Talk:Doctor Who series 13

GA prep

I took this from the GA review and will remove topics as they are adressed.

Casting

• More behind-the-scenes information about the casting and characters would be good, too. Here's a video about Dan, which is a good place to start.

Production

• This whole section (especially "Development") suffers a little from WP:PROSELINE: it seems like information was added as the series was filmed and released, and now it struggles with consistency and relevance.
• It's also largely based around announcements instead of information: "[person] wrote/directed/starred in [episode]", instead of e.g. "[person] focused the story on the relationship between [X and Y]". There's a whole playlist of behind-the-scenes content that would be a goldmine for this stuff. The Doctor Who Magazine Yearbook also looks ripe with information.

Writing

• I know Chibnall was notoriously quiet when it came to discussing his work, but this section could really benefit from some actual information about the writing process and decisions. Series 5 is probably the best example of this. Right now, the section basically just lists writers and would-be writers.
• Replace the source for Maxine Alderton. Consider removing "core writer" altogether, since she was ultimately only credited for co-writing a single episode anyway.
• First sentence of the second paragraph is messy; consider cutting it down to simply "Ed Hime and Pete McTighe, both of whom had written for the eleventh and twelfth series, were originally scheduled to write for the thirteenth". The Chibnall quote should also be paraphrased and/or significantly chopped.

Filming

• If possible, this section should be expanded, particularly with filming locations (and dates if possible, though I'm doubtful).
• I'd recommend looking for interviews with the directors for more information about filming. Good places to start: [1] [2] [3]
• {{Failed verification}} tag needs addressing.

Music

• There's an interview with Akinola in the aforementioned Yearbook which may be relevant. If not, this section should be merged with "Development".

Release

Promotion

• "the social media accounts for Doctor Who went offline"—they did a lot more than that, according to the source.
• There's definitely more promotion to be mentioned here, even if it's just the behind-the-scenes content that was released.

Home media

• Expand this section with some prose; don't just rely on the table alone. See series 5.

Reception

• This section is where the bulk of the problems lie; it's basically non-existent. Again, series 5 is a great example.

Ratings

• A table is not enough; this section needs details. Add context to the viewership numbers, give some international figures, discuss the Appreciation Index. It's a pretty table, but it needs context. Two or three paragraphs should be fine, but one may be all you need (especially considering the length of this series).

References

• I'd highly recommend archiving every online source for preservation.
• There's quite a bit of inconsistency among the references (based on this revision).
  • Outlets are linked in some instances but not in others (refs 2, 4–8, 13, 16–19, 21–22, 25, 31–32, 39–42, 46–48).
  • There's a little too much reliance on fansites for my liking—Doctor Who News and Doctor Who TV in particular, but CultBox also looks like a WordPress fansite with few credentials and little editorial oversight. Look for alternative sources wherever possible.

Problems left as of Questions? four OLIfanofmrtennant (she/her) 05:37, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Doctor Who series 14 which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 05:23, 3 May 2024 (UTC)