The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that when Hollyoaks changed Juliet Nightingale's appearance for a storyline involving drugs, actress Niamh Blackshaw was glad to get rid of her character's side ponytail?
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles
This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBT studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBT studiesLGBT articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soap Operas, an effort to build consistent guidelines for and improve articles about soap operas and telenovelas on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit WikiProject Soap Operas, where you can join the project and/or the discussion.Soap OperasWikipedia:WikiProject Soap OperasTemplate:WikiProject Soap Operassoap opera articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion.
To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles
Hey, I'm going to be reviewing this article. Expect comments by the end of the week. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 19:26, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"also Quinn" → "also known as Quinn" or something similar
Since Quinn was only her surname, using "also" is typically the common practice for every soap character that I've seen? – DarkGlow (contribs • talk) 21:44, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Try reducing the amounts of quotes in #Casting_and_characterisation.
Optional, but linking sources in the "|website=" parameter helps readers.
I'm slightly confused, this referring to the Female First source? It's the only source a link, so I assume so; it does not have a Wikipedia entry. – DarkGlow (contribs • talk) 01:48, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I was just referring to references in general. At second glance I now see they were already linked. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 01:56, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Some references from Digital Spy are missing authors.
Progress
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by SL93 (talk) 11:45, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
... that when Hollyoaks changed Juliet Nightingale's appearance for a storyline involving drugs, actress Niamh Blackshaw was glad to get rid of her character's side ponytail? Source: [1]
Created by DarkGlow (talk). Self-nominated at 12:45, 23 March 2021 (UTC).[reply]
Date (as a GA), length and hook all fine. However @DarkGlow:, the Storylines section is completely unsourced and that needs to be fixed before this can proceed. QPQ not needed as the nominator only has 1 credit and no close paraphrasing. Please ping me once that is sorted and I will have another look. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 08:42, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@The C of E: On WP:SOAPS, it is stated that "storyline sections do not require sourcing, as the programme itself acts as the source. These sections can be verified by watching the series." Therefore, it's very rare that a storyline section of a soap character will ever have inline citations. 99% of the section is sourced in the development/relationship sections, but if it's still going to be an issue despite the consensus on WP:SOAPS, the section can technically be removed as it's not essential imo, but I see no reason to do that. – DarkGlow • 09:47, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a little unsure as to how that WikiProject guidance stands up compared to WP:BURDEN. It has to be more that "just watch the programme" in my book. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 12:19, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@The C of E:MOS:TVPLOT, while not specifically about fictional characters, is applicable to talking about the plot of a series. It states that plot "may be sourced from the works themselves". The work is the series, which acts as the series. – DarkGlow • 12:29, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@The C of E: From prior precedent, it seems that plot-related sections are exempt from the "every paragraph needs a citation" rule, unless the hook has to do with a plot point or if there is plot-related analysis. I haven't taken a look at the article yet, but if there are no other issues this should probably be allowed to move forward. Narutolovehinata5tccsdnew 04:26, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I bow to your experience on that, still seems a little out of kilter with standard practice but good to go then. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 06:25, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]