Talk:The Inbetweeners 2
Appearance
The Inbetweeners 2 has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: May 20, 2015. (Reviewed version). |
A fact from The Inbetweeners 2 appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 9 July 2015 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Plot
[edit]First of all. It is over long. And per WP:FILMPLOT, it should be between 400 and 700 words. And since when did Wikipedia ever show images in the plot from the film itself? They aren't even neatly put in, and it looks a little messy. I think they should all go, or just two of them. But the plot needs to cut down. If anyone wants to do so, feel free to. Or I will myself Charlr6 (talk) 17:38, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
- I removed the images per policy and removed jokey trivial bits in the plot. A bit more to do though! '''tAD''' (talk) 18:09, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:The Inbetweeners 2/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Zwerg Nase (talk · contribs) 20:50, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
Oh well, someone needs to do this, I guess ;) I hope to be able to review it this weekend. Zwerg Nase (talk) 20:50, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- No edit wars, etc.:
- It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
Everything that bothered me, I took care of myself. So it's a pass. Congratulations! :) Zwerg Nase (talk) 08:06, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Categories:
- Wikipedia good articles
- Media and drama good articles
- Wikipedia Did you know articles
- GA-Class film articles
- GA-Class Australian cinema articles
- Australian cinema task force articles
- GA-Class British cinema articles
- British cinema task force articles
- WikiProject Film articles
- GA-Class Comedy articles
- Low-importance Comedy articles
- WikiProject Comedy articles
- GA-Class Australia articles
- Low-importance Australia articles
- GA-Class New South Wales articles
- Low-importance New South Wales articles
- WikiProject New South Wales articles
- GA-Class South Australia articles
- Low-importance South Australia articles
- WikiProject South Australia articles
- GA-Class Queensland articles
- Low-importance Queensland articles
- WikiProject Queensland articles
- GA-Class Sydney articles
- Low-importance Sydney articles
- WikiProject Sydney articles
- WikiProject Australia articles