Talk:Call of Duty 2/GA2

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Khanassassin (talk · contribs) 16:26, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

I'll be reviewing the article Things that need to be done:


 * Campaign:
 * should be a subsection to gameplay
 * No, it should be treated as a plot/synopsis section-SCB &#39;92 (talk) 13:28, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
 * In theCoD4 article, the campaign is a sub-section to gameplay, and Synopisis contains Plot and Setting and Characters. So, I'm correct. --Khanassassin ☪ 13:56, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Plot and gameplay are most commonly separate. And in this case there is no editorial reason to put "campaign" as a subsection. Just because it works better for CoD 4, doesn't mean it must be done that way here too. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 15:21, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
 * So, since both of you, Mr. '92 and Mr. Hell think it's not necessary, it's a pass.

**it is almost completly unreferenced
 * It's generally accepted that since a work's plot sections are referencing the work itself, plot citations aren't necessary; see the plot subsection in the Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare article (an FA)-SCB &#39;92 (talk) 13:28, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
 * They are not necessary but are highly recommended; atleast one in each paragraph (in-game references are often used). --Khanassassin ☪ 13:56, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Where is it highly recommended? Most recent VG discussion on this was here and it's generally accepted that plot does not require citations if it isn't contentious. Not even for FA, let alone GA. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 15:21, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Allright, allright --Khanassassin ☪ 15:54, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

I'll add more issues once spoted. --Khanassassin 16:29, 15 February 2012 (UTC)


 * It seems like they're no major issues left (atleast not for GA Class). So, when the issues above are fixed, we're cool. --Khanassassin ☪ 17:27, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * PASS --Khanassassin ☪ 15:59, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Pass/Fail?: