Talk:Boa vs. Python

Film Unassessed

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Boa vs. Python received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Boa vs. Python was nominated as a good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (No date specified. To provide a date use: {{FailedGA|insert date in any format here}}). There are suggestions below for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

Boa vs. Python

Shouldn't this article be entitled: "Boa vs. Python" with an emphasis on the period? (since it is called that upon its corresponding imdb page and what-not) DrWho42 03:20, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note to GA reviewers

I realize I am probably jumping the gun with this nominee, but I feel its a great way to get proper feedback. TruthCrusader 08:44, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article nomination has failed

The Good article nomination for Boa vs. Python has failed, for the following reason:

There is only limited content besides the plot summary and that content is not well organized. The Good Article criteria does not include the featured article criterion "t exemplifies our very best work" so there is not much I can say beyond that. Still, a very, very marginal topic (not that there's anything wrong with that) to nominate for GA.Pascal.Tesson 22:15, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Extra note this article was nominated for GA status. Please see this edit.

Oh, it was my carelessness really... I misread the tag and thought it meant that it used to be a Good article but not anymore. Sorry for my confusion. DrWho42 23:14, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]