Talk:The Giggle (TV story)

From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
Revision as of 21:42, 22 December 2023 by Najawin (talk | contribs) (→‎Thumbnail)

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
    1. 1
  • #2
    1. 2
  • #3
    1. 3
  • #4
    1. 4
  • #5
    1. 5
  • #6
    1. 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)
I vote down bi-generation with extreme prejudice. Both in terms of spoiling too much and in terms of just hating the twist. :P Najawin ☎ 22:02, 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)

I've found myself warming up to #1 more. The only two I unambiguously don't like are #2 (too vague) and #3 (too specific). WaltK ☎ 20:08, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
We can ranked choice voting our top three if everyone's okay with that? Give our top 3 picks, then our first gets 3 points, second gets 2, third gets 1, then add the points up and see the winner. Since there's already reasonably broad consensus around 3 or 4 shots being the best, this just sort of standardizes our preferences about them. Najawin ☎ 20:24, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
Sounds good to me. 5>2>6 would be my preference. Aquanafrahudy 📢 🖊️ 20:30, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
2>5>1 for me. Najawin ☎ 20:32, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
Y'know, now that we've chosen our image for WBY, I'm no longer particularly keen on #5 because it's too similar.
Anyway, my top 3:
1: #4
2: #6
3: #1
WaltK ☎ 20:52, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
5, 2, then 1. Totals for tallies so far: 1 has 2 votes, 2 has 1 vote and 5 has 4 votes. 5 is the clear winner here. We don't even need to delegate points for this given 5's lead is so big (and assigning points is arbitrary anyways). Snivy ✦ The coolest Pokemon ever ✦ 15:18, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
Throwing in my support for #5 too. — Fractal Doctor @ 16:46, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Please clarify your second and third picks, in spite of what Snivy said. He's not correct here, other people being happy with 2 and not liking 5 could easily change things, 5 is not yet the clear winner. (Not that I expect this to happen, but we should be careful.) Najawin ☎ 18:25, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

I agree we do indeed have to be careful about pre-emptively ending a discussion and waiting for an admin's formal conclusion. However, I do not understand how the tally is "not correct here" at the time of writing. 5 people have now selected image #5 as their preferred option for the article's infobox image. Even if you wanted to include the whole points system with the top chosen picture getting 3 points (which, as already stated, is not all that necessary) then that means: #5 has 5 1st place votes, meaning it would have 15 points. The next closest is #1 with 2 1st place votes, meaning it has 6. Therefore, mathematically, even factoring in the other points of 2 for 2nd choice and 1 for 3rd choice, #1 remains miles behind challenging #5's lead. As such, #5 is indeed the clear favourite at this stage in the discussion, which had reached that consensus nearly 2 weeks prior, both in standard choosing and in the arbitrary points system allocation to be the article's infobox image. Snivy ✦ The coolest Pokemon ever ✦ 20:36, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
See, the problem is you're trying to do those calculations without actually having the full slates. Indeed, on the calcs that take place using the full slates, #2 is beating #1, which already should give your analysis pause. Maybe it's more complicated and we should actually have people fully express their preferences. Najawin ☎ 20:48, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
Precisely, hence me saying we shouldn't even use the points allocation system and simply choose the image that is objectively best for the episode based on community consensus. Snivy ✦ The coolest Pokemon ever ✦ 21:21, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
...That doesn't follow in the slightest. This is a way of formalizing consensus. Najawin ☎ 21:31, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
Does it not? The image that editors generally agree is the best image with justified reasoning and following policy is the image that becomes the infobox's image. Snivy ✦ The coolest Pokemon ever ✦ 21:35, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

More rigorous analysis contradicting your quick and dirty analysis clearly doesn't imply that we should abandon the rigorous analysis and go with the quick and dirty analysis, no. Let alone say that the latter is objective. Again, I expect #5 to win out. But it's not as clear cut as you keep saying it is. Najawin ☎ 21:42, 22 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)
That seems like a good idea to me. I don't think images can be placed in {{note}} so perhaps put this on the production errors section and then link there in the crew template? Bongo50 ☎ 21:06, 12 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)

Retrieved from "https://tardis.wiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Giggle_(TV_story)&oldid=3679540"