Talk:Mary Ridge

This article was nominated for deletion on 24 September 2022. The result of the discussion was keep.

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

United Kingdom Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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

Science Fiction Low‑importance

	Speculative fiction portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction 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.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women in Red: #1day1woman (2022)

This article was created or improved during the #1day1woman initiative hosted by the Women in Red project in 2022. The editor(s) involved may be new; please assume good faith regarding their contributions before making changes.Women in RedWikipedia:WikiProject Women in RedTemplate:WikiProject Women in RedWomen in Red

A fact from Mary Ridge appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 13 October 2022 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Mary Ridge blew up the Liberator on her first encounter with Blake's 7, and killed off the crew on her last?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2022/October. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mary Ridge.

Wikipedia

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 RoySmith (talk) 00:58, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that Mary Ridge blew up the Liberator on her first encounter with Blake's 7, and killed off the crew on her last? Source: Nazzaro, Joe (April 2006). "Blake's End: Director Mary Ridge Recalls Making the Most Controversial Blake's 7' "". Starlog Magazine (344): 50–53 – via Internet Archive.
ALT1: ... that Mary Ridge directed an episode of Blake's 7 named "Terminal", and an episode of Doctor Who named "Terminus"?Source:Nazzaro, Joe (April 2006). "Blake's End: Director Mary Ridge Recalls Making the Most Controversial Blake's 7' "". Starlog Magazine (344): 50–53 – via Internet Archive; and John Kenneth Muir (2015). A Critical History of Doctor Who on Television]. McFarland. pp. 324–26. ISBN 9781476604541.
- Reviewed: Wesley Tann
- Comment: This article existed as a microstub from 2005 to 2018; it was rescued and much improved last week, by a team effort

5x expanded by Penny Richards (talk), Espresso Addict (talk), and Dr vulpes (talk). Nominated by Penny Richards (talk) at 02:20, 1 October 2022 (UTC).[reply]

General eligibility:
New enough:
Long enough:
Other problems:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Article is recently substantially expanded x5, long enough, neutral and a QPQ is done. The only outstanding issues are a few citations that are missing - please ping me when they are filled :) It's great read about her life, thanks to the team for expanding the article. As a note, I much prefer ALT0. Lajmmoore (talk) 08:10, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Lajmmoore and Penny Richards: I've sourced part of it (turns out actually reading the entire interview rather than skimming it and searching for the surname did the trick!) and removed the rest to the talk page. I think the five-folding shouldn't be a problem, it was very short before we started. I prefer Alt0 too, should we strike Alt1? Thanks, Espresso Addict (talk) 21:57, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Lajmmoore and Espresso Addict:: Strikethrough done (I never knew how to do that before, neat).Penny Richards (talk) 02:18, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Penny Richards and Espresso Addict: thanks so much both, its a green tick now! Lajmmoore (talk) 07:13, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Information needing a reliable source

She was involved in establishing television programmes for the Open University.^{[citation needed]} She was known for advising novice directors.^{[citation needed]}

These were added by an anon editor sourced to a fanblog. I've investigated the blog and while it's a great resource, and I think the details are likely to be correct, there's no obvious reason for Wikipedia to consider it a reliable source. If the anon editor could come up with more reliable sources eg published interviews they can be replaced. Espresso Addict (talk) 21:36, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]