Talk:The Christmas Invasion/GA1

GA Review

Passed. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 05:58, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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

Nominator: DoctorWhoFan91 (talk · contribs) 08:32, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: ClaudineChionh (talk · contribs) 06:29, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will start the review after I have rewatched the episode in the next 24–48 hours. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 06:29, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! And have fun rewatching. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 06:40, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This needs quite a lot of copy-editing before it gets to GA standard. What really stands out are many long, run-on sentences that could be broken up into two or three sentences, and awkward phrasing. I think you could benefit from working through Tony1's excellent writing guides and tutorials, especially User:Tony1/How to improve your writing § Achieving flow and User:Tony1/Exercises in textual flow.

Do you think this is something you can work on within seven days? ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 10:24, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can, yeah. I actually started a little CE just now, will do more when I get the time. Sorry, it was early days as an editor, I didn't write the articles that well. Thank you for the review, I can see what all I need to change.DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 10:34, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done most of them, responded in the images sub=heading, and might expand the reception section, so will copy-edit as the same time as that. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 11:51, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a huge improvement! I think only the reception section still needs editing? And I guess if we can't find a suitable image for the infobox, I don't think that should hold it back. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 05:45, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed/responded to all issues. Though I have found more reviews for the episode and would like to expand the reception section. I'll ping you when I'm done (probably in a few days). Thank you for the review, it has been great and very helpful. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 16:58, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DoctorWhoFan91: I'm happy with what I see, great job! I'll be travelling from Monday to Thursday so I'm not sure what my internet access or availability will be like. I'm happy to pass this now if you like; that doesn't stop you from continuing to improve it. — ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 03:08, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure then, you can pass it now. Thank you for the review! DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 05:52, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Copy-editing

Doesn't make sense as written Resolved
- Writing: The production of the special, and the entire series, began before the broadcast of the first series, and therefore so none of Davies' team if the script will ever see production. Should this read "none of Davies' team knew ..."? "So" is redundant after "therefore". Done
Meaning is clear but style/phrasing can be improved
- Lead Resolved
  - First paragraph includes a long run-on sentence This episode features the first full-episode appearance of Tennant as the Doctor and is also the first specially produced Christmas special in the programme's history which was commissioned following the success of the first series earlier in the year to see how well the show could do at Christmas.
    - Try breaking this sentence up. Done
    - First occurrence of "Tennant" in text should include "David". Done
  - Second paragraph (starting In the episode, principally set in London) is also one long run-on sentence that could be broken up. Done
- Filming Resolved
  - Another paragraph made up of one long sentence: starting The episode shared a production block Done
- Casting
  - Sentence starting This special was the first full episode starring David Tennant as the Tenth Doctor could be broken up; maybe the costume change warrants a sentence of its own. Done
  - I know it's a quote from Tennant but is pocket acting a common phrase?
    - No, I will try to add what he meant. Done
  - Sentence starting Penelope Wilton returned as Harriet Jones is really clunky and also repeats some of the Writing section. Done
  - Sentence starting Noel Clarke and Camille Coduri also returned as Mickey Smith and Jackie Tyler respectively is also clunky. Done (though you can check, I'm not sure the sentence seems right even now)
    I'm thinking the (now) second sentence could be made a bit more compact: "They were both set to appear in many episodes in the second series, so as soon as the success of the first series seemed assured, their contracts for the second series were drawn up." Done
- Broadcast and reception (see MOS:SECTIONCAPS) Done
  - Sentence starting The Canadian presentation on the CBC on 26 December 2005 was hosted by Piper is another long one that could be broken up. Done
  - Sentence starting The performance of Tennant was praised is also too long. Done
  - The episode was characterised as one of many of Davies’ attempts at “epic” is the start of another paragraph made up of one long sentence. Done
Other changes
- Plot
  - Powell Estate: this is a fictional housing estate, right? (I don't know London very well.) Is the name significant or could we just say they "get a taxi back home" as we already have takes Rose back to her old estate at the start of this paragraph? Done
  - Wikilink Sonic screwdriver? Done

Close paraphrasing?

Resolved

Writing: I wasn't comfortable about the awkward phrasing of Davies wished to have an adversary having an prosthetic face using the actor's eyes and mouth, and always found the idea of Santa, an old man creeping into children's rooms at night, creepy and checked the Pixley source, and it looks like this might be a case of close paraphrasing while also introducing ambiguity. You could summarise the conception of each monster (Sycorax and Santa) separately rather than in one long sentence. Done

I made a small correction: an a prosthetic face ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 05:00, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~I haven't checked for close paraphrasing elsewhere yet.~~ Having done a spot check of sources, I'm less concerned about this now. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 05:39, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing

The Pixley 2006 reference belongs in References (maybe a separate Bibliography heading), not in External links. Done

Source spot check

Four random numbers (as at Special:Permalink/1253276757): 18, 4, 21, 7.

[4] Pixley 2006, p. 4.
- The production of the special, along with the entirety of the second series, began before the broadcast of the first series, and therefore none of Davies' team knew if the script would ever see production. Verified
- Casting of Clarke and Coduri Verified
[7] Pixley 2006, p. 14.
- The episode's opening shot is a repeat of the opening shot of "Rose". Verified
- It was also confirmed at the BAFTA preview of the series one finale that Billie Piper would return for the Christmas Special and all 13 episodes of the second series. Verified
[18] Fullerton: In 2014, over 7,000 readers of Radio Times voted "The Christmas Invasion" as the greatest Doctor Who Christmas special with over a quarter of the votes going to it, 24.92%, a whole 10% more votes than the second favourite. ? Maybe I can't seem to load the poll results in the Wayback Machine version (and the original is gone) and 24.92% is just under a quarter. We could probably just round it to "a quarter of the votes". Done (it was 'around', not over- sorry, I had assumed that the edits before mine would have been correct )
[21] Eccleston and Tennant DVD Verified

Images

Resolved

Infobox: I'll admit that sourcing media is out of my comfort zone. I see that BBC images that were being used as episode thumbnails for this era were recently deleted under F7. It would be nice to have an image in the infobox; I'll poke around Commons to see if there's anything that could work.
- I'll check too
  - I have found nothing good enough to use as infobox image
    - Maybe I got spoiled by reviewing The Name of the Doctor first. Given that other episodes from this era have the same issue, I think we'll have to accept an imageless infobox. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email)
Santa: I know this is highly subjective, but I feel these other photos look more threatening than the current one:
- c:File:Dr Who (2427559405).jpg
- c:File:280808-032 CPS (3997999369).jpg
  - I would like to keep this one as is, the vibe in the episode was also about as terrifying as the current pic
Sycorax: Again, this one might be a more threatening/monstrous example: c:File:Sycorax- Something is coming (3151324294).jpg Done

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.