More actions
Thumbnail
We could still use a conclusion over at Talk:Wild Blue Yonder (TV story). Feel free to suggest some here as well. Here are the ones I noticed.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
I personally really like 2 and think 1 works as well. I didn't catch any good shots of the Toymaker vs the Doctor, one always seemed to have their back to the camera when they were both in frame. Najawin ☎ 20:04, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
- Oh, there we go. 5 works as well, thanks Walt. I still prefer 2, but think I prefer 5 to 1. Not a fan of 4 and 6, but that's personal preference, it puts too much emphasis on just the Toymaker. Najawin ☎ 20:21, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
- 2 is excellent, as is 5 and I'd say 1 as my third choice. StevieGLiverpool ☎ 21:36, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
- Definitely 5 among these, but what about a bi-generation screenshot?!HarveyWallbanger ☎ 21:40, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
- #2 is my choice. I'd also be against a bigeneration image as I really would rather this episode not be defined by that controversial twist, over the actual meat of the episode. 22:32, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
- For me, 5>4>3>2>1>6. 6 is too dark in my opinion. 5 is also quite dark but having both the Fourteenth Doctor and the Toymaker boosts the image's rank for me. I really like the dynamic of 3, but it's not that representative of the episode. 2's a better representation but I feel is far too wide to work at a small scale. Bongo50 ☎ 22:53, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
We can trim down 2 if it's just the width. I really quite like 2, cards on the table. I think the contrast is great. But 5 is a perfectly acceptable substitute if it's not viable. Najawin ☎ 23:01, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
I quite like 5 as well. Succinctly demonstrates the main conflict in the episode: 14 and the Toymaker facing off in a universe-deciding duel through simple games, with Donna's inclusion also subtlety noted, as is the environment of the Toymaker's domain through the background of his puppet show. Snivy ✦ The coolest Pokemon ever ✦ 18:49, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
I like #1 the best, as it shows the cause of the titular giggle without spoiler anything not previously advertised. BananaClownMan ☎ 20:22, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
It has been nearly 10 days since anyone posted anything here. As votes show, 5, 2 and 1 have the most support, with 5 narrowly ahead. Can a decision be made now, given there hasn't been anyone adding new opens or debating this since that general consensus was reached 10 days ago? Snivy ✦ The coolest Pokemon ever ✦ 17:46, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
Crew table note
The camera section of this episode's broadcast credits read:
- A Camera and Steadicam Operator Focus Pullers: Martin Stephens, Martin Payne
- Clapper Loaders: Jonathan Vidgen, Sophie Hardcastle
- Camera Trainee: Sarah Macleod
- SAW Camera Trainee: Elesha Pederson
- Digital Imaging Technician: Kudzai Dzokamushure
- Data Manager: Nick Everett
- Key Grip: David Buckley
- Grip: Bobby Williams
- Grip Trainees: Ken Hodgson, Alexander Jones
- SAW Entry Level Grip Trainees: Rhys Jones, Emily Badger-Knight
Based on the incoherence of the first credited position and a comparison with the previous two episodes' credits, I strongly suspect this to be a formatting error: it should read "A Camera and Steadicam Operator: Martin Stephens", then "Focus Pullers: Martin Payne, Jonathan Vidgen", and then continue with each name thus moved up one position, ending with the single SAW Entry Level Grip Trainee: Emily Badger-Knight. (This amendment renders it identical to the corresponding slate of credits in Wild Blue Yonder, and nearly so to The Star Beast.) I have entered the credits on the main page proceeding under this assumption for sanity's sake, but left a note leading here by way of explanation and record-keeping. Starkidsoph ☎ 11:50, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
- Due to talk page archiving, I feel that linking to this talk page is suboptimal. I think that placing the above information in either a footnote or simply in the "notes" section may be a better idea. Aquanafrahudy 📢 🖊️ 13:40, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
- I believe that you're correct to have made this correction to the credits and to have left the note, but I don't think it should lead here. Instead, I think there should be a lengthy {{note}} placed instead of the link here which explains the situation, giving the evidence for the conclusion that you came to. However, I am going to page User:SOTO who I believe to be more experienced in these matters. Bongo50 ☎ 14:29, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
- Yeah, I agree the talk page wasn't the best place to put this, sorry! Would it be possible to link to an screencap of the credits page somewhere relevant? That might be the most concise form of explanation, since the obvious error is really a visual thing. Starkidsoph ☎ 22:32, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
The length of the lede of the article
Asking this first for confirmation before I trim it. A simple question really: is the lede meant to be so long? It seem excessively detailed with several lengthy paragraphs with several long sentences. It reads like a mini essay that also repeats much of the plot, continuity and note sections of the article. Surely it can be cut down, perhaps to even half its current length? Snivy ✦ The coolest Pokemon ever ✦ 19:30, 10 December 2023 (UTC)