Wikipedia:Peer review/EastEnders/archive2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

EastEnders[edit]

Previous peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because it was previously a good article in 2006 but has since then it has fell into disrepair. I am not sure where to start, hoping for some advise assuming it's salvageable. Additionally I have created a sandbox so you may comment on specific sections.

User:Kelvin 101/EastEnders (Main article draft)

Thanks, Kelvin 101 (talk) 22:28, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Just some general issues, I will add more as I find them. TsangeTalk 17:02, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Images need ALT text
  • Multiple dead links see [1]
  • History section should come before Setting section
  • Not really sure the Realism section adds anything to the article.
  • Character section is too long
  • More of the article consists of
  • Lots of choppy sentences that are short and don't flow well into each other


Comments by Smurrayinchester Smurrayinchester 18:02, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • A couple of sections are out of date - the budgets only run to 2010, for instance, and the number of episodes per year is as of 2006.
  • The "Internet" section should probably go - very out of date, and it's no longer especially interesting that people search for TV shows.
  • The "Criticism" section should be split up - maybe something like "Allegations of national and racial stereotypes", "Morality and violence", "Controversial storylines" - and be trimmed a bit. (As the most viewed show in the UK, there will always be some complaints. Priority should be given to the biggest ones.
  • The "Realism" section seems mistitled - "Issues" might be more accurate.
  • I'd expand the "In popular culture" section to "In British culture", since it currently contains nothing but a link to EastEnders in popular culture. Academics have written reams about what EastEnders means to British culture (see 1, 2, 3).


Thanks for both of your comments I shall try and rectify all problems as soon as possible. Thanks Kelvin 101 (talk) 14:33, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]