Jump to content

Talk:Call of Duty 2: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
NihlusBOT (talk | contribs)
Tag: Reverted
Assessment: banner shell (Rater)
 
(11 intermediate revisions by 9 users not shown)
Line 44: Line 44:


|topic=video games
|topic=video games

|currentstatus=GA
|action8 = GAR
|action8date = 13:19, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
|action8link = Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Call of Duty 2/2
|action8result = delisted
|action8oldid = 1205740791
|currentstatus = DGA
}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|1=
{{WikiProject Video games|class=|importance=Mid|old-peer=yes}}
}}
}}
{{WikiProject Video games|class=GA|importance=Mid|old-peer=yes}}
{{Archive box|[[Talk:Call of Duty 2/Archive 1|June 2005 – April 2007]]<br />[[Talk:Call of Duty 2/Archive 2|May 2007 – October 2007]]<br />[[Talk:Call of Duty 2/Archive 2|October 2007 – February 2012]]}}
{{Archive box|[[Talk:Call of Duty 2/Archive 1|June 2005 – April 2007]]<br />[[Talk:Call of Duty 2/Archive 2|May 2007 – October 2007]]<br />[[Talk:Call of Duty 2/Archive 2|October 2007 – February 2012]]}}
{{refideas
|1=[https://archive.org/details/call-of-duty-2-articles 102 articles from American, British, and Australian gaming magazines about Call of Duty 2]
}}


== Xbox 360 Release Date ==
== Xbox 360 Release Date ==
Line 62: Line 73:
:Done. [[User:Huon|Huon]] ([[User talk:Huon|talk]]) 19:19, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
:Done. [[User:Huon|Huon]] ([[User talk:Huon|talk]]) 19:19, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


==GA Reassessment==
== External links modified ==
{{Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Call of Duty 2/2}}

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to {{plural:1|one external link|1 external links}} on [[Call of Duty 2]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=699263707 my edit]. If necessary, add {{tlx|cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{tlx|nobots|deny{{=}}InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090622045821/http://www.gamespot.com:80/pc/action/callofduty2/review.html to http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/callofduty2/review.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' to let others know.

{{sourcecheck|checked=false}}

Cheers.—[[User:Cyberbot II|<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot II</sup>]]<small><sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS">[[User talk:Cyberbot II|<span style="color:green">Talk to my owner</span>]]:Online</sub></small> 07:43, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 23:50, 17 February 2024

Former good articleCall of Duty 2 was one of the Video games good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 15, 2006WikiProject peer reviewReviewed
July 17, 2007Good article reassessmentKept
September 22, 2007Good article nomineeListed
November 26, 2008Good article reassessmentDelisted
December 16, 2011Peer reviewReviewed
February 20, 2012Good article nomineeListed
April 13, 2012Peer reviewReviewed
February 17, 2024Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article

Xbox 360 Release Date

[edit]

Call of Duty 2 was released on Nov 22 in North America, and not on Nov 17. http://marketplace.xbox.com/en-US/Games/Xbox360Games?page=34&sortby=ReleaseDate

Pls correct this. Thanks

112.209.142.226 (talk) 16:12, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Huon (talk) 19:19, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · WatchWatch article reassessment pageMost recent review
Result: Delisted. Real4jyy (talk) 13:19, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While this article isn't in the worst state ever, I've questioned the GA status on it for a while now. My issues with the article include the Gameplay section consisting of some pretty faulty sourcing, the Plot section having weird writing, a completely separate section for a seemingly trivial advertisement controversy, and several smaller bits of the article not having any sourcing at all (ex. nothing in the article verifies the game as being considered one of the best of all time, and sourcing the Wikipedia list isn't an acceptable means of verification.)

I personally feel this article to fall more in line with a C-Class article than a GA at this current point in time, though I do think that if someone were to really put in the effort, it could be whipped into shape. λ NegativeMP1 05:51, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.