for all other traps throughout the other games. Especially if we take Dillonn's suggestion, I don't see any reason why this shouldn't go through. If anything, considering that there are unresolved votes dating back to last year and that there have been more replies to this suggestion than to any of the other serious nominations, it might at least spur some more interest in participation in the Featured Article / Featured Image process.--Rook (talk) 00:53, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment: As April 1, 2019 came and went, this vote to determine whether to present Rock as the FA for that day is now moot. Croaker (talk) 04:25, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
Consensus: No Consensus. Maybe next year. —Legoless (talk) 16:37, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

Skyrim:Myrwatch (place)[edit]

A great Skyrim place page which thoroughly documents the location; all the more remarkable considering the location was only added to the game under two months ago. This article covers all aspects of the house, including new functions like the All Forge. It has an extensive gallery, showing off the interior and the completed item collections. Featuring it would also be a good way to show off our coverage of the Creation Club content, a project which doesn't have very many editors at present.

  • Support: As nominator. —Legoless (talk) 23:28, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support: Considering that I wrote most of it and took some of the screenshots (Legoless took the rest), obvious support from me. Good to have something from Creation Club featured as well. —Dillonn241 (talk) 23:31, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose: Shouldn't this page be beholden to the UESPWiki:Skyrim Houses Redesign Project? Of course, when the project was created the Creation Club didn't exist - but that doesn't necessarily excuse this page from being held to the same rigorous standards. As far as I know, this page hasn't been checked in the same way older SR pages were. Even if this page is being excluded from the project, there are currently 3 bugs that remain unconfirmed, so I can't really support the page yet. --Jimeee (talk) 01:25, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak Oppose: I agree with Jimeee that it should be under the scope of our existing project. After its examined to that standard, I see this as a strong candidate. --AKB Talk Cont Mail 06:18, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose: I would really like to see something from the Creation Club featured on the front page, but it would be pretty silly to put it out there while it still has that template stamped on the top of the page. It definitely needs to go through the review process before it can be featured. However, if we want to push Creation Club content, I wouldn't oppose a Featured Image nomination for one of the screenshots as the majority of them are very eye-catching.--Rook (talk) 01:58, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
Consensus: Oppose. 3:2 —Legoless (talk) 16:37, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

Lore:Summerset Isle[edit]

It may be on the shorter side, but it is a well-written, well-sourced article featuring both old and new lore and numerous excellent images.

  • Support: As nominator. --FioFioFio (talk) 00:40, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support: I added a few details to the page. It's still shorter than I'd like, but it seems to cover most of the important things and the layout of the page is a model for other pages to follow. —Dillonn241 (talk) 19:11, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose: Sorry, but I think this page can be better. It needs fleshed out region info with mentions of important places like Ebon Stadmont, Sil-Var-Woad, Wasten Coridale and Artaeum, etc. Architecture probably deserves its own section like on Lore:Skyrim#Architecture. The Flora and Fauna sections can be expanded and better referenced. Right now I don't think its comparable to the other province pages. --Jimeee (talk) 10:36, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
    • Comment: Not arguing with this reasoning, but I think you might be confusing the page with Lore:Summerset Isles. Is there any reason to mention Wasten Coridale and Artaeum except to say that they are nearby? —Dillonn241 (talk) 10:40, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
      • Comment: Well yes, at least some mention and their relationship to the main isle. This is kinda the problem with having a page about the main isle and a page about the larger "isles" (even though both should of course exist) - there is either a massive amount of duplication or one page ends up feeling like its lacking info that you might expect to be there.--Jimeee (talk) 10:59, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
        • Comment: The Isles page is about the province and all the islands, the Isle page is focused solely on the single island. There is only a limited amount of crossover, and only as much as would be expected of any province, its regions, and its cities, especially a region containing the capital city or areas where significant events occurred (think Skyrim, Haafingar, Solitude). Silence is GoldenBreak the Silence 18:54, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support: It's succinct and well laid out in my opinion. Plus, the images do it justice. Echo (talk) 04:57, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support: A very nice page that sticks to its scope well. --AKB Talk Cont Mail 13:48, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
Consensus: Support. Overall supported. --AKB Talk Cont Mail 13:48, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Main Page/Did You Know[edit]

I am nominating this article, for the reason that Dillon has just spent quite a lot of time revamping this page to include interesting lore from practically all of the games, now, and would further highlight his hard work.

  • Support: As nominator.Timeoin (talk) 08:46, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Neutral: I was actually joking about nominating this as a featured article. Despite the irony of featuring a subpage of the main page on the main page, though, it's well written and comprehensive (and certainly not just because of my recent edits). I'm not going to support or oppose because I don't see how this would actually work in practice. Which image or text would appear in the featured box? —Dillonn241 (talk) 08:51, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose: Its ultimately a list of interesting facts - not an article. --Jimeee (talk) 09:56, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose: As Jimeee said. -damon  talkcontribs 14:54, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose: This page is not an article. —Legoless (talk) 16:14, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
Consensus: Oppose. Not supported for FA status. --AKB Talk Cont Mail 04:46, 12 October 2018 (UTC)


This is one of my favorite Redguard pages and by far the most interesting place page in the namespace. I know there have been quite a few image nominations for Redguard recently, but of the old spin-off games, only Shadowkey has had a featured article. This place is perhaps the most significant structure on Stros M'Kai as it contains one of two orreries in Tamriel, the other at the Arcane University. The focus on astronomy is reflected on the page with a complete view of what you can see through the telescope and all of the constellation panels and runes.

  • Support: As nominator. —Dillonn241 (talk) 01:24, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support: The information and images about astronomy are fascinating, as someone who's never played Redguard. It also clearly describes what to do here and will be a great help when I get around to playing it. --FioFioFio (talk) 01:26, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support: I think it is a well designed article, and I do like the telescope section the most. Although not a very long article, it seems polished and complete. There are several images and notes, so it seems you have really tried to gather as much information as possible. To someone who has not played the game, this page appears very proper, but well this is about all I have to say hehe. Tib (talk) 08:51, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support: A very comprehensive article on an iconic building which was unfortunately absent in ESO. Maybe if the place had been this well-documented in 2013 it might've made an appearance? —Legoless (talk) 16:41, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support: I believe this article exemplifies what a good Redguard space article should look like. — J. J. Fullerton talk﴿ 06:23, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
Consensus: Support. Fully supported by all participants. --AKB Talk Cont Mail 04:46, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Online:Earl Leythen[edit]

Another ESO NPC, this one for a more major character. I was considering nominating this earlier in the week, but it was still a WIP then, and tib has made it incredible since. I also think it shows a good balance between prose and transcripts. --FioFioFio (talk) 00:30, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

  • Support: As nominator. --FioFioFio (talk) 00:30, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support: I believe this is now the most comprehensive ESO NPC article. I especially like the quotes in boxes to break up the dialogue sections and the number of images to go along with them. A minor issue I see is excessive use of indents; most of the dialogue on the wiki now only indents if there are multiple options at once. —Dillonn241 (talk) 00:48, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment: Fio, thank you for the kind words! I'm honored by the nomination, but also interested in hearing the people's opinions. Dillonn, I'm unsure where we actually stand regarding the indenting. We need to clarify this somewhere I think, but anyways for now I've reduced the indenting in this article to see if it feels better. Gotta say, the FA nomination was not in my mind when I decided I want to document this NPC! Tib (talk) 08:51, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support: Not a fan of the use of the {{ESO Red Choice}} show/hide, but otherwise this is a superb NPC article. —Legoless (talk) 16:41, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
Comment: I'm also hesitant, but now I've at least tried them out. I'd say they fit better on a quest page than here. Tib (talk) 17:36, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose: After reading this over a few times, this is probably the best ESO NPC article I've seen. The images are excellent and the article is very well written. This being said, I think there's still room for improvement, even without imposing my Oblivion/Skyrim format opinion too much on this. That being said, admittedly my main issue with the article is the lack of prose. But I'm not suggesting this needs to look like an Oblivion article as I understand that's not the direction we want to go with this namespace.
The "The Tower Sentinels" section has a good balance of prose and pure dialogue, but the prose dwindle a bit after that. I personally will never see the need to always list player options and NPC responses for a linear path of dialogue, because that format loses the majority of its benefits in those instances (when there's multiple options at the same time, prose can get awkward (e.g. "you can instead ask about Ri'Bassa" , "instead of asking about skooma you could ask about mountain lions", etc.). The player responses could be paraphrased near exactly and the dialogue introduced in prose instead. This has the benefit of being able to capture emotion or add good commentary to build up the narrative or introduce some foreshadowing if appropriate. This doesn't need to be changed in all instances, but I think it could be changed a good bit to introduce more prose and provide the article with a better balance. The large chunks of the article that are just player dialogue and NPC responses detracts from the narrative and story the article is trying to tell since our narrator disappears for so long in some sections (e.g. Lost In Translation).
I'm also not sure how we're approaching rumors on ESO NPC articles. Oblivion and Skyrim articles typically included the majority of worth-while dialogue that was said about a character on their NPC page. This helped to build up the narrative even more. I have no idea if there are more rumors about this character aside from what is already on the page, but I think including them would only benefit the article. They would help to further develop the subject and could be introduced in a prose format to provide the article with a better balance.
Related to the rumors, my last main concern would be the ending of the article. An article with this kind of size should have a bit more bang at the end than some show/hides and a player option and NPC response. Prose could be very useful here to describe how those last lines of dialogue sound, as the three dots probably doesn't do much justice in capturing the emotion filled in them. Aside from this, if the dialogue/rumors exist, wrapping the article up like how Skyrim:Ancano does might work well, where the aftermath of the character's death and other characters' reactions to it is included. As is, the article kind of suggests that Earl's story ends as soon as he dies, which may not be the case. All in all, this is a great article but these would be my suggestions to have it set a perfect example for what NPC articles written in the ESO style should look like. Forfeit (talk) 06:54, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
Comment: There's been no discussion of including "rumors" on ESO NPC articles, and honestly I don't see the need with such a long article. Including all mentions of an NPC was already a daunting task in Oblivion when we actually had ready access to all dialogue. I feel like the expectation to include same is certainly an imposition of OBNPCRP standards where they aren't applicable. —Legoless (talk) 09:39, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
Comment: Thank you Forfeit, this is very good feedback. I'm gonna address the three points: writing in prose, using rumors, and the ending of the article.
Prose - Strictly speaking, reworded player dialogue, followed by NPC dialogue is still a dialogue transcript, just in different format. Take a look at Ancano which you linked, it is full of examples like that. They don't add any emotions or build up to anything, they really are just a recount of the dialogue. However... there are some parts in the Leythen article where descriptive prose could be used. For example when he summons Mephala in A Necessary Alliance, or when he examines the stone inscriptions in Lost in Translation.
Rumors - There are some lines said by Valsirenn, before you encounter Leythen. They do not add much new information - this is already summarized and mentioned in the beginning of the article. But this could be added, however it is unclear where. Because of this, I think I prefer the existing summary in this case.
Ending - Yeah the ending could be changed, however, his story kind of does end when he dies. There are two things we could add - Darien's short comment about how we need to keep moving inside the Crystal Tower, and Valsirenn's brief reflection about her husband, after you have completed main quest. There are no other rumors or comments though ;) Tib (talk) 17:36, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
Comment: For the prose, maybe "emotion" is going a bit too far in describing the impact it makes in these instances. A simple example from Ancano would be something like, "If you claim it sounded like an argument he will return to his patronizing self:". It may seem very simple, and it is, but to me these kinds of sentences can still be used to document player dialogue while retaining the flow of the narrative in the article. They also add a small but important amount of flavor to how they present the dialogue. This line, for example, gives a good idea of how Ancano will sound when he delivers the dialogue that follows and further emphasizes that Ancano was putting on a bit of a "nice guy" act in his previous conversation. When appropriate, you can get clever with these and add some foreshadowing, mention some kind of body language the character uses when delivering the line (maybe he starts twirling a sword around, waves at someone, etc.), or point out any other interesting behavior when the line is delivered or in how it is delivered. The dialogue transcript and prose accomplish the same thing in these instances and are very similar. However, to me, the dialogue transcript is only preferable to break up prose and to document branching dialogue or dialogue with multiple options at the same time since prose can get pretty bulky here.
I think the points about the rumors are fair, especially given the nature of the game. However, I will just say that large amounts of rumors can really enhance articles and create impressive narratives (Skyrim:Thonar Silver-Blood remains probably my favorite Skyrim article because of this, though admittedly that article had some detractors when it was nominated). But I can certainly understand that documenting all the rumors is probably more of wishful thinking for a game like ESO than something that should be seen as a mandatory criteria for the page to be considered complete.
Tib, those both sound like great ideas to include into the ending! That would really give an article as impressive and well-written as this the ending it deserves. I'm being a bit picky and more involved (I'm really bad at being inactive lately) with this than I normally would for a namespace I know nothing about. However, with this being potentially the first NPC page to be featured in this namespace, it'll set an example to all future NPC pages to follow. That's why anything less than perfection is tough for me to let go by unopposed as I want this article to be as good as possible when it gets the star. Forfeit (talk) 22:46, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support: Fantastic article, very well written and would love to see it on the front page. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 17:49, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment: While the formatting on this page is marvelous and I would love to support it, I do have a reservation about an article that seems to ignore ZOS's use of the ellipsis. This concern may be minor, but it does prevent me from casting my vote in favour. — J. J. Fullerton talk﴿ 06:23, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment: Following some of the above discussion, I did a few changes. I removed the "red choice" dialogue, and put instead a table so that the two options are presented next to each other. Then I went on and tried out adding more tables to places where I think they could work. I also added a few more prose sentences, mostly from the overheard dialogue which the players do not participate in. The ending now also has a few more details. Tib (talk) 16:22, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support: I really like this page. Nothing more to say about it. --Ilaro (talk) 21:37, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
Consensus: Support. 5:1 —Dillonn241 (talk) 23:45, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Skyrim:Sibbi Black-Briar[edit]

Another excellent NPC page from the Skyrim namespace, complete with all schedule details, dialogue, rumors, etc. What I like particularly about the article is its use of rumors and conversations about Sibbi from other characters to help develop his character before moving into the quest-related events. In my opinion, it really helps to bring his character to life and makes the quest-related events section a much better read. Overall, I think the page successfully completed the task of making an interesting article about a character that sits around in a jail cell for the entirety of the game.

  • Support: As nominator. Forfeit (talk) 18:00, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Support: A well-composed page that treats its subject well. Though I don't think much of the note about him still being in jail after 8 months of game time. I think it goes without saying; Skyrim just isn't that advanced with its character scheduling. Insignificant RevisionsThreatsEvidence 15:35, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
    • I edited the note to be a bit smoother I think. While it'd certainly be technically possible to have him released after his sentence has passed (I believe there are even mods which do this sort of thing, though maybe not this specifically), it's more like they just didn't bother because they didn't think anyone would care enough to notice. Kind of like how in ESO they never even drag the invaders' bodies off the streets after you liberate a town or some such. — TheRealLurlock (talk) 20:43, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support: Extensive and good information, both helpful for the related quests and to give life to the NPCs. —MortenOSlash (talk) 20:50, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support: This nomination has been up for a very long time, so I'm going to support it. I agree that it's a very thorough examination of the character, especially considering that he remains in jail. —Dillonn241 (talk) 00:48, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
    • Oppose: Reading the other two votes, I have to agree with Rim and Legoless on this. It's very thorough but the page is also very dense, too dense to get much out of without a full read through it. Sibbi isn't a particularly important character either, and that would partially explain why the page is so complete. For example, while still lacking in format, Aela the Huntress is a much better page that hasn't been featured. —Dillonn241 (talk) 05:29, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose: Another great example of how poorly formatted Skyrim articles are. The article is hardly legible and a pain to read, since the dialogue is mixed in as italics into full paragraphs, rather than specially organized. The article isn't very long either, 60% of it is just his dialogue jumbled in, and he's involved in only two quests. I think this nomination being open for over a year with a total of four votes speak to how people don't want to add input to this since it was either too much of a hassle to read the article or since they just can't form an opinion one way or the other. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 17:49, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose: I was debating whether to be the one to cast the fifth vote in opposition and thereby propel this article to FA status. There's nothing particularly wrong with it but I don't believe it's FA material. I definitely concur that there is a reason this nomination has received so few votes despite being open for well over a year now, and I can confirm that I've been staring at this nomination for months without being able to form much of an opinion one way or another. It's a visually pleasing and complete article, but it has little substance and I just haven't been able to get behind the nomination. —Legoless (talk) 18:01, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose: In addition to the agreement with all of the other previously stated concerns, I simply don't believe that the formatting system used on this page and in the namespace at large is material of the highest quality that UESP as a wiki has to offer. — J. J. Fullerton talk﴿ 06:23, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
Consensus: No Consensus. 4:3 —Dillonn241 (talk) 23:29, 12 September 2018 (UTC)


A good example, I think, of what ESO NPC pages should be. Multiple images, detailed summary, and full dialogue transcripts. While ESO NPCs aren't quite as complex as the other games (schedules are much simpler/non-existent, for one), I think this one in particular is well-documented.

  • Support: As nominator. --FioFioFio (talk) 01:03, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose: Unfortunately I think the dialogue section needs some work to make it a bit more engaging and readable (shouldn't that entire section be "Quest-related events" per Skyrim articles?"). Tables could certainly be used to break up certain parts - particularly the conditional dialogue. It could definitely do with more images during the quests events themselves. Even with the restrictions in ESO, I don't think it stands up against some of our older NPC Featured Articles. --Jimeee (talk) 08:49, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment: I wholeheartedly agree it is a well documented article and no doubt how a NPC page should look like. But Lilatha isn't particularly involved with anything else other than one prologue quest and also not so significant character. I'd likely support FAs on more prominent characters, who appear in quest chains (Naryu) or are otherwise recurring throughout the game (Vanos siblings). Tib (talk) 09:28, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose: In favor of Earl Leythen below. This page looks complete in content, but the dialogue section could use some more images, formatting, and prose. —Dillonn241 (talk) 00:48, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose: Per Jimeee. This article could definitely benefit from introducing tables to deal with conditional dialogue. Forfeit (talk) 06:54, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment: I made most of my points about this article in the Discord a while back and they've also been made by other people here but I'll say this. The article is great, a fine example of how complete an ESO NPC article should look, but it's not long enough to be featured. This is primarily because she's only involved in one quest, and there's not much else to add. I would still love to see more ESO characters featured, but they'd have to be important/recurring ones who have a fair bit of info about them already. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 17:49, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose: I find that the formatting of this page, apart from the typo on the "Quest-Related Events" header, is excellently done and typifies what a wiki page should present, the dialogue contained within that section is carelessly transcribed, with a couple of typographical errors and disregard for ZOS's randomly-intermittent use of ellipses as well as a near-complete ignoring of the emdash, I find that the page falls prey to the UESP's all-too-common trap of attempting to convey a 'narrative' or 'story' rather than information. — J. J. Fullerton talk﴿ 06:23, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
Consensus: Oppose. 4:1 —Dillonn241 (talk) 23:29, 12 September 2018 (UTC)


I've been inactive for a while, but I noticed that editors (notably Jimeee) have taken the time to make this page look much nicer and more complete. I've always liked this page. It has a simple, mildly tongue-in-cheek purpose, which it achieves concisely. It has no images (I don't think it needs any), but it's been formatted in a much more aesthetically pleasing way than it used to be. It's also a good page for newcomers to start clicking their way through the lore section. Insignificant RevisionsThreatsEvidence 15:35, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

  • Support: As nominator. Insignificant RevisionsThreatsEvidence 19:08, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Support: I, too, like this page. It is very well referenced (thanks Jimeee) and contains a nice summation of the various heroes. Timeoin (talk) 22:20, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Support: I have always loved this page and think that it is a very clean page. Hohni 21:17, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support: A nice compilation of the heroes. And proper referencing! Tib (talk) 18:26, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment: The page contains no images, I realize this may be difficult considering this page is about the player character of each game, but is there no possibility for a few images? ~ Dwarfmp (talk) 19:38, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment: Each time Bethesda releases promotional material that shows a representation of the player (for instance the Skyrim announcement trailer you can argue that that's Bethesda's opinion of what the "canon" character looks like, though they are nice enough to not press it in-game so that the player can be who they want... Still, why not show a gallery of at least one image per game, if it's available, of a pre-release image showing an example of what the character is. Using Bethesda's image means we have an approved, neutral source of "this is the Dragonborn" to be representative of who the Hero of that game is, rather than the subjective posting of random people's versions. I haven't looked, so I don't know off the top of my head what images there are for newer or older games that consistently show one type of player across multiple promotions, but if any exist, why not use them in that way? -damon  talkcontribs 20:10, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment: I actually prefer it being imageless, given the subject, but there is one image that could go there without any hint of controversy, Cyrus. I've been through the others and from what I can see only Oblivion and Skyrim have a proper "promotional" hero, with Skyrim (see the Wallpapers) having a lot of focus on that one idea while Oblivion is more in passing. There are also images of the character creation defaults, with an early default Oblivion character, one of Bendu Olo (the one in the game), and an image of the default character in Skyrim. There are a few behind-the-character Morrowind shots, but they are all different characters, and I can't see any hint of a default in Legends or Online (I think ESO has a default for each race but randomises the race). Silence is GoldenBreak the Silence 20:41, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose: This page is rather short, and only gives a brief recap for the accomplishments (and just the major ones at that) that each Hero has accomplished. The lore information (such as the Monomyth and Elder Scroll prophecies) are barely elaborated on as well. This page may look well sourced, sure, but there's about three citations per sentence, and 22 out of 30 said references are "Events of [game/DLC]". This page isn't super informative, and is better off being a stub than a featured article. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 03:24, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose: I have to agree with The Rim of the Sky here. The entry for Cyrus is terribly short (I'll try to fix that soon) and others could use some elaboration. I think in order for this article to be featured, it needs to be at least twice its current length. —Dillonn241 (talk) 03:45, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose: This is such a touchy subject for the simple fact that the lore is written to avoid mentioning any specific details of other heroes in case it conflicts with someone's own experience. Nevertheless, we have to assume many game events are true for the purposes of lorespace. The eternal question becomes where to draw the line when it comes to the deeds of the heroes (or "prisoners", per the ESO's Sotha Sil). I think that is a very contentious topic, and I think it's the reason this page hasn't reached its full potential and perhaps never will. —Legoless (talk) 23:27, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
Consensus: No Consensus. 4:3 —Legoless (talk) 16:41, 3 September 2018 (UTC)


Since the TESVI trailer came out, a lot of people have been speculating that it will be set in Hammerfell, and a lot of people are hoping sword-singing will be included as a mechanic. Aside from that, this is also a well-written, well-cited article. Timely and in-depth! --FioFioFio (talk) 23:36, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Support - As nominator. --FioFioFio (talk) 23:36, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support: Appropriate timing, but aside from that this is an excellent article which succeeds at highlighting the more well-hidden Ansei lore from ESO. A complete and visually stunning lore article. —Legoless (talk) 23:42, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support: A well-written and comprehensive article on some lesser known aspects of the Elder Scrolls lore. As mentioned above, well-cited, and makes good use of formatting, images, and relevant quotes. Regardless of what's being planned for TES VI, this is what Lore articles should aspire to be like. Echo (talk) 23:57, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support: Yep, great article. --Ilaro (talk) 13:55, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support: Touches on some of the more esoteric subjects of Elder Scrolls lore, also well written and the pictures in the article are the best I have seen in a while. --SIX10 (talk) 00:24, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support: Definitely well-timed given the TES 6 video, and I'm all for anything that includes the ESO lore in a well-written manner. Timeoin (talk) 09:20, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support: Nice Article on an interesting subject. -- SarthesArai Talk 12:35, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment: Two Featured Articles in a row? You guys are staring to give me an ego! #humblebrag. But seriously, thanks :P --Jimeee (talk) 13:13, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
Keep em coming! —Legoless (talk) 09:36, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support: A very nice article written by Jimeee talking about Redguard lore, similar to the last one. I liked it so much that I did the ESO trial just to get a pic of the Shehai sword since there wasn't one anywhere on the internet, the article really does deserve featured status. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 21:31, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
Consensus: Support. Unanimous —Legoless (talk) 12:53, 9 July 2018 (UTC)


This article is very well written and covers just about everything relating to the subject in great detail. It has many citations and makes good use of its images. Though lore info from quests, books, and dialogue in ESO is often not fully documented in lore articles, this page is one of the few that manages to use nearly all of the info given. The usage of lists on the article is also very well done. I'd consider this an ideal lore page for a location. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 23:32, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Support: As nominator. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 23:32, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support: Page is very well formatted, sourced, and full of great images. KhajiitFromElsweyr (talk) 20:11, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support: There is a surprising amount of information here for only a few sources, and referencing ESO contraband items is pretty neat. I fixed a few mistakes on the page and added information on the settlements from the West Tamriel map, so it should be even more featured-worthy now. —Dillonn241 (talk) 23:07, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support: As per Cyan I agree that the amount of sourced information is impressive. As someone whose favorite lore is Yokudan & Redguard lore, I support this for the new featured article. Also Cloudy Dregs Inn has been FA for far too long, in my opinion. It's about time we get a new one. JarlUlfric (talk) 23:21, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support: Great article as everybody else said. Phoenix Neko (talk) 23:35, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment: Aww, shucks! --Jimeee (talk) 23:40, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support: Incredibly comprehensive, well-cited, and well-formatted. --FioFioFio (talk) 01:35, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
Consensus: Support. Unanimous —Legoless (talk) 22:13, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Legends:Cloudy Dregs Inn[edit]

I think we finally have Legends article worthy of being considered for FA status here. Not only does it have all the basic quest info, it has what cards the opponent uses, what strategies the player can use to beat that, AND an example deck that newer players could easily build, with explanations of what use each card will be in the match. In short, it's a very thorough resource and a great example of what we can do with the Legends space.--FioFioFio (talk) 13:59, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

  • Support: As nominator. --FioFioFio (talk) 13:59, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support: It is definitely one of the better Legends articles. While there are still some things that could be improved (as with all articles) this one has my strong support. --Ilaro (talk) 19:24, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support: An excellent standard for the namespace to aspire to. This article is complete as far as I can tell, and the sample deck is particularly impressive. —Legoless (talk) 16:27, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support: Its nice to see another namespace on the up and up. Listing opponent's decks along with a sample deck and strategy is very well done, and is an excellent resource. --Vyraesi (talk) 16:38, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support:Now that is an amazing article! Timeoin (talk) 23:46, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support: This article has a lot of information and presents it in a good format. I think it's important that we feature some content from Legends on the main page. —Dillonn241 (talk) 07:39, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
Consensus: Support. Unanimous —Legoless (talk) 18:00, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Online:To The Clockwork City[edit]

With the release of clockwork City on PC, and soon to be release on Console, I believe its time for a Clockwork City nomination. This article is quite detailed, amd gives a great overview of the quest, including the various dialogue options. Therefore, I'd like to nominate it as feature article. Timeoin (talk) 08:22, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

  • Support: As nominator. Timeoin (talk) 08:22, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose: This page is nowhere near the same quality as existing quest page FA's. Right now it's largely a text dump of dialogue and its even marked as a stub. --Jimeee (talk) 09:18, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose: It does include all the dialogue, but needs a lot more about the action. I'd be willing to support this if it gets fleshed out more, though. --FioFioFio (talk) 14:34, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose: Per the above, it's not up to wiki standard. —Legoless (talk) 20:26, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose: Incomplete pages should not be featured. The detailed walkthrough hasn't even been started. —Dillonn241 (talk) 07:39, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
Consensus: Oppose. 4-1 —Legoless (talk) 18:00, 17 November 2017 (UTC)


With the eyes of the TES community being focused on Vvardenfell again, I thought it might be a good time to nominate a Morrowind article. I always really liked the city pages in this namespace, and I think Balmora is one of the best among these. The article is complete with an excellent overview of the city, gorgeous images from around the town, and plenty of links to relevant articles for the interested reader. I like how the page also provides links to the list of people and related quests as this makes the size of the article much smaller since it won't have two huge tables/lists on the page. I also like the inclusion of notes that are particularly relevant to newer players, since this is likely the first major city many of them will travel to.

  • Support: As nominator. Forfeit (talk) 18:00, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Support: Concurrence with Forfeit. Balmora is also something of a hub for the player, early on, since Caius lives there, and many services are available (eg, for selling loot to) — Lee Carré (talk) 19:41, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Support: We need new FAs and I see nothing wrong with this page. Not the best of reasons, but there are currently too few votes and interest to get this thing going, so let's try to do something about that ~ Dwarfmp (talk) 16:59, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Support: These Morrowind city pages have stood the test of time. Insignificant RevisionsThreatsEvidence 15:35, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Support: This is one of the best articles in the namespace. — Darklocq  ¢ 20:40, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
  • Support: Balmora is the first city that most players arrive at in the game. Considering that it is a memorable place and is very significant to the plot of Morrowind, this high-quality article should certainly be a featured article. --DingoBongo777 (talk) 10:06, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
Consensus: Support. No opposes ~ Dwarfmp (talk) 11:52, 10 September 2017 (UTC)


As one of the first NPCs you meet, and the "tutorial" for smithing, Alvor has a strong impact on players. It's good to see him have an equally strong article to go with it.

  • Oppose: Article seems to be a mash-up of a merchant page and a quest NPC page. - KINMUNETALK﴿ 03:14, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Support: A good detailed page about one of the first characters you meet. ~ Alarra (talk) 06:22, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
    • Oppose: Per later concerns on missing dialogue. ~ Alarra (talk) 17:02, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose: Overall, I like the article but I do have a few issues with it. I agree with Kimune in that the page does feel like it's mashing together his merchant information and quest related events. I think the article may benefit from sectioning off this information a bit more. Maybe list the generic dialogue, then the generic conversations under that, then the related quests, then a section for quest-related events, and then the displayed merchandise section. As it is, the Before the Storm details just seem like they were thrown in with the rest of the dialogue. Also, there are a few lines of dialogue in the CK that aren't accounted for on the page ([1], [2], and [3]) so I'd like to see these included in the article or listed as an unused dialogue note before featuring it. Forfeit (talk) 17:24, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Support: He might be a relatively minor character in a small village with a long article, but it's not unnecessarily long and it provides a lot of information, particularly dialogue. •D. G.|Talk|Work• 23:20, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose: If it's missing dialogue, then it's not up to standard, never mind FA-worthy. —Legoless (talk) 23:30, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Consensus: Oppose. Robin Hood  (talk) 22:13, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Skyrim:Faldar's Tooth[edit]

For one of the more memorable random dungeons, I think it's rather impressive as a summary of this location, with some nice accompanying images.

  • Oppose: This article has little to set it apart from other dungeon articles. - KINMUNETALK﴿ 03:14, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Support: Very thorough coverage of the dungeon and a good example of the kind of quality the wiki strives for, even though it's a dungeon like any other. ~ Alarra (talk) 06:22, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose: I'm with KINMUNE here. It's a great article in its own right, but I can't think of anything that makes it stand out compared to the millions of other dungeon articles we have. -damon  talkcontribs 14:37, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
Consensus: None. Robin Hood  (talk) 22:13, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Skyrim:Alduin's Bane[edit]

For one of the few quests with almost no player action, this is a good summary of the NPCs actions.

  • Support: A memorable article page for a memorable quest. - KINMUNETALK﴿ 03:14, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Support: Again, great images, and good coverage of one of the main-story quests. ~ Alarra (talk) 06:22, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Support: I like how the many images and the text work together. Phacteria (talk) 00:59, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
Consensus: Support. Robin Hood  (talk) 22:13, 28 February 2017 (UTC)


One of my favorite Dwemer ruins, nice coverage, good images.

  • Support: A solid article. Lots of content without being a wall of text. - KINMUNETALK﴿ 03:14, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Support:: Another good example of a good dungeon page. ~ Alarra (talk) 06:22, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Support: A good article for an interesting location with plenty of sights to see in it. -damon  talkcontribs 14:37, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
Consensus: Support. Robin Hood  (talk) 22:13, 28 February 2017 (UTC)