Talk:Cold War (Doctor Who)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 17:40, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

I'll give this one a review shortly. I remember watching this one when it was first broadcast - I was quite surprised that David Warner's role wasn't more prominent (but that expectation was based on his two memorable Star Trek roles). Miyagawa (talk) 17:40, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Just realised I hadn't done this. Reviewing right now. Miyagawa (talk) 17:37, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

• No duplicate or dab links. All external links check out.

• Lead: Does the Dr Who project include a brief line in the lead about what the show is as standard? I've noticed them on other series and I have something similar in my Star Trek episode articles. I think something along the lines of "The show follows the adventures of the Doctor, a time travelling alien. In this episode..." (of course tweak it as suited).
  • I'm not against the idea, but I sort of feel like "alien time traveller the Doctor and his companion..." covers it. Glimmer721 ^talk 18:18, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
    • Yeah, that's fine actually. Miyagawa (talk) 18:23, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
• Plot: In my opinion the plot is a bit long. I think if it was reduced down to something the length of the first four paragraphs it would be better.

  Also, it would be better to include the actors names for those characters in brackets (as you have in the lead) for their first mention. For Skaldak, I'd suggest the same as I did for "Skin of Evil" in the lead for Armus.

• Production: Was there any information about the submarine set? Just curious if they built the set (it was impressive) or used a set previously used for something else (just because I know that Enterprise did that for the episode "North Star" where they used the old Western sets at Paramount instead of building new ones).

  Not from the sources I have (I'll add something if it shows up on the DVD); from the online mini-Confidential it just seemed like it was a set they had built in the studio. Glimmer721 ^talk 18:18, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

  • Well it was a very impressive set. Miyagawa (talk) 18:23, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

  Nitpick - I'd put a paragraph break in the third paragraph before "Unlike some other returning monsters, the Ice Warriors were not heavily redesigned." - that'll make the two new paragraphs roughly the same size as the first two.

  Done, that looks better. Glimmer721 ^talk 18:18, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

• Broadcast and reception: Were the ratings higher or lower than other episodes during the previous week or shortly afterwards?

  I typically don't include this, but "The Rings of Akhaten" was watched by 7.45 and "Cold War" was watched by 7.37, which isn't that notable of a jump as, say, between this and the next week. Glimmer721 ^talk 18:18, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

  • I agree, that isn't enough of a change to worry about. Miyagawa (talk) 18:23, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

That's pretty much it, although I'll have a prose run through once those bits are cleared up. I remember enjoying the episode as I always thought a naval ship would be a good setting - although I was expecting Sea Devils! Miyagawa (talk) 17:53, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

I wonder what redesigned Sea Devils would look like...anyway, I'm going to work on the plot later. I don't think I've looked at it too closely, and it's certainly a simple episode. Glimmer721 ^talk 18:18, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

I restructured the paragraphs and added the actor names, though I'm not sure if I cut a lot out. Let me know if you have more suggestions. Glimmer721 ^talk 21:59, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Great, that's better. I think this one now meets the GA criteria. Nice one. Miyagawa (talk) 22:08, 13 July 2013 (UTC)