Talk:The War of the Worlds (British TV series)

Release Date
Hello, I was going to change the release date on this article to say either 2019 or 2020, because I have a source (IMDb) that suggests it may be released next year. Do we consider the IMDb a sufficient reference to make this change? I also want to site this reference, but I do not know the format to do so, so if someone could point me in the right direction there, I'd appreciate it. -Fogelmatrix (talk) 16:30, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
 * , I know this is an old message, but I only just came across it whilst expanding the article. IMDb is not a reliable source in any article on Wikipedia, per WP:CITINGIMDB. Cheers. -- / Alex /21  23:09, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
 * , thanks for the info. I wasn't sure because IMDb has a shortcode in Wikipedia so you can easily make an external link, so I wasn't sure on the official ruling of this.  Cheers mate.  -Fogelmatrix (talk) 19:52, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
 * IMDB is considered an unsuitable source for primary sources is it's mainly user submitted content, in the same way that a wikipedia article ins't a suitable source for wikipedia. The short code is there so you can link to it for external sites, (in the same was that you can link quickly to other wikipedia articles for additional reading or "see also" lists) but not be used for course content. IMDB is still riddled with inaccuracies. For example I just came across an IMDB page that lists Werner Herzog's son, Rudolph Herzog as the production Manager on the 1971 film "Vampyros Lesbos"- Rudolph Herzog was born in 1973 (apparently in confusion with the older and unrelated Rudolph Hertzog, I've submitted corrections.).Duckwalk71 (talk) 17:03, 1 December 2019 (UTC)


 * , The article mentions it is going to premier on a NZ channel, but it seems it's already had its first screening on Canadian channel T+E: https://blueantmedia.com/2019/09/channel-your-fears-te-conjures-up-five-spooky-new-shows-and-resurrects-two-fan-favourite-series-this-october/

Article title
The title of this article is under discussion, see Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(television)

-- 67.70.33.184 (talk) 20:39, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

"attacks religion"
The statement that the new series attacks religion is drawn from a fairly partisan and sensationalist article by The Sun, which is listed by wikipedia as a potential unreliable source. In this case the sun has been up to its old tricks. The article is basically a typical bit of tabloid rabble rousing attack on the BBC, complaining that "BBC bosses" (i.e The Sun's usual bete noire, rather than "blaming" the writer Peter Harness) have turned the show has turned the story into a "woke drama" (ignoring the fact that despite some dodgy opinions on eugenics Wells was a pretty progressive person himself). The claim that the story "attacks religion" in the text itself is actually a quote from screenwriter Harness who is talking about Well's original story: "Religion and militarism and these notions of nationhood in Wells’s book and in this adaptation, they just whither in the face of these aliens." None of the quotes used in the article mention climate change, this seems to be a bit of editorialising by The Sun's journalist, extrapolated from a comment about "modern resonances".

This should be removed - the Digital Spy article accurately discusses the change to a female protagonist, using primary source quotes, without the unnecessary editorialising, and whether or not DS is a credible source, I've included a direct primary quote from that article anyway. Critical reception is the appropriate place to put discussion on whether this adaptation is too "politically correct" or not, where that debate seems to be well covered already. Duckwalk71 (talk) 20:50, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

"Critical reception"
Removed a sentence about viewers expressing anger at the changes, as the sources are unreliable or misrepresented. The sources were a Digital Spy article which quoted twitter posts that did not discuss in in terms the changes from the novel, the Daily Telegraph and Gizmodo articles are just professional reviews, and the Daily express is an unreliable source, and hinges on a couple of tweets.Duckwalk71 (talk) 11:12, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

mjharper (talk) 06:58, 11 February 2022 (UTC)== "The real war is not about martians, but the perceived liberal perceptions of a 2019 audience" ==

Removed this quotation as it doesn't occur in The Independent's review of the third episode. At the time of making the edit, I couldn't find this quote anywhere expect Wikipedia. Digging a bit deeper, it actually comes from the review of The Independent's review of the first episode, which is currently paraphrased as "but complained about its attempts to speak to contemporary political issues." The problem with the quotation itself is that the full quotation from the review is actually "The real war here is not between humans and aliens, but between a classic tale and the perceived liberal expectations of audiences in 2019".

To reinsert the quotation, it would need to be correctly attributed to the first Independent review, and either quoted correctly in full, or include an ellipsis at the edited point ("but [...] the perceived."). I don't think adding it in is necessary, since the viewpoint is already summarized: having both a summary and a quotation is redundant, and arguably gives the viewpoint undue weight. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.197.154.83 (talk) 06:54, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

premise
There is a warning in the Premise section saying it's written like advertisement, while it just talks about the plot? I am new to editing i dont know if it refers to the whole article or just the premise. Jimbo2803 (talk) 11:46, 5 March 2024 (UTC)