Talk:The Unbelievable Truth

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Unbelievable Truth was a good article nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. Reviewed version: October 16, 2007

	Radio Portal This article is supported by the Radio WikiProject. This project provides a central approach to Radio-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article attached to this page and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards. Visit the wikiproject page for more details.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
	This article is supported by the UK Radio task force.

	Comedy Portal This article is within the scope of the Comedy WikiProject, which collaborates on articles related to comedy, comics, comedians, comedy movies, and the like. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.

Contents 1 Links to Names 2 Would I Lie To You? 3 Failed "good article" nomination 4 New series

[edit] Links to Names

Links to names in the table do not need to be linked again if they are already mentioned. They should only be linked if they are new. ISD 18:31, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Would I Lie To You?

Has anyone elso noticed the similarities between this and the TV series 'Would I Lie To You'? Doozy88 15:38, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Failed "good article" nomination

This article failed good article nomination. This is how the article, as of October 16, 2007, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Mostly OK in respect of criterion 1(a) apart from the following line in the Reception section, “Many reviews praised Mitchell's presentation of the programme, saying, "Mitchell’s quick, intelligent wit gives it an edge that it would otherwise lack."[6]” - did “many reviews” (of which only one is referenced) use that exact quote? I think not. Criterion 1(b) appears to be met.

2. Factually accurate?: Line “However, critics have complained that the programme is "Too scripted" and would benefit from more improvisation.” in Reception section is not referenced and fails criterion 2(a). Not sure about whether criterion 2(b) passes in respect of the quotes chosen in the Reception section; higher quality sources, such as reviews in national newspapers, should be used rather than web-based reviews. Passes in respect of criterion 2(c).

3. Broad in coverage?: Fails in respect of 3(a), addresses major aspects of the topic, in that no details are supplied in respect of the creation, development and production of the programme. Fails in respect of 3 (b) in that the list of guests for every episode would constitute unnecessary detail and would quickly become unwieldy if more episodes are made. Failure in this area represents the most serious deficiency in the article as it currently stands

4. Neutral point of view?: Pass

5. Article stability? Pass

6. Images?: Not applicable. Although not needed for GA, suitable images are desirable; I appreciate this can be difficult for a radio programme though!

While length is not a criterion for passing or failing GA, I should add that the article's brevity contributes to the failure under criterion 3(a). Really, as it stands at the moment, this article is little more than a stub and needs to be further fleshed out to stand any chance of passing GA.

When these issues are addressed, the article can be renominated. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to a Good article reassessment. Thank you for your work so far. — Joe King 17:35, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New series

I have added information about the production of Series 2, which has just been completed. I attended all three recordings at the Shaw Theatre and can vouch that my information is accurate! I will continue to update the page as the series is broadcast with air dates and guest lists if wanted.

I am also able to add a photo of the ticket style for the recordings if desired; radio shows don't exactly have a wealth of pictorial evidence! - Amanda Prefect (talk) 10:58, 1 May 2008 (UTC)