Talk:73 Yards/GA1

GA Review

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

Nominator: TheDoctorWho (talk · contribs) 03:33, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Mr Sitcom (talk · contribs) 01:21, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will review this article in the coming days. Full disclosure: This is my first review, and although I am a WikiProject Doctor Who member, I have not made any edits to this article before and am impartial to its successful or unsuccessful nomination. Mr Sitcom (talk) 01:22, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Review

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

C. It contains no original research:

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

Lead

and was released by Disney+ in the United States on 24 May → clarify that it was released simultaneously on Disney+ in the United States on 24 May Done
cliffside in Wales → clifftop in Wales Done
hyperlink "Wales" Done
while being followed → whilst being followed Done
The viewing figure 4.058 million viewers is mentioned only in the lead. It should also be included, with a citation, in the Ratings section. Done

Plot

The plot is rather poorly-worded and, at times, confusing (although is that just modern Doctor Who?), and does not meet WP:TONE guidelines – it could do with some copyediting and restructuring (for example, Roger ap Gwilliam should be mentioned earlier on in the plot, as he is a significant character in the story) Done
at a cliffside → on a clifftop Done
hyperlink "fairy circle" Done
TARDIS' → TARDIS's Done

Production

Development

hyperlink "penitence" Done
Please ensure all citations are archived (via Internet Archive) Done

Filming

Reorder citations [2] and [8] in numerical order Done
"73 Yards" was filmed in December 2022 and January 2023 and directed by Dylan Holmes Williams. The accompanying sources do not specify that filming took place during these dates. I would suggest adding source [9] (Doctor Who filming with Aneurin Barnard at Cardiff City Stadium) and source [10] ("I've been sworn to secrecy": Doctor Who filmed in Caerphilly pub) to the end of this statement Done
Because the window Ruby looks out of in the pub actually overlooked a car park, the window had to be recreated in another place to get a different point of view. → Since the window Ruby looks out of in the pub actually overlooked a carpark, the window had to be recreated in another place to achieve the required point of view. Done

Casting

"73 Yards" stars Gibson as Ruby Sunday and is deemed as a "Doctor-lite" episode[12][13][14] which refers to an episode that features limited screen time for the Doctor. These citations can all be added to the end of this sentence. Done

Broadcast and reception

Broadcast

All good

Ratings

Include the total viewing figures for this episode, which were 4.06 million viewers, according to the Doctor Who Ratings Guide Done
Reorder citations [13] and [38] in numerical order Done

Critical reception

All good

In print

A novelisation of the episode was written by Scott Handcock and made available for pre-order in May 2024.[42] Is there any way to prove that this statement is correct without using the Amazon source, which is bound to change once the novel is released? Done
Citations
- All references need to be archived, if possible Done
- Source [42]: Change DWN 3 (Doctor Who Target Collection 2024, 3) to read Doctor Who: 73 Yards (Target Collection) Done
- Source [43]: Change www.rarewaves.com to just Rarewaves Done
- Source [44]: Change DWN 2 to read Doctor Who: 73 Yards Done

General comments

I have now finished reviewing this article. If you have any questions about the points outlined above, please let me know. Mr Sitcom (talk) 14:45, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just a quick update: I've fixed everything other than a copy-edit on the plot section, I'll try to get to that later today. I couldn't find another (reliable) source that verifies a pre-order just from a quick search. But I did archive the Amazon link, which will preserve the claim. The only other mention that I'll make is that the filming dates are supported by the Behind the Scenes video source. There's a clip of the clapboard at 6:09 which verifies December 2022 and a chyron at 8:22 that verifies January 2023. TheDoctorWho (talk) 18:53, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've cleaned the plot summary up quite a bit for both tone and brevity. The ending is still slightly rough, but I feel that's because (and as you said) we're dealing with two Ruby's at the same time, which makes it difficult.

The only thing I didn't do was move Gwilliam's first mention up earlier. My thought process being that he didn't actually appear until that part in the episode. Bar a brief mention in the first 60 seconds, we don't hear anything about him again until Ruby sees the advertisement. I can try to fit it in earlier if necessary, but it does feel a bit strange to work that into the first paragraph of the plot when it was such a brief moment.

Let me know if you have any other thoughts, but your comments should all be addressed now! TheDoctorWho (talk) 05:10, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've rewatched the Behind the Scenes video and found that the source does indeed prove the claim (I guess that's what you get when you watch the video with subtitles in the way). I agree that the plot section is much better and does not need Gwilliam's earlier mention, as you have suggested.

All other points have now been addressed, so I will now pass this as a good article. Well done to @TheDoctorWho and @OlifanofmrTennant, as well as all other editors who have contributed to a well-written, well-structured article. Mr Sitcom (talk) 06:49, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reviewing the article, it's greatly appreciated!

TheDoctorWho (talk) 06:59, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, I have enjoyed the experience. Mr Sitcom (talk) 07:08, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]