This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

EastEnders This article is within the scope of WikiProject EastEnders, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the popular BBC soap opera EastEnders 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.EastEndersWikipedia:WikiProject EastEndersTemplate:WikiProject EastEndersEastEnders Tasks for WikiProject EastEnders: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Expand : All articles listed in Category:Stub-Class EastEnders articles and Category:EastEnders articles in need of real-world perspective Other : Improve to FA standard: EastEnders: E20 Improve to GA standard: EastEnders Maintain: List of EastEnders characters (2023), List of EastEnders characters, List of former EastEnders characters, List of awards and nominations received by EastEnders Get involved in the Wikipedia EastEnders Project. Soap Operas 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 BBC Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject BBC, an attempt to better organise information in articles related to the BBC. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join us as a member. You can also visit the BBC Portal.BBCWikipedia:WikiProject BBCTemplate:WikiProject BBCBBC Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Tasks for WikiProject BBC: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Improve BBC, BBC News (TV channel) and BBC News to Good Article status following previous reviews, create BBC Computer Literacy Project (in light of forthcoming 30th anniversary) Cleanup : Chucklevision - references and general clean-up, Pebble Mill Studios - over-detailed and long, BBC World Service Television - unreferenced and confusing Copyedit : BBC News, Broadcasting House Expand : Top 20 start-class BBC articles with most importance: BBC Japan, BBC World Service Television, BBC Lifestyle, BBC Two Northern Ireland NPOV : Criticism of the BBC (See comments) Stubs : Stub-Class BBC articles Other : *Restructure the category Add infoboxes to the BBC articles without infoboxes Add free-use images to biographical articles where possible Add references to Goa Mix (see assessment) and Coat of arms of the BBC Return Dad's Army to a Good article. (See comments) Reassess BBC following improvements to article. Buckinghamshire (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Buckinghamshire, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.BuckinghamshireWikipedia:WikiProject BuckinghamshireTemplate:WikiProject BuckinghamshireBuckinghamshire England Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England 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.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Television: British / Episode coverage Low‑importance 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the British television task force (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Episode 6867/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk · contribs) 19:21, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Z1720 (talk · contribs) 01:39, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.

   a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

I will be conducting a review of this article. Placing template to get the review started. Z1720 (talk) 01:39, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• I made some copyedits to the article. Feel free to revert if they are unhelpful.
• "Everitt explained that he would always stand up for his city, and he also mentioned the depiction in a debate in the House of Commons." I am not sure this is needed in the lead, and can possibly be removed.
•  Done *I removed the first bit, but I kept the second half as I believe that it shows the importance of the episode, though if it should be removed I will do so. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 05:25, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• The "Production" section seems a little long. Some suggestions are below:
• "It was announced that same month" which month? Many months have been mentioned in the section.
  •  Done DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 05:25, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• "EastEnders executive producer Chris Clenshaw said of the return, "I'm thrilled to welcome the fabulous Patsy back to the iconic role of Bianca Jackson. Although the character was last seen on-screen in 2019, Bianca still remains a fan favourite. We know our audiences will be thrilled at her return as she is thrust into the heart of the drama..."" I don't think this is needed. It is expected that production would speak positively of this return and doesn't add additional information for the reader.
  • I have shortened it. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 05:25, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• There are two sentences about Palmer's thoughts on her return, and many quotes. I think this needs to be reduced to one sentence, with one quote maximum.
• " McGarty believed that the episode would give viewers a reminder about Whitney and Bianca's relationship." Considering that we already know the plot of the episode, I do not think this episode is necessary.
• "Speaking of Campbell's casting, Clenshaw revealed that he and his colleagues were "thrilled" to welcome Campbell into the cast, calling her "immensely talented".[3] Clenshaw also revealed that Zack and Whitney would be "thrust into the heart of the drama" due to Whitney becoming concerned for Britney's wellbeing" This all sounds like promotional language expected from a producer, and I don't think it is needed.
•  Done I have trimmed the second bit.DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 05:18, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• "Palmer called her return to the soap a "fresh experience" in "exactly the same place", explaining, "It always feels new - you always want to go back with a fresh head. You never really want to go back with the same head - I'm not here with the same mindset that I was when I left." I don't think the second quote is necessary.
•  Done DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 05:25, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• "McGarty believed that the episode would give viewers a reminder about Whitney and Bianca's relationship." I don't think this sentence is necessary.
• I have kept it in as I believe that it is important about the storyline development as their relationship had been depicted on-off since 2008. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 05:18, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• "Britney was described as being a child neighbour of Bianca who is being neglected by her mother, Keeley Wainwright (Kirsty J Curtis). Whitney forms a bond with the child and becomes concerned for her welfare." This was described in the plot, so I don't think it is needed here.
•  Done DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 05:18, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• "McGarty revealed to Inside Soap that Britney reminds Whitney of herself at that age, and that she feels sorry for her and wants to help and take "her under her wing"." This is not really about the production, so I think it can be removed.
• "The actress added, "All the stunt guys and women on this show always try and pull me back a little bit because I'm always saying 'Can't I just do that' as I'm desperate to do stunts when it's safe for me to do so"." I don't think this is necessary and can be removed.
•  Done Trimmed. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 05:18, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• The "Reception and controversy" is very long. I suggest that this be split or broken up with level 3 headings.
  •  Done DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 05:26, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• The first paragraph falls into the "X says Y" pattern. I suggest reading WP:RECEPTION for some tips on how to avoid this.
• There is a lot of information about Milton Keyes's reaction to this episode. As someone who knows next to nothing about this topic, I did not need this much information to understand that the town's reaction. Instead, merge the second, third and fourth paragraphs and explain (without quotes) why the reaction was so negative in one paragraph.
• Too many quotes are used to explain Everitt's reaction, and it is not necessary. His statements can be summarised instead, and his actions described instead.
• I would give more attention to other reviews on the episode. Maybe when the text is trimmed down it will be easy to find, but I struggled in the article to find critical reviews on the acting, storyline, production, or other aspects of the episode. Some of this information can be moved from the "Production" section, but other information should be added to the article.

I will leave the review there, since it looks like the prose might undergo some changes. I will continue with the review once the above are addressed. Z1720 (talk) 03:16, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your feedback and for all of your thorough comments and help. I will work on this over the weekend should have addressed everything by Tuesday evening. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 05:14, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay, I have been unwell. I have started some of the changes and will do the rest this afternoon and tomorrow. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 05:25, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@DaniloDaysOfOurLives: Please ping me when ready. Z1720 (talk) 01:54, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]