Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: J Milburn (talk) 09:28, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid that this article suffers from the very real problem of relying primarily on unreliable sources; neither IMDB nor Filmreference.com are considered reliable, especially for a BLP. Take a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Resources- both are explicitly listed as unacceptable.

• Many of the sources listed lack publisher information
• Many of the other sources cited look unreliable- http://navylark.0catch.com/navy/cast.html, http://www.vintagebritishcomedy.co.uk/#/the-embassy-lark-overview/4547413671, http://www.theseasonofmists.com/Pages/heather.html
  • Similarily, fansites like http://www.crossroadsnetwork.co.uk/oldsite/heatherchasen.htm are rarely reliable, and primary sources like http://www.dswilliams.co.uk/ete/index.php/radio/2009/the-adventures-of-sexton-blake-detective/ should be considered carefully. The BBC sources you cite, while primary, are not terrible- but the article should not depend upon them.

There sources at the end of the day,if I dont have them then there is no article. I cant have a article with just a few references. I've got the information just I dont have a reliable source. I will try and add the publisher information. MayhemMario 17:55, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• The text isn't great in places- "replacing Margaret Tyzack who pulled out of the role due to personal reasons and began filming on 15 April 2011", repetition of "also" in "other work", "prodcutions".
• In some places the text formatting is very odd- "month later[. They asked me] 'Would you come back", "between 1982–86 [2] or voicing"
  • Just wanted to say that "month later[. They asked me] 'Would you come back" was me, because the original quote is just "[...] they must have quite liked because they got back to me about a month later 'Would you come back and join the cast and change the colour of your hair?'" which is poorly written. The full stop isn't even there, so I added it to make it make sense. Mario has placed the full stop outside of the square brackets now, but it should stay in there because it's not part of the original quote. –anemoneprojectors– 19:56, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• The large number of "unknown" roles isn't great

I have changed the text formatting for bullet point 1&2. I cannot do anything about the 'Unknown' roles as if there is no reference, there's nothing I can do. MayhemMario 17:53, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I am going to fail the article at this time because of its reliance on low-quality sources. I fear the article may need to be completely rewritten once new sources are found, meaning a much heavier review probably wouldn't be beneficial at this time. Sorry, and good luck finding new sources. J Milburn (talk) 09:46, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reviewing it so quickly, it was no where near at the top of the list in the GA Nominations! There are no more references I have scoured the entire Google for them, unless new ones are made. Untill more are found, I agree with you, Thanks. MayhemMario 17:58, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah I replied to something not realising this had already been failed. Normally a GA goes on hold but in this case I don't think anything could be done to address the unreliable sources, etc. –anemoneprojectors– 20:27, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]