Jump to content
 







Main menu
   


Navigation  



Main page
Contents
Current events
Random article
About Wikipedia
Contact us
Donate
 




Contribute  



Help
Learn to edit
Community portal
Recent changes
Upload file
 








Search  

































Create account

Log in
 









Create account
 Log in
 




Pages for logged out editors learn more  



Contributions
Talk
 



















Contents

   



(Top)
 


1 Game of Thrones  



1.1  Nick-D  





1.2  Comments from SandyGeorgia  
















Wikipedia:Peer review/Game of Thrones/archive5







Add links
 









Project page
Talk
 

















Read
Edit
View history
 








Tools
   


Actions  



Read
Edit
View history
 




General  



What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Get shortened URL
Download QR code
 




Print/export  



Download as PDF
Printable version
 
















Appearance
   

 






From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 

< Wikipedia:Peer review

Previous peer review

I am listing this article for a peer review in preparation for a future WP:FAC. In the previous FAC an editor noted the lack of academic and scientific sources within the article.

Any comments or feedback, especially in relation to the comprehensiveness and sourcing, would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! -- LuK3 (Talk) 18:59, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE: when you close this peer review, please be sure to remove it from Template:FAC peer review sidebar. If FA regulars have to do all the maintenance, they may stop following that very useful sidebar :) And please add the sidebar to your userpage so you can help out at Peer review! Good luck, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:36, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
SandyGeorgia of course, thank you for the heads up. -- LuK3 (Talk) 00:50, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nick-D[edit]

I'd like to offer the following comments, and in doing so I should note that I'm about halfway though watching the series for a second time, and am liking it much less than the first time around. Nick-D (talk) 06:04, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • So I went through the source again and they did not expand on that. They just said one wrote one half and the other wrote the other half. I can dig deeper to see if there are any addition references regarding the script writing. -- LuK3 (Talk) 21:32, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've added some information about the departure of the source material. I think that was one of the major critical issues, especially with the later seasons. I will try to find some more information on any filming problems. -- LuK3 (Talk) 01:43, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've trimmed down both paragraphs, mainly visitor numbers. I also added two sentences regarding the overall impact of the series on both Northern Ireland and Croatia with journal references. -- LuK3 (Talk) 01:09, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for the comments Nick-D. I should be able to start working on them today and this weekend. -- LuK3 (Talk) 12:46, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from SandyGeorgia[edit]

Starting over. First, I assume you've worked in now the sources that Nick-D requested at the last FAC? Next, disclaimer: I don't watch television. At all. I have never seen anything related to Game of Thrones, so am coming at this naive-- in case I say something stupider than usual :)

In general terms, I think the article is still a long ways from FAC ready, but that doesn't mean you can't get there. But I suspect that the article has not engaged FAC reviewers because a deep rewrite is needed.

The art of good writing is not so much about what to include, as what to leave out, and a lot could be left out here. Combined with a better structure and tighter TOC, you will be more likely to attract more reviewers.

Overall
  • Why do we have Plot and Cast sections as sub-sections of something called "Overview", which isn't really needed at all?
  • Why is Themes under Production?
  • Why do we need a one paragraph section, Title sequence, under Visual effects, which is only three paragraphs?

These are samples only; there is just a lot of choppiness because of the sections. It seems that if you would focus on the structure of the article first, sticking more closely to the TV Project Guideline, and then move on to thinking seriously about how much to leave out as opposed to what to add in, the article will become better organized.

Separately, the article is unnecessarily large, at over 10,000 words of readable prose. With a better and tighter copyedit, and removing some of the unnecessary sections, the article will be more readable and more likely to engage reviewers at FAC. I typically find that articles around 6,000 to 8,000 words of readable prose are more approachable and enjoyable. Everything in the article from "Other media" onward amounts to a series of not really necessary one-paragraph sections about items that all have their own articles. And most of the content in those sections is just filling space, and not adding to anything about this article. It could all be covered in two tightly summarized paragraphs to one section, "Other media" (to cover related shows and video games). The more tightly you summarize a large topic, the more readable it becomes, the less maintenance issues you have down the road, and the more likely to engage reviewers the article becomes. I suggest sitting down with a printed version of the article, and a red pen and the TV Manual of Style, and think about surgery: cutting, moving, re-organizing. I do gather that Game of Thrones is a Very Big Deal for TV people, but that doesn't mean a tightly summarized article won't serve our readers better. Please think about how much the writing can be trimmed, and what can be left out ... we don't have to say everything, and a trimmer article, focusing less on minutaie, will be more enjoyable. Here's one example: what is this adding to the article? Why do I need to know this very specific detail? In April 2016, the showrunners' plan was to shoot 13 more episodes after the sixth season: seven episodes in the seventh season and six episodes in the eighth. (Also see MOSNUM issue about that sentence below).

MOS nitpickery
Prose (some samples)

Taking one sample:

Principal photography for the first season was scheduled to begin on July 26, 2010; the primary location was the Paint Hall Studios in Belfast, Northern Ireland. Exterior scenes in Northern Ireland were filmed at Sandy Brae in the Mourne Mountains (standing in for Vaes Dothrak); Castle Ward (Winterfell); Saintfield Estates (the Winterfell godswood); Tollymore Forest (outdoor scenes); Cairncastle (the execution site); the Magheramorne quarry (Castle Black); and Shane's Castle (the tourney grounds). Doune Castle in Stirling, Scotland, was also used in the original pilot episode for scenes at Winterfell. The producers initially considered filming the entire series in Scotland, but decided on Northern Ireland because of the availability of studio space and tax credits.

This is 114 words, full of parentheticals that tire the reader. As an example, why are we told it "was scheduled to begin" on X date: did that date change? For some significant reason? If not, why not shorten that and combine it with the last sentence?

The producers planned to film the entire series in Scotland, with principal photography beginning in July 2010, but settled on Northern Ireland because of available studio space and tax credits. The Paint Hall Studios in Belfast, Northern Ireland was the primary filming location. Exterior scenes were filmed in the Tollymore Forest, Mourne Mountains for Vaes Dothrak, Castle Ward for Winterfell, and Saintfield Estates for the Winterfell godswood. The execution site was filmed at Cairncastle, Castle Black at the Magheramorne quarry, and the tourney grounds at Shane's Castle. Doune Castle in Stirling, Scotland, was used in the pilot episode for scenes at Winterfell.

That is 102 words, less parentheticals to read through. I am no prose guru, so feel free to ignore, but this kind of tightening is what is needed. Does the Television MOS really want us to list every filming location, which this whole section does? It feels like tiresome trivia to me, but then ... I don't watch television :) The entire filming section is just a list of places used for filming, and could just as easily be presented in a table after the more significant content now in the "Effect on locations" section. But I'm not sure what MOS TV says on that. Another sample:

Game of Thrones attracted a record viewership on HBO and has a broad, active, and international fan base. Critics have praised the series for its acting, complex characters, story, scope, and production values, although its frequent use of nudity and violence (including sexual violence) has been subject to criticism. The final season received significant critical backlash for its condensed story and creative decisions, with many considering it a disappointing conclusion. The series received 59 Primetime Emmy Awards, the most by a drama series, including Outstanding Drama Series in 2015, 2016, 2018 and 2019. Its other awards and nominations include three Hugo Awards for Best Dramatic Presentation, a Peabody Award, and five nominations for the Golden Globe Award for Best Television Series – Drama. Many critics and publications have named the show as one of the best television series of all time.

That is 140 words. Getting it down to 130, with the most significant part first:

Many critics and publications have named the show as one of the best television series of all time. Gaining a broad, active, and international fan base, Game of Thrones broke viewership records on HBO. Critics praised the series for its acting, complex characters, story, scope, and production values, although its frequent nudity and violence, including sexual violence, was criticized. The condensed story and some production decisions made in the final season received significant backlash as a disappointing conclusion. The series received 59 Primetime Emmy Awards, the most by a drama series, including Outstanding Drama Series in 2015, 2016, 2018 and 2019. Its other awards and nominations included three Hugo Awards for Best Dramatic Presentation, a Peabody Award, and five nominations for the Golden Globe Award for Best Television Series – Drama.

Another example: how much of this needs to be said-- that is, how much of this is typical for any movie or television series, and it is so significant it needs mention here? Applying the wigs was time-consuming; Emilia Clarke, for example, required about two hours to style her brunette hair with a platinum-blonde wig and braids. Other actors, such as Jack Gleeson and Sophie Turner, received frequent hair coloring.

I am just casting about the article for samples of things that can be addressed:Because the effects became more complex in subsequent seasons (including CGI creatures, fire, and water), German-based Pixomondo became the lead visual effects producer ... that construct doesn't work logically. In subsequent seasons, as the effects became more complex, including CGI creatures, fire, and water, German-based Pixomondo became the lead visual effects producer ??

Not sure what this says or why it is where it is: Language-learning company Duolingo began offering courses in High Valyrian in 2017, of which 1.2 million people signed up for between 2017 and 2020. Wherever it belongs (if it belongs) :of which ... signed up for ... ugh ...

Have you incorporated the excellent advice at WP:RECEPTION? I have not done a top-to-bottom read, but suggest that reviewers aren't engaging because the length and organization is discouraging. Think about, it's not what you include, but what you leave out, that makes for a good article. You don't need to answer any of these things I raise, as some may be personal preference, and I am not a prose guru ... just trying to give you some ideas to get the FACs unstalled. There is a whole lot of detail that feels like trivia that might not be needed. These are ideas only; ignore me if I'm clueless on TV. Good luck !!! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:27, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you SandyGeorgia for the comments! I have skimmed through them however I probably won't get editing the article until this weekend. I'll be sure to ping you for any further questions or clarifications. Thank you again. -- LuK3 (Talk) 18:24, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No problem-- I'll be rooting for you! Good luck, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:50, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Game_of_Thrones/archive5&oldid=1000323752"

Category: 
November 2020 peer reviews
 



This page was last edited on 14 January 2021, at 17:08 (UTC).

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 4.0; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.



Privacy policy

About Wikipedia

Disclaimers

Contact Wikipedia

Code of Conduct

Developers

Statistics

Cookie statement

Mobile view



Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki