Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Doctor Who (2005–present)/archive1

Doctor Who (2005–present)

The topic was promoted by Kyle Peake via NovemBot (talk) 08:10, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Doctor Who is a British science fiction television show which began in 1963 and resumed airing in 2005, after having ceased broadcasting in 1989. The revived version of the show, though a continuation, made many changes from the original series, most notably longer episodes and more self-contained episodes, interspersed with occasional multi-part stories, structured into loose story arcs, instead of multi-episode serials of shorter length. 14 series and various specials have been broadcast as of February 2025, with another series close to broadcast.

Contributor(s): Alex 21, Chompy Ace, DoctorWhoFan91, Glimmer721, OlifanofmrTennant, TheDoctorWho

A number of editors have improved the articles relating to the revived series to GA status. This topic is a comprehensive set of all of its series and quasi-series up till now, which together meet the criteria listed at WP:GT?.(~~Series 15 is at PR, but it's basically done, so I'll formally close it by tomorrow~~ edit-peer review done) They have similar layouts and are connected through, links, categories, and templates. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 20:05, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support as contributor. Fun fact of the six open GTCs WP:DRWHO has 3 of them. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 20:33, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

changes made, discussion became unhelpful, collapsed

Can this be moved to the title "Doctor Who (2005–present)", rather than "Doctor Who (2005-present)"? -- Alex_21_TALK 20:04, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see any difference (if it's about apostrophes, then there was an issue with it regarding nom creation, so I had to do it without them). DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 20:17, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@DoctorWhoFan91: "Doctor Who (2005–present)" has an en-dash, "Doctor Who (2005-present)" has a hyphen-minus. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:30, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see. I actually pasted the notification on all the articles, so if it needs moving, it probably needs to be edited on every page too? DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 23:11, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That would be correct, yes. En-dash is the correct usage for date ranges. -- Alex_21_TALK 09:45, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I meant that 20 article talk pages would have to be edited, so is there a faster way to do it than manually- if yeah, then the page can be moved at the same time. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 10:15, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

20 article talk pages were already edited, I'm sure it'll be a piece of cake, though the community can support you with such a heavy load. -- Alex_21_TALK 20:08, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for moving the page- I forgot that the prev page would still be a redirect, so change is technically not required on the 20 articles. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 20:53, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

20 talk pages still use "2005-present", an incorrect usage of dashes. Do you intend to correct this? -- Alex_21_TALK 07:10, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If this passes, then the bot will add it with an en-dash; if it fails, it will get removed. Given that the redirect is working, I do not intend to do it. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 08:20, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunate editing practices. I'll fix your mistakes for you once again. -- Alex_21_TALK 20:11, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would have done so myself if more than one editor said they had an issue with you. You don't need to be passive-agressive with the "I'll fix your mistakes for you once again". Or mention me 19 times in the edit summaries lol.DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 20:33, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Burden lies on the editor who made the mistake and is aware of it; you were cited on why we use en-dashes. -- Alex_21_TALK 23:43, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DoctorWhoFan91 is being helpful. Why are you so hostile? Cremastra (talk) 00:44, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not. I'm educating. What would be helpful would be fixing mistakes that are known, which I happily did. Thank you for your opinion. -- Alex_21_TALK 01:00, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What would be even more helpful would be waiting for someone else to also mention they have an issue with it, instead of leaving passive-aggressive edit summaries. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 06:49, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's not that it's an issue, it's that it's a standard Wikipedia MoS. -- Alex_21_TALK 07:46, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, go ahead and fix hyphens to en-dashes across the whole of wikipedia while you are at it. Why wait to change a re-direct, especially ones that will be replaced with a pass or fail soon enough. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 09:31, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, go ahead and fix hyphens to en-dashes across the whole of wikipedia while you are at it. There's bots that do that, how is that related to the issue at hand? -- Alex_21_TALK 20:21, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's related bcs you are editing 20 pages which are linking correctly via a redirect. And the 20 pages don't need to be changed with haste, bcs they are temporary until this passes or fails. You bring up MoS to say that those changes were needed-but we are not in article space, the pages were talk pages. I WP:IARed it for the time being, bcs only one editor brought it up at the moment. Maybe my mistake was not realising you would throw a temper tantrum once again, and leave 19 passive aggressive edit summaries. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 21:01, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IAR? I can see the basis of your argument here, I'm fond of THICK. Glad to have helped you out here. Happy editing! -- Alex_21_TALK 00:08, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Personal attack removed) DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 07:15, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unacceptable language on a featured/good topic candidate. I hope this doesn't continue. -- Alex_21_TALK 09:25, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I have posted a GA concerns thread on the talk page of Doctor Who series 3. If these are unaddressed this article may be nominated at GAR. I would suggest that interested parties look at the article and ensure everything is cited according to the GA criteria. Z1720 (talk) 21:15, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are also some {{Citation needed}} tags on series 4, 8, 9, and 2023 specials that should be addressed. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 22:46, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, I missed that, I'll fix series 3 and all the articles in the upcoming days. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 23:12, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed series 3 cn tags, and all the other mentioned articles too. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 08:17, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support since all outstanding issues seem to be addressed by the nominator. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 22:20, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Idiosincrático (talk) 03:30, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support as contributor. TheDoctorWho (talk) 06:18, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Withdraw nomination the head article is going to be demoted, so I am withdrawing this nomination. DWF91 (talk) 13:09, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, but the head article is not getting demoted, so I do not see a reason this nomination should be withdrawn. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 22:31, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As a co-contributor I'd like to voluntarily take up overseeing any further issues with this nomination. It seems like most issues have been resolved and has been open for some time, so I don't think it should be an issue. TheDoctorWho (talk) 18:55, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm also noting that I, as a FLC delegate, declined to demote the list which this nomination is based on at the promoter's request. If anybody is interested in doing so they should go through WP:FLRC. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:15, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Just double checking on this since this has been open for two months with no comment and the only opposition is no longer an issue. I believe there isn't anything outstanding stopping a promotion? Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 20:48, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Quick ping to the coordinators: @FGTC coordinators: just in case they haven't seen this comment, because I have the same inquiry. TheDoctorWho (talk) 22:00, 9 May 2025 (UTC}
  - I had left this when the owner initially was withdrawing the nomination without having looked into it further, now that I have this article should be promoted since there has been no demoted main article. --K. Peake 08:00, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This topic has been Approved for promotion. Congratulations and thank you for your hard work. A bot will promote this topic within one hour. Please double check that {{Featured topic box |title= is exactly what you want the topic name to be, is short, and is unformatted. K. Peake 08:00, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Promotion completed successfully. Don't forget to add {{Wikipedia:Featured topics/List of Doctor Who episodes (2005–present)}} to the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Good topics. NovemBot (talk) 08:10, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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.