Talk:Doctor Who specials (2022)/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: TheDoctorWho (talk · contribs) 06:52, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: DoctorWhoFan91 (talk · contribs) 15:42, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take this one, @TheDoctorWho and OlifanofmrTennant: I'll give my initial remarks in a little while, though more might take a few days. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 15:42, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Before I start, for disclosure's sake: I have edited the article four times before, though only to maintain consistency with the other series articles.

Lead

The final episode also stars Sophie Aldred as Ace and Janet Fielding as Tegan Jovanka.: The final episode also stars Sophie Aldred and Janet Fielding as former companions Ace and Tegan Jovanka. Done
... and Jamie Magnus Stone.: ... and Jamie Magnus Stone respectively. Done
Filming took place ... into 2022.: Not needed in lead Partly done
Other members of the:Some other members of the Done
Three soundtrack albums were also released to accompany the specials.: Also not needed ~~Not done~~ Done
And of course, shuffle around the sentences a bit after the above changes, to maintain coherence Done

Episodes

Nick: Nick, occupation(Looks kinda strange without mentioning his job) Done
Last sentence of EotD not needed Done
Wait, why was the loop happening? Done
- "Instead, it lands in ELF Storage and causes a time loop."
discover Ji-Hun: discover that Ji-Hun Done
learns the key: that the key Done
gem that he:gem, which he Done
Ching recovers the treasure, while Dan attempts to bond with Diane; and the Doctor and Yaz start to discuss their feelings for each other.: ... the treasure; the Doctor and Yaz discuss (Diane isn't mentioned before, and is honestly not important here; maybe add something about Yaz's feelings in EotD- also did they just talk about them out of nowhere, or did something happen in the episode) Done
copyedit PotD: reads weirdly in many places Done
The Doctor is lured by the renegade Dalek, leaving the Daleks to capture her: I forget, why did he help if he's a renegade? Done (it was a ruse)
Vinder, Ashad and Graham aren't mentioned before? Done (I didn't have room to explain in detail here with the 200 word limit, so I just added brief descriptions, readers can always visit the actual article for more info)
Wait, neither is Ace and Tegan being former companions mentioned in the body Done
Same about CyberMasters Done
- I instead replaced it with the generic Cybermen name as its not really relevent that their specifically CyberMasters. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 07:30, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Might as well talk about Yaz and Thirteen's conversation, it's the common thread in the specials Done (built into special 2, I don't think they really had a conversation in ep3 beyond it not wanting to end, it was mainly just the final outing, but again the word count doesn't leave much wiggle room)

Release

Promotion: Expand section, too small and very WP:Proseline
Broadcast: First sentence not needed; are that many references needed for the last sentence- like ref 3 for BBC America is actually enough for it, and maybe it's the same for the other refs? Partly done
Home media: A paragraph of prose, perhaps- say like Series 5 or 13? Done
Soundtracks:Looks too detailed, but seeing that other GAs have it, I assume it's fine Done

Reception

Ratings first- other GAs have that layout Done
Talk about the appreciation index too; split into two paragraphs afterwards. Done
- Can't find non-Doctor Who News sources for the AI.
  - That's fine, just use DWN to add some prose.
DWM is an issue as a reference, but it's reliable enough for the index given that other sources can't be found, so it's fine Done
Critical Response- This is practically non-existent? Greatly expand
- Funny this was my reaction to looking for criticism for the specials. I'll look for episode reviews and season rankings Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 02:55, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Casting

It's mostly fine in details, but needs the following to be more in depth if possible-

Jodie- explain/quote why she left
Fielding and Aldred- some details on how they were approached to return
Briggs, Dixon, Albina, Dhawan, Kane, Anderson- all reprised their roles, but only some have been explained to have reprised it. Where have Wright and Diane been seen before, add.
- Dhawan's return is touched on in writing. Would it be better to move it to casting?
  - No, it's good in the writing section. Just change the sentence, as it reads like Dhawan was cast just for PotD and not since series 12, and kind of similiarly for Kane
~~Redgrave appeared after a long time, emphasis that~~
- Not really. She played a supporting role in Flux, though I did note that.
  - Sorry, I forgot that
The Doctor cameos+Tennant- how were they approached, explain
- Tough to find information on cameos but I think I found some interviews which seems promising.
  - Yes, adding them would be good- basically the decision to return should be expanded upon- they must have had some reactions, with some of them returning after decades
Similiarly for the past companions

Basically do not just add names, explain/add a little how they were cast

Development

Para-1: Expand, perhaps with what Jodie said Done
Para-2: Expand on how Chibnall though making a third special, especially with all the cameos? Done (added to writing instead, because it seemed better suited there)
Para-3: Maybe add when the latter two announced that, before or after airing? Done

Writing

Para-1: Expand on how the Dalek trilogy relates to the other two. There must be more regarding special 2?
Para-2: A ref and text saying all three appeared together for the first time (also, given that it is in this section, maybe "to feature" instead of "which feautured"). Is finale the right word, or should it be final? Also, maybe something about the cameos?
Para-4: Did Chibnall say it before or after airing? "some threads" seem vague, change it, and the sentence seems grammatically incorrect.

Filming

Para-1: First sentence seems redundant. Second sentence- mention/explain how specifically it was affected? Way more detail for Eve needed. Some more for Legend, especially location. Roath Lock should probably be in text, not caption.
Para-2: Some detail for Power- so many locations and big moments, mention some specific dates and locations? Also, Jodie's final episode, maybe she had a reaction about it being the final day

Overall

Looks good till now, no major issues. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 16:16, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Only moderate level issues in the article on skimming though it- which is good, given how low the coverage was. That's all for today, and probably also at least a few (2 or 3) days. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 16:41, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Trying not to push back two much, but quick question: the WP:LEAD is supposed to summarize the article, why should filming and soundtrack information be excluded when we have entire sections dedicated to them within the article? I feel by not mentioning those things we're failing our readers by not properly summarizing the article content. I could raise a similar question for the first sentence in the broadcast section? This sentence directly relates to the scheduling of the specials broadcasting, why should it be excluded?

To answer your question on the filming section, yes. The first references covers EotD broadcast in CA and AUS, second covers LotSD in CA, third covers LotSD in AUS, and the fourth covers PotD in CA and AUS. I did however group them though to avoid it looking like a WP:REFBOMB. TheDoctorWho (talk) 04:52, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks better with the grouping. Though for the US you only need the third ref and not the first two, as the third one states that all episodes pre-2023 were on BBC America.

About the broadcast- the development already states that, it looks like unnecessary repetition. Summary of only "its most important contents" though, per WP:LEAD- soundtracks are always released, similarly for the filming info (but you can keep it if it flows better- as it just looks a summary of each section one by one by how it's written).

Also replied to one of the replies above in reception section. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 09:05, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the additional sources for BBCA (I guess I thought I listed the dates at first which is why I had the additional two, but since that's not the case, I removed them).

I slightly trimmed down that first sentence in the broadcast section. The development section mentions that they were commissioned with the thirteenth series but not that they were already planned to be held for broadcast 2022 because it seems odd there. I do understand your point about repetition though, so if you don't think it's a problem in development I could sort of merge the two?

I feel that a brief mention of filming dates and soundtrack isn't beyond the leads scope, I did trim the portion about post-production work since that's far less important. TheDoctorWho (talk) 18:30, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, development already mentions that they were to air in 2022, so you don't need to actually add anything, just remove the sentence from broadcast. I changed the layout and shortened a sentence, as it seemed kinda long to explain, feel free to revert if you think it's a problem. I still think you should remove the soundtrack part as it's not really unique/important. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 18:55, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have cut the line Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 22:25, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DoctorWhoFan91: Did you have anything else specifically in mind for the promotion section? The specials were so far space apart that there wasn't really any comic-con pannels, large promotional campaigns, etc. I'm not sure if @OlifanofmrTennant: had anything else to add to the critical response section, but if not, I think that we're nearly done (other than the promotion section). TheDoctorWho (talk) 04:46, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe trailers and other stuff, and individual promotional stuff, in like half-one line each, perhaps? Yeah, all my comments have been dealt with, though can the reception in general, and to Thasmin in particular be made into two separate paras?(I'll edit it myself, you can edit to a different layout if you want) I'll give further remarks later today or tomorrow. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 07:15, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DoctorWhoFan91: How does the promotion section look now? It was a bit hard to find things to include without violating MOS:TRAILER (technically part of MOS:FILM but generally extended to articles within the scope of MOS:TV in my experience). However, I did add things about the promotion of the first two specials. The information about a trailer for TPotD was already there. TheDoctorWho (talk) 04:23, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It looks good, but had some awkward working which I changed. Further review might take some time. I probably will do it by today, but ping me if I take more than 3 days. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 07:12, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Casting seemed short to review, so I also reviewed that, only Production remains. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 07:26, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Production section also reviewed. I made some edits for copyedit and layout. Feel free to change back if you want after you are done. The only issue has been lack of depth, which you two have fixed well for the other sections as well. Good luck, ping me when done. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 15:38, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A few possibly relevent articles for POTD: [1], [2], [3] Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 23:32, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·