Talk:Whitney Dean

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleWhitney Dean has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 18, 2008Good article nomineeListed

Sources[edit]

  • Edemariam, Aida (13 September 2008). "Dark days in Albert Square". The Guardian. Retrieved 2008-09-25. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help) -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 18:01, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Revoir, Paul (17 September 2008). "Scores of complaints as EastEnders shows scenes of a paedophile grooming a teenager". Daily Mail. Retrieved 2008-09-25. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  • Smith, Lizzie (12 September 2008). "Now EastEnders tackles paedophilia with horrifying child abuse 'grooming' plotline". Daily Mail. Retrieved 2008-09-25. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  • Quade, Gemma (12 September 2008). "Coming up in EastEnders". The Sun. Retrieved 2008-09-25. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  • Rodger, Jennifer (13 September 2008). "My Role Can Help To Expose Sickos". Daily Record. Retrieved 2008-09-25. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  • Lee, Cara (17 September 2008). "Complaints over paedo plot". The Sun. Retrieved 2008-09-25. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  • Robertson, Colin (19 September 2008). "Viewer fury over Enders paedo plot". The Sun. Retrieved 2008-09-25. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  • Sandison, Nikki (18 September 2008). "EastEnders paedophile plot sparks over 200 complaints". Brand Republic. Retrieved 2008-09-25. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  • Arnold, Holly (19 September 2008). "EastEnders paedophile plot receives complaints". Now Magazine. Retrieved 2008-09-25. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  • Sare, Jeremy (22 September 2008). "The dangers of Sarah's law". New Statesman. Retrieved 2008-09-25. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help) Frickative 22:11, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Frickative, you're a legend! -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 22:24, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! :D Frickative 21:15, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Whitney Dean/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
    The prose is a bit over-written in places. I realize that it's hard to come up with different ways to say "said" but "opined", "disclosed" and the like really don't fit in the context of their use. Constructions like "who later transpired to be Whitney" and "Whitney's school play eventually arrived" don't make sense. I have no idea what "he didn't exactly take the news quite excited as her and this made him feel uncomfortable" means. There is some UK English slang in the article that may not be understood by non-UK people or non-native English speakers. The plot summary needs to be re-written in present tense. Per WP:OVERLINK, de-link common terms like "whore" and "CEO", and each character only needs to be linked once. For instance, the link to Tony King in the development section is not needed and Morgan is linked twice in the same storyline section. There is an extra quotation mark in the last sentence of the development section and in the reception section a quotation mark is needed at the beginning of the second paragraph of the two-paragraph quote. Is there any reason why Whitney's other two siblings are not listed in the infobox?
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    Reference list is properly formatted and sources are reliable. "This would mean that he doesn't really want to run away with Whitney as he has moved on to someone else - Lauren Branning." reads like original research. What does the character do or say rather than what might he be thinking?
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    Covers creation, development, storyline and reaction while remaining focused on the character and her situation. The storyline section is a bit too detailed and needs to be trimmed of some of the excessive detail. Do we really need to know about the venue of the play for example or that Whitney spread her clothes out on Pat's wall or that Whitney paid for the dog's post-mortem? One detail that needs adding is an explanation of who Lauren Branning is.
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
    Covers reactions to this controversial storyline in an even-handed manner, representing both sides appropriately.
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
    The article is stable and free from edit-warring.
  6. 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):
    It's nit-picky but technically the fair-use rationale is insufficient. Screenshots may be used for identification and critical commentary, not merely illustration. That will need to be updated.
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

I am going to place the article on hold for seven days to allow for these issues to be addressed. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Otto4711 (talk) 10:58, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your review! I believe I have addressed most all of the points raised here; I've reduced over-linking within the article, replaced the 'opined's and 'disclosed's with simpler language, fixed the punctuation issues, and re-written the Storyline section in the present tense. I've condensed the last 4 paragraphs of storyline detail into a few lines - I think much of the excessive, not particularly well-written detail was added by IP editors as the relevant episodes aired over the past week or so, and now that the storyline is in the concluding stages, it is easily reduced to just the most salient plot points. In doing so I have hopefully also addressed the WP:OR issue, and have explained the identity of Lauren Branning. I have also expanded the Fair Use Rational and hope that it is now sufficient. The only point that I'm not certain how best to address is that of Whitney's brothers being absent from the infobox. I'm at something of a loss, because they're not related to Whitney by blood or marriage, however the EastEnders infobox has no parameter for adoptive siblings. Do you have any recommendations for how best they might be included? Thanking you! Frickative 15:41, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If Bianca adopted Whitney then the boys are her brothers (the son of my mother is my brother). I would simply include them as her brothers and note parenthetically that the relationship is adoptive. The article is much improved with the re-write and IMHO an excellent example of how a fictional character article should be written. I'm happy to list it and suggest that you might want to have it peer reviewed with an eye toward featured article status. Otto4711 (talk) 21:06, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, don't know whether I'm aloud to be typing this but anyway. I'm glad this article has been given a GA review as I added the picture and edited the storylines section alot :D lol but anyway in reference to what you said about the brothers thing. I do not know how they would be added as I thought on the case of adoption you only but adoptive parents like Bianca is her adoptive mother and adoptive children like Whitney is listed as her adoptive mother. If the box is changed then it could be fitted in I guess. Alex250P (talk) 02:38, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Family[edit]

Is it right to include all those "adoptive" family members? I would just include siblings and parents. Any thoughts on this? AnemoneProjectors (what?) 17:50, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's important to leave the siblings in there, but adoptive second cousin four times removed? That's beyond tenuous. Frickative 18:11, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's exactly what I thought! What about Whitney being in family sections of all the others? AnemoneProjectors (what?) 18:12, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yuck! The majority should be removed, what's in the ibox now is ridiculous.GunGagdinMoan 19:29, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sources 2[edit]

No, that's right. Liam is leaving, Whitney is staying. There was some initial confusion over whether she would be going too. - JuneGloom Talk 20:39, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I read that as with lol!--5 albert square (talk) 20:42, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Storyline section[edit]

Anyone plan on cutting this storyline section down? It is already massive and given that Whitney is usually in the thick of action - it will only get bigger. Just looks bad for a GA tbh.Rain the 1 14:36, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Storyline reduction is an ongoing thing for all characters really. With Ronnie, we put in a hidden comment that said "reduced to here" so we knew where to go next. I always feel it's best to put the detail in and then take it out later. But since this was promoted to GA, the plot has more than doubled. She's had a lot of storylines, but it can certainly be chopped. –AnemoneProjectors– 14:39, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'll do it! :) GSorby – Ping 14:47, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That is good. It just seems a shame - there is no development for recent things either - like Fatboy and Tyler.Rain the 1 15:02, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah it would be good to have development on that. Anything from the soap mags? –AnemoneProjectors– 15:16, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There has been plenty in all the mags for Whitney and Tyler. Have you been buying some still?Rain the 1 15:21, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I have, and I still have them, but I don't remember, and it's not great for me to bring them to the library! (Though I will if it's for Ray Dixon!) –AnemoneProjectors– 14:22, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Whitney Dean. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:04, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:23, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Whitney_Dean&oldid=1208123093"