Talk:Juliet Nightingale

Juliet Nightingale has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
March 23, 2021	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on April 28, 2021.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that when Hollyoaks changed Juliet Nightingale's appearance for a storyline involving drugs, actress Niamh Blackshaw was glad to get rid of her character's side ponytail?

Fictional characters

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

LGBTQ+ studies

This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies articles

Soap Operas

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soap Operas, an effort to build consistent guidelines for and improve articles about soap operas and telenovelas on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit WikiProject Soap Operas, where you can join the project and/or the discussion.Soap OperasWikipedia:WikiProject Soap OperasTemplate:WikiProject Soap Operassoap opera articles

Television: Hollyoaks Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Hollyoaks task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Juliet Nightingale/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Some Dude From North Carolina (talk · contribs) 19:26, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I'm going to be reviewing this article. Expect comments by the end of the week. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 19:26, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Basic stuff and comments

Infobox looks good.
- Thank you! – DarkGlow (contribs • talk) 21:44, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"also Quinn" → "also known as Quinn" or something similar
- Since Quinn was only her surname, using "also" is typically the common practice for every soap character that I've seen? – DarkGlow (contribs • talk) 21:44, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Try reducing the amounts of quotes in #Casting_and_characterisation.
- Done – DarkGlow (contribs • talk) 21:44, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The storylines section looks good as well.
- Thank you! – DarkGlow (contribs • talk) 21:44, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Don't forget to recite sources at the end of each quote per WP:REF.
- Done – DarkGlow (contribs • talk) 01:48, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Couldn't find any issues with #Relationships.
The reception section could probably be expanded with some reviews from critics.
Archive all sources (either manually or with this tool).
- Done – DarkGlow (contribs • talk) 21:44, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Optional, but linking sources in the "|website=" parameter helps readers.
- I'm slightly confused, this referring to the Female First source? It's the only source a link, so I assume so; it does not have a Wikipedia entry. – DarkGlow (contribs • talk) 01:48, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I was just referring to references in general. At second glance I now see they were already linked. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 01:56, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Some references from Digital Spy are missing authors.

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. 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:
· · ·

Did you know nomination

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 SL93 (talk) 11:45, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that when Hollyoaks changed Juliet Nightingale's appearance for a storyline involving drugs, actress Niamh Blackshaw was glad to get rid of her character's side ponytail? Source: ^[1]

Created by DarkGlow (talk). Self-nominated at 12:45, 23 March 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Date (as a GA), length and hook all fine. However @DarkGlow:, the Storylines section is completely unsourced and that needs to be fixed before this can proceed. QPQ not needed as the nominator only has 1 credit and no close paraphrasing. Please ping me once that is sorted and I will have another look. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 08:42, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@The C of E: On WP:SOAPS, it is stated that "storyline sections do not require sourcing, as the programme itself acts as the source. These sections can be verified by watching the series." Therefore, it's very rare that a storyline section of a soap character will ever have inline citations. 99% of the section is sourced in the development/relationship sections, but if it's still going to be an issue despite the consensus on WP:SOAPS, the section can technically be removed as it's not essential imo, but I see no reason to do that. – DarkGlow • 09:47, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a little unsure as to how that WikiProject guidance stands up compared to WP:BURDEN. It has to be more that "just watch the programme" in my book. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 12:19, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@The C of E: MOS:TVPLOT, while not specifically about fictional characters, is applicable to talking about the plot of a series. It states that plot "may be sourced from the works themselves". The work is the series, which acts as the series. – DarkGlow • 12:29, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@The C of E: From prior precedent, it seems that plot-related sections are exempt from the "every paragraph needs a citation" rule, unless the hook has to do with a plot point or if there is plot-related analysis. I haven't taken a look at the article yet, but if there are no other issues this should probably be allowed to move forward. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 04:26, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@The C of E: WP:DYKSG#D2 also suggests that plot summaries do not need to be cited. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 00:07, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I bow to your experience on that, still seems a little out of kilter with standard practice but good to go then. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 06:25, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The C of E I have always known it to be standard practice per the manual of style. SL93 (talk) 05:24, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ "Interview with Niamh Blackshaw (Juliet Nightingale)". Channel 4. 7 April 2020. Retrieved 23 March 2021.

[1] "Interview with Niamh Blackshaw (Juliet Nightingale)". Channel 4. 7 April 2020. Retrieved 23 March 2021.

[1]