Talk:Forest of the Dead/GA2

GA Review

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

Nominator: DoctorWhoFan91 (talk · contribs) 17:35, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Pokelego999 (talk · contribs) 13:14, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will take this on in the coming days. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 13:14, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DoctorWhoFan91 sorry about the wait. Life's been getting busy on my end irl. Should be able to review this in the next few days so long as nothing else gets in the way. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 04:33, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's fine, I have been busy too. Take your time, no need to rush yourself. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 05:59, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Pokelego999: any update on when you think you might be able to review the GAN? DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 15:01, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Six GA Criteria

1. Article has some phrasing issues in places.

2. No OR, all info is cited in the article.

3. Coverage is broad in depth and focus. Production could do with expansion, but only if the coverage to do so exists.

4. Article appears neutral, and does not appear to hold a significantly negative nor positive stance on the subject.

5. Article appears stable. Does not appear to have had any major vandalism occur.

6. Article uses one fair use image with proper rationale.

Lead

-"The episode also features the death of River Song (Alex Kingston), an archaeologist who has a close relationship with the Doctor, but because of the non-linearity of this partnership, the Doctor in the episode has only just met River." Specify River is a recurring character later in the series

- Done

-"a 40% audience share, the highest in Series Four" Is the audience share of the viewership the highest here?

- Yes, and it is referenced in the ratings subsection
  - Please clarify this in the lead, as this can be misinterpreted very easily. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 02:24, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    - Oh sorry, I didn't notice the sentence was ambigous. Fixed

-"a moment which IGN stated "rivals any of the great emotional beats in this series" noting their plentifulness." I am very confused by what this sentence is supposed to be saying and why it's relevant to the above image.

- Moved to reception, hadn't paid attention to it
  - My concern isn't location, but rather how this applies to the image. As it stands, it's really only here for visuals, so it either needs a rationale strengthened (Either by being highlighted by a source) or by some other rationale. If there isn't a justification for the image it may need to be removed. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 02:24, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    - Oh, I see your point now. Removed.

Plot

-"where she will be safe as the Doctor fixed the data core." Specify River will be safe. I also feel everything after "safe" isn't too necessary.

- Done

Production

-Could images for some of the filming locations be used? Not sure if any are free to use/have images, but I figured I'd ask as it could visually spruce up the article a bit and help visualize the locations.

- I'll look for them
  - Could only find one, added it

-This section is a bit small. Have you checked out the BBC Doctor Who website, and the Doctor Who website's stories section? Both have links to some BTS videos you might be able to use, if you haven't used them already.

- There is more, but is used on the article for part one. I'll copy some from there (have already used the info from these areas)
  - Do these behind the scenes videos apply to both parts? If so, then I'd definitely agree with moving some of it here, as some readers may be looking for this episode exclusively and not look between for both parts on information for both episodes. If they have separate videos, then keep the videos relating to Forest of the Dead at this article and not at Silence in the Library's.
    - The info is also in an official magazine, I used the info from there. This episode's video mostly dealt with the scene of River's death
      - Expanded

Broadcast and reception

-"Following the two-parter, Davies said that Moffat (who was succeeding him as showrunner from the next series onwards), brought the best attributes to Doctor Who, such as "intelligence and wit and fears and thrills and dynamism"" Could it be clarified why this relevant? A showrunner saying their writer is good isn't too extraordinary. I know there's significance here, but I feel this should be made apparent in the article.

reworded

-"SFX's review on GamesRadar+" For reference, SFX is an entirely separate publication from GamesRadar, and only uses GamesRadar as a host for their content. SFX's reviews are entirely their own, and should be credited as such. Additionally, credit author if one is listed. If not, then it's not a major concern.

No author listed. And thank you, I was confused about the situation between the two

-""great contrast": both a continuation and something new, shifting away from the monster plot to focus on the parallel world, and "the little girl at the heart of the machine"." I'm very confused what kind of commentary this is supposed to say, and feels like a very heavily paraphrased quote from the review. Could this be reworded or clarified to better express what the author is trying to comment on with this? (Are they praising the plot? The themes?)

reworded, I was trying to list what said things were throughout the ref

-"as she is someone the Doctor is yet to meet but who already knows a lot about him, including his name" We already know this, so it doesn't need to be restated.

quoted, was in the review

- - I mean even if it's quoted it's primarily restated information, so it doesn't really benefit the reader by being said twice. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 02:24, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
removed in the re-write

-Is that all that can be gleaned from Radio Times? That's a very small amount of commentary.

The actual review was short, as they were doing something like a blog for reviews at the time. I'll add the other review too

Couldn't find any RT review

-"Travis Fickett said that he found his brain "searching for new superlatives"" I'm proud of him but what does this have to do with the episode?

reworded, superlatives for the episode

-"while also praising Donna and Tate's chops as a dramatic actress" Very opinionated and reads like close paraphrasing. Also acts like Donna and Tate are two different people and not just character and actress.

Will reword

Replaced in the re-write

-Shouldn't the Constellation Award be mentioned in the lead alongside the Hugo?

Will do it

Not as big of a award, I think, so I didn't mention it in the lead

-Did a brief search: Searching "Forest of the Dead" Doctor Who" in Scholar yields quite a few hits, as does Books (Though the latter is less strong). If possible, check if some of these can be added to the article to expand its coverage.

Will check

I added 2 reviews and a top nth episode list, do you still want me to expand it

Overall

-@DoctorWhoFan91: This article needs some work, but the bulk of the concerns are pretty minor and seem feasible within the scope of a GAN. I understand I suggested some big ones in spots; let me know if I can help with these in order to minimize the work. Let me know if you have any further questions. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 21:55, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Pokelego999: Did the small changes. I'll rewrite the reception section completely as I seem to have made a mess of it. Will add some info from the part 1 article too. Thank you for your review. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 06:20, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DoctorWhoFan91: left a few comments on the above. Will respond more on the Reception when you're done rewriting it. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 02:24, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Pokelego999: Finished everything else, will copy content from "Silence in the Library" for production, and rewrite reception. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 06:18, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Pokelego999: Done both, you can check now. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 07:55, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DoctorWhoFan91 A few nitpicks:

-I feel the casting info doesn't need to be as detailed given Silence in the Library covers that well enough. I'd shorten down some info on Kingston and Pemberton, and remove the mention of Salmon.

-""found his brain searching for new superlatives"" Still doesn't make much sense since it isn't really commentary. Like, how does this translate to actual commentary of the episode? Does he feel that the episode was very good? Does he feel the episode had so many themes it was indescribable?

-There's a lot of quotes in the Reception. Try paraphrasing a few of these to condense it to the writer's main thoughts (For instance, the AV Club could be rewritten to something like "Keith Philipps praised the episode for its exploration of the relationship between the Doctor and River, as well as its emphasis on the Doctor's character. While he felt the episode was weaker than its first part, he felt it was still a good episode in isolation." Just an example and you don't need to change it (And this example isn't perfect either, but hopefully it helps)

Rest looks good. Once this is done it should be good to go. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 18:35, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Pokelego999: Done all. Also condesed the reception section a bit more bcs mostly the same things were brought up in the review, which i mentioned in the first para, and so with less quotes, there was no need to keep those sentences. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 21:01, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DoctorWhoFan91 Spotcheck: Reviewing sources 1, 20, 4, 14, 15, 8. No notable issues I can find among the sources, so this should be good to go. Nice work. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 00:34, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]