Talk:Spooks series 1/GA1

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

Reviewer: Khazar2 (talk · contribs) 12:50, 18 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I'll be glad to handle this review. I'll do a close readthrough today or tomorrow, noting any issues I see on my first pass, and then begin the formal checklist. -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:50, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

First readthrough

 * "In this table, the number in the first column refers to the episode's number within the entire series, whereas the number in the second column indicates the episode's number within the first series. " I'm not sure I see the value of structuring the table like this, when these two numbers are obviously the same. I realize this has probably just been cut-and-pasted from other Spooks articles, but for this standalone article, I'm not sure it makes sense.
 * Would you prefer if I removed it? -- Matthew RD 18:51, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'd suggest removing one of the redundant columns there. It's not a factor under the GA criteria, though, so it's up to you. -- Khazar2 (talk) 15:13, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "where MI5 learn of Kane's next intended target" -- "where" doesn't seem like the correct word here--what place is this referring to?
 * "Throughout the investigation behind Maynard" -- I'm not sure I understand this sentence. Does this mean, perhaps, "through the investigation into Maynard"?
 * "that he is a CIA asset"-- Maynard, Jools, or Harry? I assume Maynard is meant here.
 * "due to his "radical" and "provocative" playwrights in his past works before Spooks
 * "The series went through research by the writers." --I've cut this sentence, as it seems close to meaningless. In any case, the fact that there's some research involved has been abundantly established.
 * "from their sources" --from whose sources? Tom and Patrick's? The actors who play them?
 * "have temptations in order to get spare money" -- I'm not sure what this means. Maybe just "are tempted by money"?
 * Clarified all the above issues. -- Matthew RD 18:51, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

This looks very comprehensive on the first pass--nice work. I'll begin the checklist in the morning; in the meantime, take a look at the above. -- Khazar2 (talk) 04:40, 20 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "it allowed the producers to rewrite scenes to take account of the event to show the audience Spooks's goal of fighting terrorism" -- did the producers rewrite the scenes themselves? This is a little unclear. -- Khazar2 (talk) 15:28, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Clarified. -- Matthew RD 18:51, 24 December 2012 (UTC)