Talk:History of EastEnders
 | This is the talk page of a redirect that targets the page: • EastEnders Because this page is not frequently watched, present and future discussions, edit requests and requested moves should take place at: • Talk:EastEnders |
 | History of EastEnders was a Media and drama good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
 | The contents of the History of EastEnders page were merged into EastEnders and it now redirects there. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history. |
Good Article review - Failed (References, Fair Use Image Tags, Focus/Structure)
[edit]This article still needs some work to get to Good Article status. Here are my comments on this article with reference to the six required attributes of a good article:
Report Card
[edit]1. Is it well written?
- Prose/Grammar/Structure: Good
- Logical Structure: Somewhat good. Some of the sections are quite long, and may benefit from more organization into subsections.
- MoS: Good
- Jargon: Good
2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- Provides references: References are provided.
- Citation of all sources: This article has some references, but has a lot of unreferenced material. Additionally, the majority of the references are from one source, and the rest of the sources are used to reference material in the last few sentences of the article. See below for more details.
- Reliable sources: As I do not have access to the one book which is used as a reference for the majority of the article, it is hard to say. However, on the surface, the sources seem reliable.
- Original research: Again, without adequate citations, there is no way of telling whether or not this article contains original research.
3. Is it broad in its coverage?
- Addresses major aspects: Good
- Stays focused: Somewhat good. Again, some sections delve into great detail. Editors of this article should debate whether some material can be deleted, or if organization into subsections would provide a more clear presentation.
4. Is it neutral?
- Unbiased: Good
- All views: Good
5. Is it stable? Yes
6. Does it contain images?
- Tagged and captioned: Good
- Enough images: Good
- Fair Use Rationale: Eastendersearly.jpg and EastEndersAreHere1985.jpg do not have a fair use rationale. This definitely needs to be added before this article can achieve GA status.
References
[edit]The biggest problem with this article is references. Below are some examples of sections that need to be referenced (or deleted, if no reliable reference exists). This is not a complete list.
- The entire introduction.
- Conception, first paragraph
- Character creation and casting, paragraphs 2, 3, and 4.
- Early History, paragraphs 2, 3, and 4.
- Later History, paragraphs 1 and 3.
Additionally, it may be a good idea to rely on a greater variety of sources. As noted above, the vast majority of references are from Rupert Smith's book.
Two things
[edit]1. There's no mention of the pre-launch publicity campaign (trailers featuring characters introducing themselves direct to camera) which was unprecedented in British television, and 2. At first the BBC insisted on calling it a "serial". When did they finally admit it was a soap opera? -88.109.202.97 15:22, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:New ee web.JPG
[edit]
Image:New ee web.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 05:18, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Oldee.JPG
[edit]Image:Oldee.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 01:07, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Done anemone|projectors 09:57, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Eastendersearly.jpg
[edit]Image:Eastendersearly.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 07:11, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
EastEnders25
[edit]A special EastEnders ident for BBC One and the titles being changed to "EastEnders25" should be mentioned but the only source I have so far is this YouTube video. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 21:18, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
- Digital Spy have reported it now. Yay AnemoneProjectors (talk) 22:03, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Cast deaths
[edit]What's the rationale behind including these here? Everyone dies at some stage. That list is going to be huge one day if we include all the cast deaths. Plus it isnt complete.GunGagdinMoan 13:08, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
- Ask Trampikey, I'm pretty sure he's the one who originally wrote about it. Delete, not part of EastEnders history. anemoneprojectors talk 15:03, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
- I agree, the cast deaths section shouldnt be here. When I edited this article a lot a little while a go, I thought about getting rid of this section. Bleaney (talk) 16:40, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
- There, it's gone. anemoneprojectors talk 16:55, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
- I agree, the cast deaths section shouldnt be here. When I edited this article a lot a little while a go, I thought about getting rid of this section. Bleaney (talk) 16:40, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
CGI
[edit]In the "2010s" section, it says CGI was used for the first time, but wasn't the train in the episode of Lou Beale's funeral in 1988 CGI? 144.124.121.55 (talk) 00:18, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Sources
[edit]- 'EastEnders' 25th anniversary 'cost £700k' (or maybe for the main EE article, or both) –anemoneprojectors– 10:32, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
September 1984?
[edit]EastEnders was never due to start in September 1984. The BBC originally proposed January 1985. Smith and Holland favoured a November or even September 1984 start date when audiences would be higher, but the BBC never accepted that and Smith and Holland had to concede that it was impossible as Elstree had to be made operational - which would be a massive task. Also, Smith and Holland were called in to see David Reid at the BBC and the idea first put to them on March 14 1983, not in February, so I have corrected this info. My information can be verified by the book "EastEnders - The Inside Story" by Julia Smith and Tony Holland, 1987.
Great article by the way - one of the best examples of this type I have seen on Wikipedia! Lots of memories brought back, and very informative.
(Solidsandie (talk) 00:15, 13 May 2011 (UTC))
Market In Honey Lane - Not A Precursor In Any Real Sense, Apart From Similarity Of Market Setting
[edit]The Market In Honey Lane "precursor" to EastEnders idea seems to have come about because of the DVD company that released it. The assertion that it was the EastEnders "precursor" seems (largely) to stem from there and on-line "experts". It's a great way of selling DVDs, but in reality the 1960s show was not a soap opera in the sense that EastEnders was, being broken into series (the first being one episode a week) and then a shortening of the name and slight change of format (and often scheduling into obscure afternoon slots on the ITV Network) for its two episodes a week final outing. Tony Smith and Julia Holland never cited the show as an influence or precursor to their own show, and I don't believe it was. EastEnders was, from the start, far grittier and unafraid to push the boundaries with topical issues.
Do read the British Film Institute's piece on Market On Honey Lane. It contains the following quote below, and although it does mention that EastEnders partly draws on a market for its scenarios, it in no way infers that the Market In Honey Lane was a "precursor". The similarity, which IS worth mentioning and is mentioned in the Wiki article, is the setting. Here's an extract from the BFI piece - and a link to the full article - http://www.screenonline.org.uk/tv/id/1400806/index.html
FROM THE BRITISH FILM INSTITUTE - Market In Honey Lane
This soap serial, in trying to demonstrate an earthy, natural society, succeeded somehow in showing how very nice, how indomitably life-loving, how British and human and working-class life is.
Inspired to some extent by Granada TV's success with Coronation Street (ITV, 1960-), ATV's Market in Honey Lane was a very conventional TV serial, setting up minor heartbreaks and conflicts so that the writers could dissolve them, usually, in a flood of cosy sentimentality.
The series, overall, is deeply embedded in a culture; that of the Cockney proletariat with its wide boys, stoical mothers and hermetic yet threatening cosiness. It was not an earth-shaking programme, and certainly not pioneering in any revolutionary ideas in technique and production, but simply proposed itself to the casual viewer as a mildly pleasant affair.