Talk:The OA

Judicious Editing Needed on This Page

To the admins maintaining this page: it's filled with grammatical and punctuation mistakes. For instance, "Upon doing so, Hap kills her" is a misplaced modifier--grammatically, it means that Hap performs the movement, not her--but since she does it, not Hap, that sentence makes no sense at all. There is a LOT of this type of poor writing throughout the page. Someone with competent writing skills should give it a thorough editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.184.74.7 (talk) 01:52, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia pages are not maintained by "admins" ... but rather by "editors", like you and me. If you see grammatical and punctuation errors, you can and should correct them. Jibal (talk) 11:27, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

Narrative about production method needs a solid thwack with the grammar stick

I'm referring to this:

"From the beginning, they were telling the story out loud, and noting one another's reactions to it and refining it accordingly.[14] When the time came to create a story bible, they found it difficult to distill the essence of the show in a document, so they developed it as a play. When executives would read the script of the first hour they had written, they would ask them "Does this really go somewhere?", and Marling and Batmanglij would then tell the story from beginning to end,[14] play all the characters, and act out the big moments through many hours, which helped people get into it.[15]"

Can please someone harmonise the tense of these statements in a way that doesn't disturb the meaning? I have problems with the ambiguity of "would", which in British English only occurs when there's some sort of conditional going on. Did these conversations take place as reported? --Matt Whyndham (talk) 19:29, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Fixed it, made it a bit more concise. -RM (talk) 02:46, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Lead image

The lead image was recently changed from a promotional poster to a logo by AgWoolridge. But I find the poster (which contains the logo against a starry landscape shot) a bit more evocative and interesting. Also: see the MoS TV show guidelines: For a show's main article, an intertitle shot of the show (i.e., a screenshot capture of the show's title) or a promotional poster used to represent the show itself should be used. WanderingWanda (they/them) (t/c) 03:02, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Agree with Wanda... let's revert to the poster. —Joeyconnick (talk) 06:08, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Changed. Though I'll note that I don't have super strong feelings on this and can understand why someone might prefer a logo. (I think in general a poster will give the reader a better sense of what a show is like, but a logo is cleaner: low-res posters wind up with a bunch of blurry hard-to-read words.) WanderingWanda (they/them) (t/c) 18:39, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Issue with first paragraph of the article

It says that the show has made a social impact, in what way has it made any impact on society? LROSE (talk) 21:26, 24 October 2019 (UTC)