Forum:Featured Card Issues

I hate to say it, but whoever's been writing the last few Featured Cards is just plain awful. Not only does it provide any more info than just chatter, there's no useful analysis of the card or how to play it.

Also, shouldn't a writer at least try to be a bit more formal with the language used in these reviews?

Text like this has nothing to do with the actual card itself. It's just editorializing:

''* How will this card affect the Metagame in the near future? You could say only time will tell, however if you look at the success of this card’s impact on the OCG. Frog Monarchs, aka Frognarchs, have made a good use of this card in the OCG, as well as Formula Synchron, Swap Frog, Fishborg Blaster, Ronintoadin, and the recently unlimited Treeborn Frog. Considering that the OCG is a good barometer for the impact cards will have in the TCG, it’s safe to say that Effect Veiler has a lot of playtime to come.''

Text like this is not analysis. Also, how do you get into a discussion about D.D. Crow? Stick to the card:

''* With the upcoming format killing some decks, and making others more viable, the Metagame is going to change. The question now becomes, which do you find more problematic, the presence of cards in the graveyard, or the effect of the monster that hits the field? Effect Veiler stops the problem when it arrives on the field, and D.D. Crow’s goal is to stop it from happening to begin with by hitting key cards in the graveyard. The potential of both cards is clear, but you don’t always have room for both, as they’re likely to take up the same slot in your main or side deck.''

If anyone is thinking about doing this Featured Card segments, then would it be so hard to actually do the job? Stick to the card, give good/in-depth analysis and avoid the cliches of trying to use one card to predict the entire meta!


 * Well, it's very easy to criticize it, but how would you write it to make it better?--YamiWheeler (talk • contribs) 15:42, August 29, 2010 (UTC)

Question: Why isn't there a featured card article for each new pack for the yugioh wiki site? And why do featured cards take so long to change? --184.96.223.211 (talk) 01:39, August 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * Probably because the Featured Card changes monthly or something. It's been a while since the last time I saw that discussion on how often the Featured Card should change though. --Gadjiltron (talk • contribs) 07:16, August 30, 2010 (UTC)

How are the featured cards decided anyways? And I agree, I would like them more often. We have averaged about a featured card every 2 months (24 months/12 featured cards), which I think is a bit too long...--BassNettoHikari2 (talk • contribs) 15:11, August 30, 2010 (UTC)

well we have to appreciate the writer. not everyone would spend their time in writing a featured card article. Who ever complained about it just being like a discussion, well its already included some ways how to use it and you cant expect too much from the writer as he said that the card hasnt been released for long Enternal Evoluton Burst (talk • contribs) 23:04, August 30, 2010 (UTC)

Normally, the Featured Cards are cards that have just been released so the writer usually doesn't have much to work with. As for who decides, well it isn't sure. There was one time that the admins and users discussed about it but the newest one wasn't discussed publicly before. I guess you would need to ask Deltaneos and maybe Messenger of the Dark/Demon God Asura, as I hear that he also helped out with this before.-- HHTurtle  Talk  06:22, September 2, 2010 (UTC)

I think admins deciding what the featured card is is fine. I actually think the featured card section on the main page is a pretty well, thought out set of paragraphs. There's an introduction, reasons why it's a good card, and then a conclusion. Very well-done. There's really no reason for change. Admins do their research on this stuff, so unless a non-Admin makes a new featured card, there's really nothing to potentially worry about.  Yugioh DED ( (Leaving Me Messages Are Often Left Here) 06:58, September 4, 2010 (UTC)

I think we should make a sticky thread in this section of the forum where people can post their suggestions and have other users comment on them. Something like this. If a Featured Card is created without discussion in that forum, it should be deleted. It was kinda sad to see Some discussion about a Featured Card based on the new Forbidden and Limited Lists ignored in favour of Something completly different. I prefer to let everyone have their say, than leave it a pure admin decision. Besides how many active admins are up-to-date on the current meta? -- Deltaneos (talk) 19:38, September 4, 2010 (UTC)

Writing "Committee"
I think that we may need a "Writing Committee". Not to say that only those users can come up with ideas, no, just that only they are allowed to write the content. This should allow for a much more clean slate of articles. Of course, the community would vote on the card to be written about. One format I would, however, prefer to see, is that the pattern of FCAs should be that when a new set comes out, a card that has not been spotlit by KONAMI on their strategy site, is featured here. One example is that I would currently like to write about "Skull Meister". Other times, older cards that have fallen by the wayside and may still have a powerful impact, or a good niche, potent, small-amount-of-cards, strategies that lead unpopular Decks to a YCS victory and the like would be good FCAs. I personally would love to write more FCAs, however, how often new ones go up should be discussed. A new one every week could lead people to run dry of ideas, and if they aren't frequent enough, the Wikia looks stale. DemonGodAsura (talk • contribs) 01:47, December 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * Skull Meister was actually done by Konami... quibbling aside, I do think that only users that can prove that they have writing talent should be allowed to write the card articles. Some of them just stink.... I mean they really, I-wouldn't-have-believed-it-if-I-hadn't-seen-it-with-these-eyes, stink. Runer5h (talk • contribs) 02:42, December 1, 2010 (UTC)Runer5h


 * I agree with Runner, we should be able to find someone who could actually write good card articles (I mean really, who writes these?!?), plus, being that the articles are on Our Main Page it kind of makes our Wiki look bad, and quite sloppy, which we all know this isn't, I think we should have everyone who would like to write the articles write their name down somewhere, and then we as a community pick some card that they should all write about, we then pick the best ones, and they can write the articles (if we like more than one, we can rotate them around). Then we can find someway of picking the featured cards...BassNettoHikari2...Talk to me... 07:08, December 1, 2010 (UTC)

The "Destiny Hero - Plasma" one has been deleted now. I've also removed the createboxes from Project:Featured Card and Template:Featured Card and linked to this forum instead. This thread has also been renamed as it didn't seem appropriate to "Horrible Writing/Reviews for Featured Card" from those pages. -- Deltaneos (talk) 13:42, December 1, 2010 (UTC)

I dont have a username, but am willing to contribute to the featured article page in anyway possible. Perhaps we should make a list of the cards that we want to feature, and then we'll have some place to go from. I think Chain Disappearance is an overlooked card. Maybe we should make a featured one about that. I think the big issue with the writing is that we dont want to just copy all of the card tips that are already on this forum, but to cast an old card in a new light. They dont have to be the best cards in the game, they just have to have a certain charm to them which makes the game fun. Take the Gift Card feature from a few years ago for example148.100.208.57 (talk) 23:23, December 1, 2010 (UTC)

Seconding this, just because it would look more formal and organized. I mean, at first, I made some hesitations when I made the Barbaros Page, because I wasn't sure if it'll last. Being in a committee will mean that we'd actuall talk on a page, make drafts and finally have a finished product that would look most presentable, and its author more confident. MarxMayhem (talk • contribs) 09:12, December 3, 2010 (UTC)

A User/Writer's Input
I use the above header just to separate this message from the one about the writing committee as it's not that connected to it. For anyone who doesn't realise (I don't see why you would), I'm just a standard user, not an admin, however I'm also the writer of the previous featured article on "Ronintoadin". The way I saw my article, was I'd recently built a Frog deck and was starting to realise the wonders of "Ronintoadin" so I decided to write the article on him and submitted it under the aforementioned (Deltaneos) createbox for featured card. I expected, and by the end assumed the process would be that my article would be present in the "Featured Card Project", admins would look at it as it has created a new page in the wiki, and then if they liked it, after making some small punctuation, grammar and coding corrections, they might put it on the main page. What happened next was strange. After a couple of days, the article appeared on the main page, but only for me. Any other computer still showed the previous featured card, and mine would only show my article, even when I logged out, but would change if I deleted my cookies. After a couple of days of this, my article appeared for everyone (and I was really happy!). I don't know if that story helps anyone at all, but if it did, you're welcome.

To me, this seems like the best system, whether or not that is actually how the system worked. I don't know if admins approved it, or it did, after a while, automatically change. If it was that it automatically changed, and the lack of changes to the featured card that occur, it seems to me that admins wouldn't have a hard task of approving new featured card articles, as the amount of articles submitted would be reasonably low. I would love to write another article, and have considered it for a while, but the right card never came up, until now, and I've started writing an article for "Red Nova Dragon" as I feel it's a card that shouldn't be overlooked. But that's merely my opinion. I think having admins approve new articles gives everyone the chance to contribute, and people will know straight away if they can write or not, cause their article won't be featured, but as I said, I don't many people are that interested in it anyway.

Before I close, (I do realise I've written a hell of a lot), if anyone would like to leave me constructive feedback on my "Ronintoadin" article, it would be much appreciated, as I realise there is some concern, particularly from the original poster, as to the quality of writing and if there were parts of my article people felt were unnecessary, I would like to know for future reference. Ok, I'll stop now. --Nick R P Green (talk • contribs) 02:40, December 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * I licked the Rointoadin article, is was one of the better ones we have had, it described what it does, ways to (ab)use it, and comparing to other cards that may work similarly, and how to work it against your opponent. It was nice, simple as that, we need more like that, although I do think that Admins, or the community, should look at them and tweak them a little bit, as I suggested before...BassNettoHikari2...Talk to me... 07:05, December 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * What happened was that your computer was showing you the absolute most recent revision of the page, which not all computers do. To see the absolute most recent revision, just add the following to the end of the link: &action=purge
 * Now, on the topic of a "Red Nova Dragon" article, some people may already know this somewhat, but I am a staunch advocate for not doing am article on this card for a few reasons. One: KONAMI has already done an article on it. For anyone to post any article about it here would look ticky-tacky. Two: I feel that we should do an article based on one of the TCG Exclusive cards, such as "Skull Meister". I know that KONAMI mentioned it in their intro article for it, however, it was not a strategy article in any way. It merely explained how the effect worked. We all know how to use generic Synchro Monsters, such as "Red Nova Dragon", so there really is no strategy for it. These articles shouldn't be "look how cool this card is!". No, they should be insightful on how to use the card properly. The card that is featured, not always, however, should be relatively relevant to the current metagame. Unfortunately, "Red Nova Dragon" is not even close, with "Red Dragon Archfiend" being largely replaced by "Scrap Dragon". Please do not take this as a vote of dis-confidence in your writing ability, just that I am opposed to the card that you would like to write about. (Oh, and no, I'm not an admin [yet], so what I say isn't concrete. I felt I needed to make that clear, as I see my name thrown around for decision making.) DemonGodAsura (talk • contribs) 08:27, December 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * Fair point. If Konami is writing these articles on cards, why aren't we making use of them, and placing them on the front page, or creating a section devoted to the Konami written ones, whilst leaving the user and admin written ones to the main page, as I feel it is these articles are those likely to give more of an insight into the card and its strategies, as Konami's are more used more advertising purposes more than anything else. I'm not sure why the featured card should necessarily be a TCG exclusive, seen as how the Wikia is supposed to cover all aspects of Yu-Gi-Oh!, including the OCG.


 * Finally, as this is purely a difference of opinion on our parts, I disagree with your arguement against a Red Nova Dragon article. Being an advanced synchro monster, i.e. requires a very unusual Synchro material list, I wouldn't class Red Nova Dragon as a "generic synchro monster", because for the most parts, it is very difficult to summon. Plus there are a lot one could talk about in an article, like how it can be summoned, how deck's could be changed to accommodate it or which decks can already use it, (the reason I wish to write the article is because I can't summon it currently, I need to adapt, yet my mate's Infernity deck can get Archfiend and then Nova out in one turn). I do see this affecting the metagame, as because of its sheer power, I think it should be ran in every deck that Synchro summons. Plus the fact that Red Nova and Red Dragon Archfiend are far easier to obtain than a single Scrap Dragon suggests that we're going to see much more of Red Nova Dragon than we are of Scrap Dragon.


 * That's my opinion on the matter anyway, obviously everyone's view will be different. Would be nice to get some responses from the people who started the article to see how these last few posts have affected their original thoughts and ideas.
 * --Nick R P Green (talk • contribs) 15:52, December 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * I like the idea of having a page for Konami written ones, but there might be problems, since they own that coverage, plus I really do think that there are those users who could probably write better. As for my thoughts on what's been happening in the last few posts (I was the fourth to post) I think we should have everyone who would like to write the articles write their name down somewhere, and then we as a community pick some card that they should all write about, we then pick the best ones, and they can write the articles (if we like more than one user, we can rotate them around). Then we can find someway of picking the featured cards...


 * As for Red Nova, he really isn't that hard to get out, in fact all you need is one card. Plus there's ways of using Glow-Up Bulb, Plaguespreader Zombie, Deep Sea Diva, Flamvell's (Rekindling, Junk Synchron, Spore, Fabled's (The Fabled Cerburrel, The Fabled Chawa), Synchro Monarchs, the list goes on and on. Plus RDA isn't that hard to get out. As for seeing it in almost every deck that can Synchro, I think not, as there are many, many other Monsters that would do much better, as I can see many Extra Decks packed as it is. So that's my argument against your argument against Red Nova Dragon...BassNettoHikari2...Talk to me... 20:43, December 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * We cannot use KONAMI's articles. That would be copyright infringement. However, we could write articles on the same cards, but we have to be careful with the content. DemonGodAsura (talk • contribs) 20:55, December 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I noted that in my response...BassNettoHikari2...Talk to me... 21:23, December 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * I think it makes sense to highlight a card like Book of Moon or Bottomless Trap Hole. Many players do not understand exactly HOW these cards are versatile, with priority and chains etc. I think if one of those cards were featured, it would help duelists understand exactly how these cards function148.100.185.39 (talk) 23:03, December 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't know...maybe. I could see Book of Moon featured, since it can do...well...everything. But featuring Staples...they are well...Staples after all. Maybe we could feature cards like that between pack releases, or some older cards that don't receive much attention, maybe something like Malevolent Catastrophe, since its been seeing usage lately. I do think that maybe we should have a new featured card every 2 weeks...BassNettoHikari2...Talk to me... 01:34, December 10, 2010 (UTC)

I'd like to make a new Featured Card Article
Title says all.

After some time of thinking and writing, I have now an article that could be the next featured card article. I'm posting here now because since making Featured Card Articles are locked, I may request to be able to have it posted up.

If the admins would like to see what I've written for the article, please reply saying so and I'll post here.

Thanks

MarxMayhem (talk • contribs) 06:18, December 28, 2010 (UTC)

Red-Eyes Metal Darkness Dragon
I'd like to display this card, due to its high rate of power of that brand new card, besides of its relevance at Hopeless Dragon variants. Featuring this card should be a good idea! Duelmaster3000

Featured Card

 * I've been the featured card writer for the past 3 cards, but if anyone wants to take over, that's cool. I took over because no one else seemingly wanted to consistently on the Wiki, and felt that changing it every month or so was sufficient to address some of the game's best cards. As for the cards themselves, I believe that cards that are relevant to the game should be written about. While Skull Meister might be a quirky card, let's be honest - it isn't going to see much play. I've written the past 3 Featured Cards on the basis that it is meant to educate people on the Wiki and allow them to become better players by breaking down key aspects of the current metagame and its cards. This place does need more educating in that area, so that should definitely be considered.--YamiWheeler (talk • contribs) 17:31, September 3, 2011 (UTC)


 * Oh, and to the person who wants Rescue Rabbit as the featured card: I have to say I disagree, because it hasn't been released in the TCG yet, and its effects on the OCG metagame haven't been that well documented. Also, we don't just "change" the Featured Card. They aren't pre-written. Someone has to write them and then submit them for revising.--YamiWheeler (talk • contribs) 17:35, September 3, 2011 (UTC)


 * I just realized how old this thread is and seems to have been abandoned since its creation... So, IDK, really. I can keep writing them until someone decides otherwise.--YamiWheeler (talk • contribs) 17:37, September 3, 2011 (UTC)


 * Yea, I agreed, it's nearly dead if it was not for you to reattaching the plug back in the socket. -- F  r  e  d  C  a  t  17:39, September 3, 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for reviving it, I was always interested in the outcome of this and it never really came about. I would enjoy writing another featured card article, not sure what on at the moment though. My metagame card would've been BLS-EOTB, but obviously YamiWheeler has already written it. If anyone would like to suggest one, I'd be happy to look into it. For an example of my writing style, in case anyone wishes to judge me prior to a submission, I wrote the Ronintoadin article. Check that one out, and just tell me how to submit. --Nick R P Green (talk • contribs) 22:00, November 13, 2011 (UTC)

there is no need to feature cards that r well known. cards that come from the banned list, cards that r already limited, cards that r staple, they all r obviously used too much already, or have an effect that is too strong. otherwise the card wouldnt be on any list. feature cards that r not staple or limited! feature more combinations, feature with more creativity! thats what this should be about. netdeckers have their own sources, they dont need "our" features.

New Featured Cards?
Why not do a few DT Archetypes? HA5 is coming out so we have some good ones to choose from, including, Evigishki Mind Augus, Steelswarm Caucastag, Steelswarm Girastag (Need good pic tough), etc. -- - Dark Ace SP ( Talk )  20:51, December 3, 2011 (UTC)


 * I actually wrote one for Mid Augus: User:Dark Ace SP/Storage Unit. -- - Dark Ace SP ( Talk )  23:36, December 6, 2011 (UTC)

I'd like to write a review for Madolche Puddingcess. Would that be acceptable? We haven't had a new featured card in 3 months. The Pope 15:51, July 3, 2012 (UTC)


 * Not sure if Madolche Puddingcess is the best of cards to be writing a Featured Card article for, but if anyone wants to write one, they're welcome to. I haven't had much interest in Yu-Gi-Oh! lately, and there haven't been many cards that were interesting enough to write about, hence why I haven't written one since April.--YamiWheeler (talk • contribs) 16:01, July 3, 2012 (UTC)


 * Could we hold off on using cards without clear TCG images from now on? It's a pet peeve of mine. Though we do need to get a new one up. I nominate "Red-Eyes Darkness Metal Dragon".
 * Oh, and how about letting them remain for a month minimum? Hornet only got 2 weeks on the main page, iirc. --Golden Key (talk • contribs) 16:26, July 3, 2012 (UTC)


 * I nominate nothing, not till we get our good ole' Wikia back to normal. -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  16:28, July 3, 2012 (UTC)


 * What's wrong with it? But yeah, a month a card is what it should be. The Pope 16:39, July 3, 2012 (UTC)


 * More than 2 weeks. The next FC article (the Gear Gigant X one) was only 9 days early. And there's very little to say about Puddingcess. It only functions in its own deck, it has no meta relevance, so you can't even talk about that, and its effect is very limited. It would make a pretty awful Featured Card, IMO. Red-Eyes Darkness Metal Dragon is a good choice, despite being done before, a lot more can be said about it now, but on the principle of hating Eclipse, I've avoided it. Anyone else is welcome to try writing it, though.--YamiWheeler (talk • contribs) 16:54, July 3, 2012 (UTC)


 * Since it's been done before, it's dumb to have a repeat card. Besides, they don't all have to be meta-defining; just look at Gear Gigant X. And an article about Puddingcess would highlight the archetype as a whole and different ways to support the Princess. And it'd be nice to write about newer cards that not many people know about yet. The Pope 17:11, July 3, 2012 (UTC)


 * It was done before? I don't see it on Category:Yu-Gi-Oh! Wikia Featured Cards. Anyway, how about we wait until next month to do Puddingcess, when we have a TCG card, and do REDMD first? --Golden Key (talk • contribs) 17:21, July 3, 2012 (UTC)


 * Oh, guess I was mistaken about it being done before. I know there was a card I wanted to do that was already done, and thought that was it. As for Gear Gigant X, it has many more uses than Puddingcess, it can be splashed into several archetypes, and be summoned in various different ways, and can still be used in meta decks. Puddingcess cannot. You're basically asking to do a Featured Card article on an entire archetype, which isn't what the FC articles are for. As for having a TCG card or not, I don't think that's a relevant enough reason to shy away from writing about it, but Puddingcess is just a bad card to write about in general. And everyone knows about Madolche, it's been one of the biggest recent gimmick archetypes for fanboys. Oh, and it's far from "dumb" to have a repeat card, especially when you can significantly expand on the previous article.--YamiWheeler (talk • contribs) 17:29, July 3, 2012 (UTC)


 * First of all, machines aren't meta. It'd be nice if they were, but they aren't. At all. Second, there's a variety of ways to summon Puddingcess, from Madolche Mille-feuille to Chaos-End Master, Valhalla, Hall of the Fallen, Soul Exchange, etc. And there's a ton of other support for her to battle and remain alive. However, I would like to wait a little while to see the new cards in Abyss Rising, since they might get a new boss monster to talk about, or more support to supplement a Puddingcess article. In the meantime, we should have another article up, preferably about a new card, one that not everybody is using (because that would just be preaching to the choir). What about Heroic Champion - Excalibur? We could discuss the multitude of decks he works in, and his available support. The Pope 18:41, July 3, 2012 (UTC)


 * No shit they aren't meta, but they have been meta before and they could be meta again. Anti-Meta, Gadgets, Machina are all examples of previously-meta decks that could utilize Gear Gigant X in the future, and they're still definitely higher-up than Madolche, who will never in a billion years be meta. The article I wrote on Gear Gigant X really says it all, so there's no need for me to defend them, TBH. All of those ways of summoning are inconsistent and sucky, and you can't say much besides a sentence on them anyway. Heroic Champion - Excalibur is also another really bad card to write about. Not only can only a handful of decks utilize him, he's just an awful card since Veiler kills his use completely, and we shouldn't be advocating the use of bad cards. Even Gem-Knight Pearl is a better card. What would you write anyway? You seem to be thoroughly underestimating what it takes to write a competent Featured Card article.--YamiWheeler (talk • contribs) 18:51, July 3, 2012 (UTC)


 * How about "Cardcar D" then? Relatively new, popular in OCG but not too popular in the TCG, useful in certain Decks. Potentially enough to write about? Otherwise I go back to my original choice. I'm not much of a writer these days, though. --Golden Key (talk • contribs) 19:03, July 3, 2012 (UTC)


 * I tried it once, but I personally found there wasn't enough to write about. Maybe someone else can make more of it than I could.--YamiWheeler (talk • contribs) 19:06, July 3, 2012 (UTC)


 * Yeah, Cardcar D is pretty cut-and-dry. Summon, tribute, draw 2. Not much else can be said. The Pope 19:21, July 3, 2012 (UTC)


 * Just shut up and pick a damn card. We are not here to fighting over how good one goddamn card - we are here to vote the coming-up popular card that released from the booster. -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  19:24, July 3, 2012 (UTC)

Well, can we decide on something The Pope 05:25, July 4, 2012 (UTC)

Well, now that Abyss Rising is all confirmed, and Queen Madolche Tiaramisu showed herself, I'd like to write up an article on her. She has a lot more options than Puddingcess, and she combos with a LOT of the new cards, so a lot of detail would be able to go into it. Does anyone object to that? The Pope 23:44, July 15, 2012 (UTC)
 * Seeing how no one's objected in over a week, I'm gonna go ahead and get started on this. The Pope 01:21, July 27, 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, I wrote the new article. Now how does it show up on the main page? The Pope 17:03, July 27, 2012 (UTC)

October 2012's card
In another topic, it was decided that we need to set up a writing/review committee for Featured Card articles. This will ensure that they are of higher quality and prevent one writer from having to do all of the work.

The first day of the month was decided to be the date that new ones are added. October 1 is almost upon us, and as far as I know, the next card has not been decided. Do we have a suggestion and/or volunteers to get us started? For the card, I think the newly unbanned "Tsukuyomi" deserves recognition. The reason it was banned in the first place can be discussed, as can the reasons why it is/isn't as powerful as it once was. --Golden Key (talk • contribs) 02:47, September 26, 2012 (UTC)


 * Considering "Tsukuyomi" has had quite a buzz around its unbanning, it seems like a good choice. Didn't you say that you wanted to take a shot at writing it? I think we should also consider a rota system once we have volunteers that want to take part in the featured card project.--YamiWheeler (talk • contribs) 02:54, September 26, 2012 (UTC)


 * What about the new "The Seal of Orichalcos"? That seems like a likely candidate, considering it is one of the most sought after cards in the game now being brought forth into real life. I just find the card epic. And, it does fit in with multiple Decks. If we make an articles on that, we can show it's not just "a waste of space". And, I know some are biased, but it is a pretty decent card. Xerdek! (talk • contribs) 02:55, September 26, 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't think "The Seal of Orichalcos" is a good choice. For one, it isn't released until October (anywhere), so doing an article on it seems a bit like jumping the gun. Sadly, I feel like my "Snowman Eater" article was a bit of a bomb because I did jump the gun. There were points that are completely irrelevant in hindsight, like the Plants focus. I think waiting until November would be a better time to do the Seal, just like doing Tsukuyomi now is better than doing it a month ago.--YamiWheeler (talk • contribs) 02:59, September 26, 2012 (UTC)


 * I see what you're getting at, but you're wrong about one thing, some countries already have The Seal. But, I do see where that is jumping the gun. Xerdek! (talk • contribs) 03:08, September 26, 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, it does seem a little early for The Seal. But November we could have a look at that, depending on what else is hot.
 * Clean-up and suggestions are more my specialty. I'm really just here to help with the organization process. :) --Golden Key (talk • contribs) 03:06, September 26, 2012 (UTC)


 * So nothing? Anyone? With so many complainers every month, I expected to see a ton of submissions. I hope people will appreciate the work of the writers from here on out. --Golden Key (talk • contribs) 20:01, September 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * It's become apparently now, Goldy, if there are nothing to request - go ahead and start one with Tsukuyomi if you like, as that's only activate card this whole topic was talking about. The Seal can wait till November or so. -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  20:04, September 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * I expected more, too. It's already October the 2nd and we don't have anything. I don't really feel like writing one myself after the fiasco last month. Maybe DGA would be interested.--YamiWheeler (talk • contribs) 13:30, October 2, 2012 (UTC)


 * I spoke to someone on NeoArk named k-w on Sunday about writing one, and he got back to me today. It needs work. Anyone feel free to edit it, I can't take on something that big right this moment. --Golden Key (talk • contribs) 13:39, October 2, 2012 (UTC)


 * It needs... a lot of work. I still don't feel comfortable just going in and editing someone else's work, though, so you guys can decide whether or not it's acceptable. I personally don't think so, not in its current state.--YamiWheeler (talk • contribs) 13:42, October 2, 2012 (UTC)

November
So, uh, I would like to propose Number 6: Chronomaly Atlandis as November's Featured Card. Reasons:


 * A walking land (How many of those have you seen?)
 * Powerful effect
 * Stacks well with other Numbers
 * Does not require much to be summoned

So, what do you think? E n e r g y X ∞ 17:17, September 28, 2012 (UTC)


 * We don't even have a definite card or writer for October yet, so I think you're jumping the gun somewhat.--YamiWheeler (talk • contribs) 18:52, September 28, 2012 (UTC)