Jump to content

Talk:The Amazing Spider-Man 2/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[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) · Watch

Reviewer: Carbrera (talk · contribs) 03:35, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I am Carbrera, and I'll be reviewing this article for possible good article submission.

Full review coming very soon. Carbrera (talk) 03:35, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for starting the review process. SuperHero👊 06:26, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Lead[edit]

Paragraph 1[edit]

Paragraph 2[edit]

Paragraph 3[edit]

Plot[edit]

Paragraph 1[edit]

Paragraph 2[edit]

Paragraph 3[edit]

Paragraph 4[edit]

Cast[edit]

Paragraph 1[edit]

Paragraph 3[edit]

Paragraph 4[edit]

  • Replace "since" with "for".
  •  Done SuperHero👊 12:35, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reword "He eventually assumes the role of the Green Goblin after he injected a special serum of the spider-venom who curing him but suddenly it turns him into a hideous psychotic and ugly ruthless goblin-like creature who dons a technological suit who heals him and also he uses a large glider to fly" to "He eventually assumes the role of the Green Goblin after injecting a special serum of spider-venom into his body, initially injected to provide a cure, which instead turns him into a hideous, psychotic, goblin-like creature. As the Green Goblin, Harry dons a technological suit capable of healing him and can fly with the use of a large glider".
  •  Done SuperHero👊 12:35, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Paragraph 5[edit]

  • Omit "member" following "Head of the Board".
  •  Done SuperHero👊 12:35, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reword "who is conflicts with Harry, claiming that Harry is just a boy and doesn't have enough power to take lead on Oscorp, so that's why he hates him and wants to reject him from the CEO stand" to "He is often in dispute with Harry over his capabilities of being a CEO to Oscorp, claiming that because Harry is a boy, he is incapable of leading the company."
  •  Done SuperHero👊 07:49, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Paragraph 7[edit]

  • Reword "who allies with Harry and gets from him a huge well-armored robotic rhino-like suit" with "who allies with Harry and receives a massive, well-armored, robotic, rhino-like suit from him".
  •  Done SuperHero👊 07:49, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Paragraph 12[edit]

Production[edit]

Paragraph 2[edit]

Filming[edit]

Paragraph 1[edit]

Paragraph 2[edit]

Paragraph 3[edit]

  • I don't see why the 'External video' column is necessary

 Partly done - The prequel has one. It was even promoted as GA. SuperHero👊 07:49, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

But as for now i had replaced with Times Square image. SuperHero👊 08:05, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Special Effects[edit]

Paragraph 1[edit]

Paragraph 2[edit]

Post-production[edit]

Paragraph 2[edit]

Music[edit]

Paragraph 1[edit]

The rumor that James Horner turned down this movie because the script was terrible is false. He states this in a 2015 interview. He was never offered the film. [1] Tropic Wolf (talk) 03:17, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Paragraph 2[edit]

Marketing[edit]

Paragraph 2[edit]

Paragraph 6[edit]

Paragraph 7[edit]

Home media[edit]

Paragraph 1[edit]

Reception[edit]

Paragraph 3[edit]

References[edit]

  • Since there are so many, could you make sure that none of them link to the same publishing company/website more than once? Thanks.
  •  Partly done - All are reliable. And it doesn't makes difference SuperHero👊 12:35, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean by this? In the referencing section of articles, links to the 'website' or 'publisher' should only be included once. If any of them in the article are, please remove them from the citation so that there only is one. Let me know if that doesn't make sense and I'll try to provide an example. Thank you. Carbrera (talk) 16:50, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sources are untouched and can you explain me again about the references? Almost all errors have been removed. SuperHero👊 08:08, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@D'SuperHero: I just wanted you to make sure that the citations didn't link a certain publication/website more than once, as it is unnecessary. If USA Today was linked more than twice in the 'References' section, it should be removed immediately. Does that clarify it? Hope so!! Carbrera (talk) 01:31, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Done for good as for now. SuperHero👊 13:09, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

End of GA Review:[edit]

A very good article; most of my suggestions are just regarding grammar/punctuation. Please leave "done" after each suggestion once you have fixed it. I will put this article on hold for a maximum of seven days. Thanks. Carbrera (talk) 15:14, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@D'SuperHero: Fantastic job of editing and making changes! Another user has alerted me a few things before I pass the article; the awards sections is a bit messed up and there are too many single sentences/statements featured in the article. I will allow an additional 7 days for changes to be made. Good luck! Carbrera (talk) 23:31, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Carbrera: mate now which kind of settings you expect? Coz actually i have one more article on review and further, i could not log in due to work, so state the reasons or errors in articles asap. SuperHero👊 12:56, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
And, if it does not meet to GA criteria then clear it right now. Coz here i had worked for an article before and in return to give my best, it stated to be soon-to-be-failed. Despite whatever fixations you said i did respectively. And further if reward doesn't get back in return for the so-called-substantial edits, i wont have any regrets for this. SuperHero👊 13:33, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@D'SuperHero: I don't exactly know what you're talking about, but you need to take a look at the accolades section. It's a mess. Carbrera (talk) 17:31, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Carbrera:, I have noticed the nominator did not respond to your last comment, so I have decided to clean up the accolades section. Cheers, Burklemore1 (talk) 06:05, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Burklemorel: Thank you very much. I was barely understanding what the nominator was talking about above; the article is definitely GA status now; cheers! Carbrera (talk) 01:55, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Carbrera: You're most welcome, I could not understand what the nominator was saying either, but I'm glad I could help out to bring this to GA (minorly). Cheers, Burklemore1 (talk)
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.