Talk:Boom Town (Doctor Who)/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Matty.007 (talk · contribs) 10:26, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

OK, I'm going to try and review this, but please bear in mind that this is my first review; please feel free (anyone) to correct me. What I would quite like is, when replying to my comments, if you reply individually to each comment, as I believe is the norm, please sign each fix/comment withthree tildes, which signs only your name, and means the conversation doesn't get too confusing. Thanks, Mat  ty. 007 10:26, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Minor prose quibbles

 * if 'The Doctor' is his name, should the 'The' be capitalised? I ask this not because I am lazy, but to get your opinion
 * We typically have not in the WikiProject. Glimmer721  talk  18:20, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
 * That's what I wondered. Mat  ty  .  007
 * is alive? Should this not be removed/moved to plot as it requires previous knowledge?
 * Not sure what you mean. I did change it to "recently defeated enemy". Glimmer721  talk  18:20, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Is alive after what? How about 'survived 'Episode', and willing to destroy...'? Mat  ty  .  007
 * should the episode names be in italics? I suspect that there is some guideline saying not, as the page names aren't in italics, but please could you link me to them?
 * WikiProject Doctor Who/Manual of style: serials are italicised, episodes are in quotes. Glimmer721  talk  18:20, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I wondered if there was something about that. Mat  ty  .  007
 * please can you source the first sentence. Can the references to 'Burk and Smith?' be expanded for author, publisher...?
 * It's the same source as the next sentence; they don't always have to be repeated, but I did anyway. The publisher and stuff for that reference is found in the Bibliography section at the end of references, as is commonly done with this sort of multiple page number referencing. Glimmer721  talk  18:20, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
 * So it is. Mat  ty  .  007
 * please can you source the first sentence?
 * Same as above; did it anyway. Glimmer721  talk  18:20, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I can be pedantic at times... Mat  ty  .  007
 * perhaps a bit of shortening, and simplifying please?
 * Done. Glimmer721  talk
 * Thanks. Mat  ty  .  007
 * simplify please?
 * Done. Glimmer721  talk  18:20, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Mat  ty  .  007
 * any reason for the question mark?
 * here's his website at the University of Ottawa
 * Thank you. Mat  ty  .  007
 * either remove the 'just', or add it to quotes. Personally, I think a fun romp isn't bad by itself.
 * The actual quote is "It's a fun romp. Nothing more than that." "Just" does work as it means "nothing else", but I understand the bad connotation, so I changed it to "nothing more".
 * Still seems like it's dismissing his quote. I changed it a little (and removed a stray 'The'). Mat  ty  .  007
 * um... not in the source given he didn't
 * Oops. Fixed to correct word. Glimmer721  talk  18:20, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Mat  ty  .  007

Miscellaneous

 * Perhaps 'Production' should be 'Production and casting'?
 * Back to the DW MOS above, "Casting" can be a section under production if there's enough info, but otherwise it's part of the production process anyway. Glimmer721  talk  18:20, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Okey-dokes. Mat  ty  .  007
 * 'Broadcast and reception' Needs more than a few reviews, surely some British newspapers have reviews online. Also, I think that the SFX and Radio Times reviews need shortening.
 * If they ever did they have been swallowed by changes to the Internet. I'll add The A.V. Club's review when they cover it. Back when the series was new, less sources covered it episode by episode. The size of the section is about normal with older non-event TV episodes (see numerous GAs of The X-Files, etc). RT is essentially just a sentence so I left that, but I shortened SFX a bit. Glimmer721  talk  18:20, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I originally mistook RT and Digital Spy as the same. Mat  ty  .  007
 * ' Burk and Smith? p. 46': does it have a question mark in?
 * Answered above. (Oh don't worry, I am used to this question.)
 * (Do you get this question every GAN?) Mat  ty  .  007
 * Is 'Outpost Gallifrey' a RS? Is it used in other GAs? (I genuinely don't know this, I'm not trying to be annoying)
 * "Fear Her" and "Love & Monsters" are some recent ones, but it and its later Doctor Who News Page are used in several because the website has been cited by other reliable sources who reprint the information, and in the case with Outpost there is a definite author and editor, etc. I think they actually hire people to report for them. Glimmer721  talk  18:20, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks. Mat  ty  .  007
 * You give years for some past Who episodes mentioned but not others. Is there a reason?
 * The historical episodes have dates while the ones mentioned that were produced/aired as part of the same series do not because that would be unnecessary. Remembrance of the Daleks doesn't have it in parentheses because the year was mentioned earlier in the sentence. Glimmer721  talk  18:20, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Mat  ty  .  007
 * In SFX, Blaine is stated to be played by Annette Badland. I am reasonably confident that this is a mistake, but is that the only place where Annette Badland is credited? Mat  ty  .  007  10:48, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Not sure what you mean; the character is Margaret Blaine and the actor is Annette Badland. She is credited at the end of the episode itself, on the official website, and numerous reference sources. Glimmer721  talk  18:20, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Heh. Well done me for that mistake. Thanks, Mat  ty  .  007
 * Per ELMAYBE, "Blogs, personal web pages and most fansites, except those written by a recognized authority", "Open wikis, except those with a substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors" should not be external links. I quote from a previous GA review he did on Rose (Doctor Who): "At GA level we should not be directing readers to alternative reader generated sites like IMDB and external wikis. If those sites have more information than Wikipedia than this article is by default failing to provide enough information. For an article on a TV episode links to the script or a licensed stream of the video would be acceptable, but not fan sites such as http://www.drwhoguide.com, which offer nothing that can't be put in this article with appropriate research and use of reliable sources". Thanks,  Mat  ty  .  007  19:43, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Huh I've never seen that be an issue before as so many articles link to those (I might bring it up on WP:DW because we need to make sure we're following the guidlines). I've removed everything but BBC-licensed sources. Glimmer721  talk  16:37, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I think it's OK now, it passes my reading of external link policies. Mat  ty  .  007  16:44, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Table
On hold until the issues I have set out are adressed. Best, Mat  ty. 007 10:57, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I believe I have replied to everything above. Thanks for the review! Glimmer721  talk  18:20, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
 * All done. Thanks. Glimmer721  talk  16:37, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Yep, passed. Well done! Mat  ty  .  007  16:48, 2 January 2014 (UTC)