Talk:A Quiet Night In/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Grapple X (talk · contribs) 04:34, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"It first aired on 12 February 2014 on BBC Two and BBC Two HD." -> I'm not sure we aught to consider these separate channels, especially given that the HD link is merely a redirect to BBC Two. Just "on BBC Two" would suffice.
- Done. J Milburn (talk)
The Shearsmith caption seems a little run-on. It'd be the same length but flow a little more directly as "Reece Shearsmith (pictured in 2003) co-wrote "A Quiet Night In" and starred as a moustachioed burglar".
- Done. J Milburn (talk) 18:05, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
~~Whether or not you rearrange the caption, "burgular" should be burglar.~~
- Duh. Fixed. J Milburn (talk) 18:05, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
~~There's some WP:LQ inconsistency, with terminal punctuation both inside and outside quotes in different places; I tend to prefer the latter but either works if it's consistently used.~~
- I only put the punctuation inside the quote when it's a full sentence- I am pretty sure this is consistent with the MOS, but I appreciate how awkward the guidelines are... What do you feel is problematic? J Milburn (talk) 22:32, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - Fair enough, didn't realise that was the case. I found it a little odd to see both ways used, even if it is technically correct, but I'm fussy so don't consider that a real issue.
"The writers had considered having a ten-minute section in an episode,[4] or even the whole episode,[5] without dialogue." -> there's something about the end of the sentence lacking a reference that irks me for some reason. I think if you turn it on its end, something like "The writers had considered having omitting dialogue for a ten-minute section in an episode,[4] or even the whole episode.[5]", then you avoid this.
- Reworked. J Milburn (talk) 18:05, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
~~"Piano Concerto No. 2" is in plain text in the plot summary but in italics in the sound file caption. I assume italics is the correct way about it.~~
- Removed italics. Per WP:ITALICS, it's only needed when there is an actual name. J Milburn (talk) 18:05, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Plot section is really long. 909 words is long even for a feature film summary; WP:TVPLOT recommends around 300-500. Even without losing any of the plot threads, a lot could be shaved off this length if the descriptions were trimmed and longer phrases condensed down a little (for example, "Ray returns to the painting, cutting the canvas from the frame, before making a fake version of the painting from kitchen roll" could be "Ray cuts the painting from its frame, replacing it with kitchen roll" for about half the length, etc).
Never been keen on cast sections that just list roles and actors; consider just listing cast in brackets in the plot summary when their roles are mentioned (and in regards to the point above, you could get away with ignoring the wordcount the names would add).
- Gone. J Milburn (talk) 22:28, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The Times review is quoted a little heavily; it might be a good idea to mine out a few smaller nuggets and paraphrase the rest; if you're very attached to it, consider taking the quote into a quotebox to one side if space allows.
- Trimmed it a little- I can trim further if you need me to. J Milburn (talk) 18:05, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
~~Link the Observer and the Guardian.~~
- Done. J Milburn (talk) 18:05, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There's a lot of repetition of "describe", especially in the reception section but also towards the end of the production section. Switch it up a little with a few synonyms.
~~I'd consider dropping the Lawson image to the same width as the Shearsmith one, but that's an aesthetic concern.~~
- I've redone the images. J Milburn (talk) 18:05, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - Not what I had meant but that works too.
That's all I can see for the time being; I'll give it another look when the plot's cut down though. Sounds like an interesting show, to be honest, might have to find it on iPlayer. GRAPPLE X 04:34, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- I've made a start on the fixes. I do recommend taking a look; the first episode was one of the best things I've seen on TV in a while. I was personally less sure of this one, but I did enjoy it. J Milburn (talk) 18:05, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - Ok, some of the "described"s are gone and the plot section has been trimmed; it needs a bit more though. Thanks for bearing with me... J Milburn (talk) 01:02, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - I can take a pass over it as well if you'd like, sometimes a fresh pair of eyes can find a few redundancies to trim easier than someone used to looking it. GRAPPLE X 03:26, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    - Please do! I'm down to about 575 now, but I'm not sure what else to trim! J Milburn (talk) 19:18, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      - I think it works as it is, to be honest; there's a bit of leeway since there's more description needed with no dialogue—75 words over is a lot closer than 400. I'm happy enough with it at the minute, going to pass this. Well done! GRAPPLE X 20:53, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        Thanks for your efforts! I've started work on the next episode (different in feel again... writing the main article will be difficult!) so hopefully that'll be at GAC soon. I'd also be interested in throwing some of them towards FAC, but I may wait until I've seen whether the DVD release has any bonus features first! J Milburn (talk) 21:33, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]