Template:Did you know nominations/Rosemary's Baby (miniseries)


 * The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as |this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by BlueMoonset (talk) 08:18, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Rosemary's Baby (miniseries)

 * ... that the 2014 adaptation of Rosemary's Baby starring Zoe Saldana (pictured) is set in Paris rather than New York City like the original novel?
 * Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Sanur, Jenin, Jarrar, Throne village (3rd of 3 QPQs)

Created by TonyTheTiger (talk), CAWylie (talk). Nominated by TonyTheTiger (talk) at 21:37, 7 May 2014 (UTC).


 * Let's make this a date request for either May 11 or May 15 (12 or 16 UTC), when the show airs.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:41, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg Article meets the 5× expansion rule, is long enough, and contains no close paraphrasing. Hook is supported with two refs, but the image does not appear in the article (is free to use, though). Whisternefet (t &middot; c) 05:03, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
 * , I forgot to add the image. Thanks. Also, can you comment on the date request.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:34, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg : Will do. With the image added (I made it slightly smaller within the article), everything checks out. Whisternefet (t &middot; c) 06:20, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
 * , you only gave general approval. You did not approve or deny the date request.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:37, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I see that you approved the date request at WT:DYK rather than here. I am going to move this to the date request section.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:46, 10 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Please Note that this date request is for the hook to appear from 1:00-3:00 UTC on May 12, while the show is on the air. It is possible that the timeslot begins on May 11 since the queue is out of synch.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:53, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
 * : Sorry, I'm a total newbie to DYK. But yes, the dates hold no problems; should be good to go then or May 15 (16 UTC). Whisternefet (t &middot; c) 07:02, 10 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Symbol possible vote.svg This article has virtually no substance: 1070 of 1518 prose characters are for an unsourced Plot section; in the case of works that are not yet released and therefore cannot be used as their own source, an actual source must be provided. In any event, 448 non-plot prose characters are grossly inadequate for an article that is supposed to run on the main page, especially with a quarter of those being dates of actors signing on to the project. This article needs far more meat to it: aim for 1500 prose characters without the plot and you won't risk it being delayed further. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:54, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I added a reference for the plot. I also added a bunch of possible references to the talk page, but it may take some time to implement. Whisternefet (t &middot; c) 22:14, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I will get to this in a bit. It will only take a couple of hours.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:02, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
 * , How is it now?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:01, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Much better; perhaps I can touch upon the production section after it hits DYK, but as of now I'm satisfied. Whisternefet (t &middot; c) 01:53, 11 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Symbol question.svg I think the new section needs a copyedit: some sentences don't make grammatical sense, it shifts from present to past tense (should be entirely in past), and reviewers "note" and "concur" entirely too much. There's also a place where it veers into plot, and shouldn't. Also, I think Production needs more information now, before this hits the main page. It's not as if you don't have the sources for it. PS: Tony, don't revert my edit again on prep 2, or place what you did there: it was inappropriate before, and it remains so. I'll take care of it when I think this is ready. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:39, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * you are becoming quite annoying as you unilaterally raise the standards of DYK, but I have expanded the text and attempted to put the critical review in past tense.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:36, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * How is this?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:36, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * No complaints for either sections; I'd say this is GTG, but if we're going down the path of picking apart other things, perhaps the lead should be expanded a bit more (maybe summarize its critical reception by referencing Rotten Tomatoes to reflect reviewer's common sentiments?). Whisternefet (t &middot; c) 03:44, 11 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Tony, since I'm far from the first to have to push you for more material on a lacking article (witness Template:Did you know nominations/Chicagoland (TV series), I make no apologies here. This is much closer, though I'm baffled as to why you didn't beef up the production section with the information in FN1, rather than remine the reviews. There are still some things that I feel need improvement, so I'm going to make an editing pass through the article. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:14, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * P.S. I don't understand what you mean by remine the reviews. I went out and found new sources for the production content that you requested.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:52, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * My error, Tony; apologies. I saw the New York Times and the reference numbers, and thought you were going back to the Stanley; I think what happened is that I recognized text sourced from the Stuever, and thought there was more than that instance. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:24, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Maybe I don't understand the current standards, but DYK is suppose to accept 1500 character versions of articles.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:22, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * No, it's not. 1500 is the absolute minimum, but it has always been true that Articles that fail to deal adequately with the topic are also likely to be rejected. Articles on television programs that are 3/4 plot with 1500 characters, as this one was, are not going to meet standards. DYK puts articles out on the main page of Wikipedia, and these should all meet certain basic quality levels; it isn't just an arbitrary length. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:24, 11 May 2014 (UTC)


 * I think the article's in good shape now, but would like Whisternefet to take a final look. Eventually, the intro should be expanded per WP:LEAD, but that isn't a DYK requirement (though it is for GAN). BlueMoonset (talk) 05:24, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Even better. Good to go. Whisternefet (t &middot; c) 05:33, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * One more thing: since the reception section is pretty lengthly, I'd recommend splitting it more or less equally. But because all the reviews sort of transition to each other, I don't know how I could do this in a way that isn't confusing. Should we wait until it premieres and add post-broadcast reviews to another paragraph (or something like that)? Symbol confirmed.svg Still good either way. Whisternefet (t &middot; c) 05:42, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Everything is a work in progress. At some point in the future it may get split. I am not promising to be involved in post broadcast editing.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:49, 11 May 2014 (UTC)