Talk:Holby City series 18

Holby City series 18 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
January 3, 2019	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on February 1, 2019.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that a storyline about domestic abuse from the eighteenth series of Holby City sparked 177 calls to the BBC's support line?

BBC Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject BBC, an attempt to better organise information in articles related to the BBC. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join us as a member. You can also visit the BBC Portal.BBCWikipedia:WikiProject BBCTemplate:WikiProject BBCBBC articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tasks for WikiProject BBC:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Improve BBC, BBC News (TV channel) and BBC News to Good Article status following previous reviews, create BBC Computer Literacy Project (in light of forthcoming 30th anniversary)
Cleanup : Chucklevision - references and general clean-up, Pebble Mill Studios - over-detailed and long, BBC World Service Television - unreferenced and confusing
Copyedit : BBC News, Broadcasting House
Expand : Top 20 start-class BBC articles with most importance: BBC Japan, BBC World Service Television, BBC Lifestyle, BBC Two Northern Ireland
NPOV : Criticism of the BBC (See comments)
Stubs : Stub-Class BBC articles
Other : *Restructure the category
- Add infoboxes to the BBC articles without infoboxes
- Add free-use images to biographical articles where possible
- Add references to Goa Mix (see assessment) and Coat of arms of the BBC
- Return Dad's Army to a Good article. (See comments)
- Reassess BBC following improvements to article.

Television: British / Episode coverage / Holby 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 British television task force (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by the Holby task force (assessed as High-importance).

Plot descriptions cannot be copied from other sources, including official sources, unless these can be verified to be public domain or licensed compatibly with Wikipedia. They must be written in original language to comply with Wikipedia's copyright policy. In addition, they should only briefly summarize the plot; detailed plot descriptions may constitute a derivative work. See Wikipedia's Copyright FAQ.

Twenty-eight day data

For viewing figures, are we keeping consistency with previous articles and using seven day data figures, or using the updated, usually higher twenty-eight day data figures? 86.132.177.64 (talk) 14:00, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Holby City (series 18)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Bilorv (talk · contribs) 00:28, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this shortly. Sorry to see that it's been languishing in the queue for such a long time. A couple of quick thoughts:

Are there any promotional posters, DVD covers etc. that can be used in the infobox (under fair use)?
The "Critical response" section looks almost empty. Are there not more reviews for various episodes? How were the premiere or the finale received? What were critics' opinions of various narrative arcs and characters in this series?

— Bilorv_(c)(talk) 00:28, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking on this review! I know it's a fairly big article so I appreciate it. No fair use content that can be used for these types of series articles. Yes, I might be able to locate some bits from critics etc. to place in the critical response section. Thanks again, Soaper1234 - talk 10:11, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've added some more critical response, but there isn't loads out there. Soaper1234 - talk 11:12, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks. The expanded version looks good. Here are the first batch of comments on the article; I've just got the lead and some more episode summaries to look through, which I should be able to do in a few hours. — Bilorv_(c)(talk) 19:32, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Bilorv: Thank you so much for your fast response! I wasn't expecting it so soon. I've responded to your improvements, so just let me know

- Soaper1234 - talk 23:56, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And thanks for your fast replies! I've left a few more comments under "Second batch". Once these are addressed, I'll be happy to pass the article. — Bilorv_(c)(talk) 00:24, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Bilorv: I've responded to your comments, some with answers, some with a

Done. Soaper1234 - talk 11:11, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for the quick responses. After one small edit, I'm satisfied that the article meets all six GA criteria, so that's a pass for GA! — Bilorv_(c)(talk) 12:05, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Bilorv: Such excellent news! Thank you so much for taking the time out to complete this review. An great start to the new year. All the best, Soaper1234 - talk 12:22, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Episodes

If I'm understanding the note right, the figures given excluded simulcast data for consistency, right? It might be worth adding to the last sentence: "so it has been excluded". But then some episodes (e.g. #6) have overnight ratings instead, presumably because the episode didn't make the top 30 on BBC One that week. It's worth mentioning in the note that viewing figures are for 7 days (right?) unless they are specified as "overnight".
- Done The figure is actually a combined rating from BBC One and BBC One HD, so I have updated the note to reflect this. All the figures (unless specified) are 28 days. Soaper1234 - talk 23:17, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
There are quite a few seas of blue that need to be reworked. I see them in #1, #2, #4, #5, #8, #11. For instance, we open in #1 with "Cardiothoracic surgical registrar Mo Effanga". The links are certainly not paired as I expected them. This is difficult to rephrase but perhaps this works: "Mo Effanga (Chizzy Akudolu) is a registrar of cardiothoracic surgery; she has decided ..." Sometimes there are simple solutions e.g. (#4) "CT2 doctor Arthur Digby" (don't include "doctor" in the first link). Certainly the instances of three links in a row need rephrasing, and if it can be done eloquently then the double links should be rewritten as well.
- Hopefully this Done, but let me know what you think. Thanks for pointing out this to me as I never realised that SOB was a thing! Soaper1234 - talk 23:17, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
All plot lengths are between 100 and 200 words, so I'm happy that they're of consistent length and don't exceed the MOS:TVPLOT upper limit.

Production

Can we mention somewhere that the series had no break following the previous series—that is, the series 18 premiere aired a week after the series 17 finale, in the same timeslot?
- Done Soaper1234 - talk 23:29, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"'will they, won't they?'" could perhaps link the wiktionary entry wikt:will-they-won't-they.
- Done Soaper1234 - talk 23:29, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The sentences on Harper talking about the standalone episode needs reference to a date. For instance: "In October 2015, Harper confirmed that a standalone episode was currently being filmed, to air in January 2016."
- Done Soaper1234 - talk 23:29, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"especially around the time of Casualty's thirtieth anniversary" — When is this anniversary? Well, 6 September 2016 based on our article on the show, but this needs mentioning in the prose.
- Done Soaper1234 - talk 23:29, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"Too Old for This Shift" needs an airdate mention (and I'd maybe only mention the month that it was announced in—June).
- Done - I've mentioned the airdate as the date of the announcement is already mentioned. Soaper1234 - talk 23:29, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The October 2015 date needs mentions again in the sentences: "In an interview with Daniel Kilkelly of Digital Spy" and "Harper teased a ..."
- Done Soaper1234 - talk 23:29, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cast

There are some more seas of blue to rework e.g. "Guy Henry appears as chief executive officer and consultant general surgeon Henrik Hanssen".
- I've tried my best here to get it Done. See what you think and let me know. Soaper1234 - talk 23:54, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"making to decision to 'kill-off' his character" — No need for the quotes (or dash) and kill off can be linked for explanation.
- Done Soaper1234 - talk 23:39, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reception

"soap opera EastEnders" is another sea of blue.
- Done - Soaper1234 - talk 23:46, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Generally when things are nominated for awards but do not win, we just say "nominated". Hence you don't need "although it did not win" and "with other nominees losing out on their respective awards". For the "Best Drama Storyline", we can rephrase to avoid repetition of titles: "The storylines "Arthur's death", "Fletch saves the day!", and "Zosia and Ollie's romance" were longlisted in the "Best Drama Storyline" category; the first two were then shortlisted and "Arthur's death" was announced as winner." Then do a similar thing for "Best Drama Storyline".
- Done - Soaper1234 - talk 23:46, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Other

Some Digital Spy references have Hachette Filipacchi UK as publisher rather than Hearst Magazines UK. Is this a mistake?
- Done - fixed this. Soaper1234 - talk 23:38, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've made some (hopefully) uncontroversial copyedits and reference fixes in this edit, and archived references in this edit.
- Brilliant, thank you. Soaper1234 - talk 23:38, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Second batch

Per criterion 2(d), I've a couple of checks for copyright violation, and nothing turned up (as expected).
More copyediting here. Undo any of it if you feel it worsens the article.
#26 says "However, he realises that he cannot lie to Arthur and he should not act differently." Who should act differently to what exactly?
- Done - changed to "However, Dom realises that he cannot lie to Arthur and he should not act differently around him because he has cancer." Soaper1234 - talk 11:09, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
#30 says "Zosia is detached from Oliver while working so he calls her cold." I'm not sure exactly what "calls her cold" means here.
- It quite literally means that Oliver calls Zosia cold. Would you like this changed? Soaper1234 - talk 11:09, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - I've changed it myself to "Zosia is detached from Oliver while working, so he tells her that she is "cold"." — Bilorv_(c)(talk) 12:05, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
#46 says "She is impressed when Jasmine suggests that Herzig device for Valerie". I don't know what this means.
- Done - changed to "Jac is impressed when Jasmine suggests that they use Herzig device for Valerie" Soaper1234 - talk 11:09, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
How long is each episode? I'd briefly mention this under "Production".
- Done - Soaper1234 - talk 11:09, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Per MOS:TITLEABSENTBOLD, we don't bold the "eighteenth series" in the lead.
- Done - Soaper1234 - talk 11:09, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The first sentence has a sea of blue (I'd recommend de-linking "television series", which is perhaps an overlink anyway).
- Done - Soaper1234 - talk 11:09, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The lead's second paragraph should use past tense ("appeared" and "starred"). We use present tense for fiction but the cast/acting details are real events so they should use past tense. I've also noticed that the same changes need to be made in the first paragraph of "Overview" (under "Cast").
- Done - Soaper1234 - talk 11:09, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"attacked by an aggressive partner, who is married to a woman" – Not sure the gender of the partner really matters. Try "attacked by an aggressive partner, who is married".
- Done - Soaper1234 - talk 11:09, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]