Template:Did you know nominations/Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell (TV series)

Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell (TV series)

 * ... that Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell is a seven-part BBC adaptation of Susanna Clarke's first novel of the same name?

Created by Tentinator (talk). Self nominated at 21:06, 25 October 2013 (UTC).


 * Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Maggie Murphy hoax


 * Symbol possible vote.svg While this meets the minimum length requirements for a DYK article, it's basically a regurgitation of two BBC (primary source) press releases, plus one from BBC America, and a Digital Spy source that is itself a regurgitation of the primary BBC source (FN1) used throughout. The article is laden with show business encomiums. There is very little here aside from lists of producers, writers, directors, and actors, all saying splendid things about each other and the book and impending series. As such, there's very little useful and interesting meat, and a great deal of filler. A major rewrite will be necessary to include more meaningful material and remove a good proportion of the filler (for example, the Ben Stephenson sentences): there also needs to be more in the way of secondary sources that aren't simply parroting BBC press releases about this program for the article to be considered for DYK—or, for that matter, as notable enough for Wikipedia. ("Articles that fail to deal adequately with the topic are also likely to be rejected.") BlueMoonset (talk) 22:24, 15 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Symbol delete vote.svg It's been long enough. Let's fail this and move on. --  Ohc  ¡digame! 07:58, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Improvements were made a few days after BlueMoonset's comments. (revisions)   Tentinator   17:41, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Er, some stuff was added for sure, but it still read like a press release. I've gone and done some pruning and copyediting. --  Ohc  ¡digame! 08:49, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Symbol possible vote.svg I've cleaned it up a bit more. Now it's just fine as an article. I defer to the more experienced reviewers, but my personal opinion is that (a) we shouldn't be using DYK for advertizing; (b) the 'plot' section of the TV show's page is currently insufficient: it doesn't go beyond the lead-in provided by the advertizing. Any expansion of the plot section, however, would count as lifting the material from the book's page and be liable to be wrong in particulars when the adaptation takes its inevitable liberties with character development and budget and time constraints; (c) that said, anything with such glowing reviews from Neil Gaiman has my attention so I personally am glad to have seen this thing. (Isn't even in the article but I would've used that for my hook: but see (a) for my thoughts on using this as an advertizing platform.) — Llywelyn II   13:16, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: You should include that ...is the BBC's seven-part... in the hook if we do keep it. — Llywelyn II   13:19, 6 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Symbol confirmed.svg This one looks fine to me now - all the promotional content has been removed, and Llywelyn has expanded the "Plot" section nicely. Admittedly the plot section is still incomplete in the sense that it doesn't cover the entire plot, but that isn't a requirement for DYK, it is only required that all aspects have adequate coverage, and in this case, there is more than enough info in the plot section to give readers a sense of what the series is about. Gatoclass (talk) 08:58, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Well done, team! --  Ohc  ¡digame! 03:03, 9 December 2013 (UTC)