Talk:Thasmin

Thasmin 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.
Review: January 1, 2025. (Reviewed version).

LGBTQ+ studies

This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies

Doctor Who Low‑importance

	Doctor Who portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Doctor Who, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Doctor Who and its spin-offs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this notice, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Doctor WhoWikipedia:WikiProject Doctor WhoTemplate:WikiProject Doctor WhoDoctor Who
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

"I have loved being with you, Yaz’: Doctor Who, Thasmin and brilliant lesbian futures"
"Casual queerness and desire lines in Doctor Who"
"'Martha Jones is a lesbian': Queer (re) interpretations of companions in Doctor Who"

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Thasmin/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Pokelego999 (talk · contribs) 21:29, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: OlifanofmrTennant (talk · contribs) 08:32, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Saw this and would love to do review it. Unfortunatly I may not get around to writing the review for a few days due to both on and off wiki commitments Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 08:32, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to review it too, I should have been quicker. I hope you did Thasmin more justice than Chibnall did^[Joke]. Best of luck with the reviewing! DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 16:31, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Lead

Define ship for those unaware
- Done. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 18:24, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

History

"This spawned considerable fan-works, including memes and slash fiction, which expanded the ship's popularity in the fandom" missing period
"Special episode "Revolution of the Daleks"" maybe list what its a special for
Series 13 is linked three times
- Fixed all three of these. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 18:24, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
section is quite long so maybe break it up with subheading
Ref 8 needs to be archived.

Reception

Ref 17 in prose is listed as "/Film" in the references is listed as "SlashFilm"

References

Cut the "| Radio Times" in the various Radio Times refs
- Done. Let me know if I missed any. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 18:24, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Overall

Checked odd numbered refs and everything lines up. That's all ping me when done. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 22:51, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@OlifanofmrTennant made changes where necessary. Let me know if the subheading works fine because finding a split is iffy. Additionally, ref 8 won't archive no matter how many times I try, so I'm not quite sure what to do for it. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 05:35, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If your using IA bot then just archive it manually Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 06:48, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@OlifanofmrTennant how do you do that? Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 18:56, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Go to Archive.org the way back machine is on the homepage just enter the link and then fill in the |archive-url parameter Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 19:02, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@OlifanofmrTennant done. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 19:16, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Pokelego999: great! I'll do one last sweep and if nothing else pops up Ill pass it. Additionally due to the amount of good content you produce would you have any intrest it signing up for the 2025 wikicup? The rules have changed to allow late sign ups so you still can throught the year. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 00:18, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that a popular ship between two characters in the television series Doctor Who, dubbed Thasmin, was later adapted into the show at the suggestion of lead actress Jodie Whittaker?

Source: https://bleedingcool.com/tv/doctor-who-how-shippers-saved-the-show-with-thasmin-love-story/

"The love story between The Doctor and Yaz was originally created by shippers as a slashfic meme. Jodie Whittaker saw them and suggested to Chibnall that it be made canon in the show, made text instead of subtext, and ended up giving it life in the show's final season."

- Reviewed:
- Comment: Wasn't sure whether to class this as newly created or recent GA promo due to its circumstances, so just left it on the default template.

Created by Pokelego999 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 22:04, 1 January 2025 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

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

Hook eligibility:

Cited:
Interesting:
Other problems: - will address below

QPQ: None required.

Overall: Splendid work Pokelego999, looking forward to your future contributions to DYK! New enough, by both GA promotion date and creation date. Congratulations on attaining GA status with such quick turnover! Earwig detects low similarity with sources used within the article. QPQ not needed as the nominator has below 5 nominations. There are two things I would like to address before approving the hook. I wanted to discuss with you whether the term "ship" should be used in the hook rather than a less jargonistic term. The GA reviewer noted the same, and I'm wondering if "pairing" or another term would be more accessible for a general audience. In addition, I am curious if there are additional sources for the hook aside from Bleeding Cool that could serve to back it up. It is not as much of an issue, but I am curious if other agencies had covered the same interaction between Whittaker and Chibnall. Ornithoptera (talk) 00:00, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Ornithoptera: Perhaps "romantic pairing" with a link to the shipping article would suffice for simplicity's sake? Additionally, I do believe other sources mention this, as I have seen it get brought up in brief across other sources, but Bleeding Cool mentioned it the most directly for the purposes of the article, and is what the statement for this DYK is cited to in the article, so I do not believe there should be an issue there, since Bleeding Cool is a reliable source per WP:VG/RS. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 00:10, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the quick response Pokelego999! Romantic pairing sounds like a good idea to me, could you propose the alt hook in your reply? I will approve of that shortly. Also, thank you for the clarification. Seems like apart from that, everything should be good on my end! Wonderful work, and looking forward to your future work! Ornithoptera (talk) 00:17, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Ornithoptera: could you clarify by alt hook? Do you mean a second hook, or an alteration to the original hook? Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 00:45, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My bad, I should have specified! You are welcome to do either, but in my experience, a second hook is proposed with the proposed rewording and then approved from there. Ornithoptera (talk) 01:01, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Ornithoptera: How is that done? I'm admittedly unfamiliar with the process here. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 01:04, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thank you for asking Pokelego999, typically it would go something like "ALT0a: ...that [blurb]". Here's an example from my DYK nomination of Salmon n' Bannock if you want to see it in practice, and another one just in case! Ornithoptera (talk) 01:18, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ALT0a: ... that a popular ship between two characters in the television series Doctor Who, dubbed Thasmin, was later adapted into the show at the suggestion of lead actress Jodie Whittaker?

Like this? Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 01:24, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, but with the changes that we had discussed! You can alter the hook for ALT0a with what we've discussed and I'll give it the needed approval! Ornithoptera (talk) 04:26, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, woops, brain farted and forgot to actually include the new content in there. Here:

ALT0a: ... that a popular romantic pairing between two characters in the television series Doctor Who, dubbed Thasmin, was later adapted into the show at the suggestion of lead actress Jodie Whittaker? Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 03:08, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above hook is pretty long at 190 characters and thus would probably fall under WP:DYKTRIM. Perhaps something like: ALT0b: ... that a popular romantic pairing from Doctor Who was later adapted into the show at the suggestion of lead actress Jodie Whittaker? Sometimes, it's not actually necessary to mention the article subject by name in a hook. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:13, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]