Talk:Fourteenth Doctor/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: Pokelego999 (talk · contribs) 18:41, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: FishLoveHam (talk · contribs) 14:55, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Hey, I'll be reviewing this article, expect comments soon :) FishLoveHam (talk) 14:55, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Infobox and lede

• Remove comma after "incarnation of the Doctor".
• "series' narrative" → "series narrative".
• "a millennia-old alien who is thought" remove "who is".
• Remove "Usually".
• "changes" → "change".
• "quirks in his personality" → "personality quirks".
• "Tennant's second incarnation is similar to the Tenth Doctor," remove comma.
• Add a comma after "Initially".
• In the third paragraph, "played" and "portrayed" are both used, I think only one should.
• "lead by a Fourteenth Doctor" add a comma after "Doctor".

Appearances

• Add a comma after "24 November 2023".
• Remove comma after "comic strip".
• "in-character" → "in character".
• Remove comma after "perish".
• "had" → "has".
• "the DoctorDonna" capitalise "The".
• "Later on," → "Later,".
• "a cup of coffee" → "coffee".
• "spaceship which is" → "spaceship that is".
• "as part of promotion" → "for promotion".

Development and casting

• missing "an" before "informal discussion".
• "60th anniversary" → "60th-anniversary".
• After "Tate's roles", there is a space between references 11 and 12.
• "has a tendency" → "tends".
• Add a comma after "Doctor's appearance".
• Replace "that" with a colon and capitalise "to". (saying: "To)
• "to be" → "being".
• "Tennant had starred" → "Tennant starred".
• Remove comma after 2010.
• "Tom Baker, had returned" remove "had".

Reception

• "ability for" → "ability of"
• "been universally praised" → "received universal praise"

References

• I strongly recommend adding archived urls to all the web citations, but it isn't a requirement.
• Unlink Mark Stammers in ref 23.
• Ping when you're done. FishLoveHam (talk) 15:49, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

  @FishLoveHam I've made the bulk of your suggested changes, though I've chosen not to perform a few for the following reasons:

  -The DoctorDonna does not typically use a capitalized "the" to my knowledge, though correct me if I'm wrong on that.

  -I did not change to "for promotion" to avoid repetition of "for" in the text, as the current way it is phrased relays the same information while being more professionally phrased.

  -From what the source states, there seem to have been more than one informal discussions held between the trio, hence why I did not include "an."

  -I did not do "60th-anniversary" since it is not formatted that way anywhere else in the article.

  -I kept "had" on the Tom Baker sentence since it makes more sense to keep it there. Had allows the audience to understand that a returning Doctor has precedence in the series, whereas without it the sentence feels like random trivia.

  Otherwise there's a lot of good catches in here (And a lot of typos added since I nominated this, geez). Thank you for the help with the multiple citations on Ref 30, as it looks much cleaner now (And I admittedly have no clue how it works). I've archived the sources per your suggestion, I previously hadn't since it wouldn't let me last time I tried to. Overall, the bulk should be addressed, but let me know if you have any more comments on anything in the article. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 19:23, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

  @Pokelego999 (talk · contribs) You're welcome with ref 30.

  With the DoctorDonna, I made that bullet point and then decided against criticising it, I must've forgotten to remove it sorry lol. As for the others, they're not really that big of deals. Mostly I was worried about parts of the article being overly wordy, but your explanations all make sense so I'm willing to leave the article the way it is now. Thanks for your responses! FishLoveHam (talk) 20:39, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Congrats!

Progress

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·