Talk:Nigel Kneale

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Nigel Kneale is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do.
Article Milestones Date Process Result February 24, 2007 WikiProject peer review Reviewed March 2, 2007 Good article nominee Listed March 15, 2007 Featured article candidate Promoted Current Status: Featured article

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
FA	This article has been rated as FA-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
More information about this article... This article has had a peer review by the Biography WikiProject, which has now been archived.

[edit] Nigel Kneale on Doctor Who

Despite Nigel Kneale's criticisms of Doctor Who he of course cannot denied that many people who became fans of Quatermass as a result of being Doctor Who fans. I for instance found out about Quatermass through Doctor Who. If it wasn't for Doctor Who Quatermass would have been a complete memory and that it was the foundation of British sci-fi TV would have been scarely relevant. Given the fact that infamous Doctor Who hater Michael Grade has admitted publicly that he loves the new Doctor Who series I can only hope that Kneale has converted as well. After all the Quatermass remake feature in its cast Mark Gatiss a writer of the new Doctor Who and David Tennant who has replaced Christopher Eccleston as Doctor Who. Despite Kneale's distaste of Doctor Who that is not going to stop me as a Doctor Who fan from watching Quatermass when I get the chance. --The Shadow Treasurer 8 July 2005 01:49 (UTC)

Oh I quite agree - I doubt there's a person who's seen both shows who, if they like one, doesn't like the other. But this is an article about Kneale, so we have to concentrate on his thoughts on the matter really, rather than being a general piece on SF fandom. Angmering 8 July 2005 11:26 (UTC)

[edit] GA review

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is well written.

   a (prose): b (structure): c (MoS): d (jargon):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (inline citations): c (reliable): d (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   a (fair representation): b (all significant views):

5. It is stable.

   

6. It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.

   a (tagged and captioned): b (lack of images does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):

7. Overall:

   a Pass/Fail:

--Rmky87 03:21, 2 March 2007 (UTC)