Talk:Twice Upon a Time (Doctor Who)/GA1

GA Review

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: OlifanofmrTennant (talk · contribs) 19:27, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: TheDoctorWho (talk · contribs) 03:51, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

I'll take this one, expect at least the first part of my review in the next few hours. TheDoctorWho (talk) 03:51, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Lead

• The first two sentences feel rather long, consider splitting them up for easier reading. Just an example on the first one: ""Twice Upon a Time" is an episode of the British science fiction television series Doctor Who, written by Steven Moffat, directed by Rachel Talalay, and was broadcast as the thirteenth Christmas special on 25 December 2017 on BBC One." --> ""Twice Upon a Time" is a special episode of the British science fiction television series Doctor Who. It was broadcast on BBC One on 25 December 2017 as the programmes thirteenth Christmas special. The episode was written by Steven Moffat and directed by Rachel Talalay.  Done
• Is it really fair to call Bradley a guest star considering he received main billing?

I don't know if there is a better term. He is a guest actor in a starring role.

• I debate whether the information about An Adventure in Space and Time is lead material? Definitely important in production, but I'm not sure if it's relevant enough to this episode directly.
  • Removed
• "while his other companions make guest appearances – Jenna Coleman as Clara Oswald and Matt Lucas as Nardole." - I'd recommend shifting the character names to be ahead of performers names since the beginning of the sentence references the companions. Otherwise reword it, "while Jenna Coleman and Matt Lucas make appearance as former Twelfth Doctor companions Clara Oswald and Nardole." Done
• Wikilink First World War Done
• The second paragraph is chalked full of information, which while true, isn't in the article directly. This violates MOS:LEAD as the lead paragraphs should be a summary of the remainder of the article and isn't sourced. Particularly this is in reference to the information about Gold, Akinola, Christmas Invasion, Church on Ruby Road, New Year's Specials. It will need added to the production section and sourced.  Done
• "Series 11" --> "series 11"  Done

Plot

• Seems fine, technically one word too long, but I won't hold this review back because of that.

Production

• Nearly all of that first paragraph feels like writing information... who wrote the episode, why that person wrote it
  • Merged with writing
• "lose the coveted 25 December slot" - "coveted " reads a little bit promotional, consider rewording  Done
• "before he returned to Doctor Who in 2024" wikilink Doctor Who as the first major mention outside of the lead
• "Series 14 --> "series 14"  Done
• This section could be further illustrated. Commons has images of Bradley or Gatiss or Talalay. At least one, if not all.
  • Added one of Moffat, Bradley and Talalay.

Writing

• I'd suggest moving the first paragraph of writing to be the last paragraph for better flow  Done
• "Russell T. Davies" --> Russell T Davies  Done
• "playing the Brigadier's grandfather" - link Brigadier Lethbridge-Stewart  Done
• "The episode features several call backs and references to previous episodes of the programme including the use of archive footage of past Doctors." - the part about archive footage feels out of place. That's already mentioned in filming too, perhaps just remove it here. The rest of the sentence and the following one is in the proper place.  Done

Casting

• Wikilink David Bradley as first major mention outside of the lead  Done
• I'd suggest adding the year An Adventure in Space in Time was broadcast  Done
• The wikilink of First Doctor in this section should be shifted from the third to second paragraph.  Done
• "Mark Gatiss, also writer of nine episodes" - "also" feels a bit weird here, reword or remove  Done
• "Ben respectively" --> "Ben, respectively,"  Done

Filming

• "The episode was written by Steven Moffat" --> irrelevant here and honestly not directly mentioned in the writing section, shift up there  Done
• "Talalay recreate several" --> "Talalay recreated several"  Done
• "Around 100 extras were on set" --> feels slightly more like casting information  Done
• "Capaldi's regeneration was shot on the final day of filming." - 10 July or 19 July?  Done
• "had imput on" --> "had input on"  Done
• "Following his regeneration Capaldi was gifted" - recommend a slight reword to make it clear that this was a real world event, obviously Capaldi didn't really regenerate  Done
• "The recreated set of the original TARDIS" --> "The recreated set of the First Doctor's TARDIS" - technically the Doctor's TARDIS is always the original as it just continues to update its own design  Done
• "respective TARDIS to" --> "respective TARDISes to"  Done
• "last episode of the 1966 story is one" - just name The Tenth Planet here, feels like it's being danced around despite the fact it's been named multiple times  Done

Broadcast and reception

• Contains no broadcast information (something else that is technically in violation of MOS:LEAD since it's up there). The BBC One broadcast at minimum should be added. Preferably other countries too, America (particularly this one since figures on BBCA are given), Canada, Australia, etc.
  • Added basic info

Critical reception

• received generally positive reviews - perhaps expand on this, doesn't look like any of the positive reviews are mentioned beyond this brief portion

Overall

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.

I still need to do a source spot check, but I'll wait until the above is responded to. I'll also give it a second read through at that time. TheDoctorWho (talk) 06:20, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Source spotcheck:

• "In January 2016, Moffat announced that he would step down as the programme's showrunner after the tenth series, to be replaced by Chris Chibnall beginning with the eleventh series in 2018, but a 2017 Christmas special was not mentioned in the plans at that time." - Y
• "The scene was the last to be filmed for the episode and while Coleman was willing to come back to film, timing between the filming of this special and her work in Victoria was difficult to arrange. Moffat said "How many times have I killed that girl off and she was right there in my last shot! It's absolutely extraordinary. The unkillable Coleman!"" - Y
• "It was simultaneously released in the United States by BBC America where it was seen by 2.2 million viewers on" - Y the source says it was first broadcast at 9pm on BBC America, I'm assuming this episode did not air for the first time at 2am on BBC One? (simultaneously released --> broadcast on the same day)
• "The episode was a finalist in the category of Best Dramatic Presentation, Short Form for the 2018 Hugo Awards." - Y
• "In June 2018 an audiobook version, read by Gatiss, was released." - Y

The article looks much better, appears there's just one or two more things above to be addressed (as well as the BBCA broadcast) and we'll be good to go. I'll still give it a final read through at that point, but I don't expect to find much else. TheDoctorWho (talk) 03:09, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

@TheDoctorWho: done Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 03:32, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Looks good, passing! TheDoctorWho (talk) 04:12, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

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.