This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Cewbot(talk | contribs) at 23:24, 11 February 2024(Maintain {{WPBS}}: 6 WikiProject templates. Keep majority rating "GA" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 6 same ratings as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Comedy}}, {{WikiProject LGBT studies}}, {{WPNYC}}, {{WikiProject Romance}}, {{WikiProject Television}}, {{WPUS}}.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.
Revision as of 23:24, 11 February 2024 by Cewbot(talk | contribs)(Maintain {{WPBS}}: 6 WikiProject templates. Keep majority rating "GA" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 6 same ratings as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Comedy}}, {{WikiProject LGBT studies}}, {{WPNYC}}, {{WikiProject Romance}}, {{WikiProject Television}}, {{WPUS}}.)
A fact from The Bold Type appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 12 December 2019 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that the television series The Bold Type is inspired by the life and career of former Cosmopolitan magazine editor-in-chief Joanna Coles?
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Romance, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional romance in literature and romantic fiction writers. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.RomanceWikipedia:WikiProject RomanceTemplate:WikiProject Romanceromance articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion.
To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
I wish I could take credit for this, but it was already in place by the time I began contributing to the article. I personally love it as well! KyleJoantalk12:38, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
In the lead, "who also executive produces the series" may read better as "who also serves as executive producer on the series".
The lead doesn't need to contain a full principal and secondary cast list. That's what the cast list (and infobox) is for. The main three and Melora Hardin should do fine.
Development section good; writing is a little plain but not bad. It suffices, but could be improved with some creative ways to connect the different statements.
There's actually some odd phrasing in this section, perhaps a bit of a rewrite is needed to make it more natural and less repetitive? If you want pointers, I'm happy to suggest tweaks.
Describing reviews by saying "X says: long quote" is poor style. The Rotten Tomatoes parts come under this, and though some of the main reviews have longer intros, the quotes could still be better incorporated, notably, the paragraph chunk from Matt Zoller Seitz.
Done. I really tried to incorporate all of the quotes into the context of the general points; the only two comments that stand formatted as "X says: long quote" are both of Seitz's comments. I thought that the first comment was so meticulously written and impossible to break down into chunks, especially since it was only a sentence–albeit a long one; the other one I left as it was to maintain the formatting to make it seem as if the style is deliberate to match the author quoted. KyleJoantalk12:38, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
More work on the review section in terms of structure.
Hmm, much better except the review section still has spots of 'X said quote'; perhaps try paraphrasing the views more and add only a short quote? I guess the aim is to summarize critical views, not transplant them, so to write like that. Kingsif (talk) 16:33, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Premise section could have some expansion in touch with the later seasons
Would that provide too much of a summary of the series? I originally believed that the premise section was to explain the story's starting point and its background, but I could add more details regarding the second and third seasons if you believe that's appropriate! KyleJoantalk12:38, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@KyleJoan: Some series pages do give season summaries, but each series also starts from a new point, so it wouldn't be unusual to mention Kat's political leanings, Sutton's more public relationship, in terms of a new starting point and how they deal with it. Kingsif (talk) 16:07, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The episodes section is a link and a table; though there is a separate article dedicated to episode coverage, perhaps something could go here? Also, combining the short Broadcast section with this one might help.
Casting section suffices - but is there no more information? Also, is there any information on how actors worked on characterization or on the conceptualization of characters? Other series GA's have these (Money Heist is a solid example) - if the info isn't in RS, it's fine, but the section can be improved :)
If you're having a broadcast date for some countries, you should also have one for the other country that they're being compared against (i.e. when did it start showing in the UK?).
The Australia-gets-episodes-the-same-day-as-US seems implausible, if just because of the massive (15 hour) time difference that would mean Australia could theoretically have them before they air in the US depending on the time of broadcast - are we sure that's what is meant?
Comment: Hi there, Kingsif! I believe I made all of the changes you suggested, so if you'd like to take a look at it again at your convenience, I'd really appreciate it! I do have a question. You recently modified a sentence in the filming section into Filming in New York was only done to get good exterior shots of some of the city's iconic locations, such as the Brooklyn Bridge and Central Park. I was wondering whether it would acceptable to remove the word good from this statement because I feel as if it holds a connotation that they've tried filming elsewhere and the footage turned out bad. Thanks again for taking the time to give this article your attention! KyleJoantalk12:38, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Kingsif: I think I fixed it by replacing one of the quotes and shortening the other. I would love to discuss them if you find either of them inappropriate, though! KyleJoantalk06:01, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original orplagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. SamSailor10:44, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Done and 
Wonderful! Meets standards for GA - still room for improvement, but it's good and quite nice. Kingsif (talk) 19:13, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://www.goodhousekeeping.com/life/entertainment/a35326867/the-bold-type-season-5-news-release-date-spoilers/. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)