Talk:The Museum of Curiosity

The Museum of Curiosity was one of the Media and drama good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
May 6, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed
June 26, 2008	Peer review	Reviewed
July 22, 2008	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
September 23, 2024	Good article reassessment	Delisted
Current status: Delisted good article

The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

Senexiracundus (talk · contribs) / Turner, Richard This user has contributed to the article.

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Radio: UK Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Radio, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Radio-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RadioWikipedia:WikiProject RadioTemplate:WikiProject RadioRadio

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This page is within the scope of the UK Radio taskforce. New members are always welcome!

To-do List:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Create: Missing years and articles in radio, National Association of Radio Distress-Signalling and Infocommunications (Hungary)
Assess : Unassessed Radio articles; Unknown-importance Radio articles
Cleanup : Radio articles needing attention
Expand : Midweek Politics Bob Crane
Maintain : Portal:Radio
Stubs : Expand: Radio stubs
Verify : Unreferenced BLPs
Other : Collaboration of the Week:
Requests for Radio peer review:

BBC Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject BBC, an attempt to better organise information in articles related to the BBC. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join us as a member. You can also visit the BBC Portal.BBCWikipedia:WikiProject BBCTemplate:WikiProject BBCBBC

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tasks for WikiProject BBC:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Improve BBC, BBC News (TV channel) and BBC News to Good Article status following previous reviews, create BBC Computer Literacy Project (in light of forthcoming 30th anniversary)
Cleanup : Chucklevision - references and general clean-up, Pebble Mill Studios - over-detailed and long, BBC World Service Television - unreferenced and confusing
Copyedit : BBC News, Broadcasting House
Expand : Top 20 start-class BBC articles with most importance: BBC Japan, BBC World Service Television, BBC Lifestyle, BBC Two Northern Ireland
NPOV : Criticism of the BBC (See comments)
Stubs : Stub-Class BBC articles
Other : *Restructure the category
- Add infoboxes to the BBC articles without infoboxes
- Add free-use images to biographical articles where possible
- Add references to Goa Mix (see assessment) and Coat of arms of the BBC
- Return Dad's Army to a Good article. (See comments)
- Reassess BBC following improvements to article.

Comedy Low‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Museums Low‑importance

	museums portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Museums, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of museums on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MuseumsWikipedia:WikiProject MuseumsTemplate:WikiProject MuseumsMuseums
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Good article review

Latest comment: 16 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

This is an interesting article with good coverage of its topic. It needs some more work to reach GA status, however.

Not all the information in this article is supported by citations.
- Much of it is obviously drawn from the primary source (the radio show), which is fine, but per the manual of style primary sources need to be cited just like secondary sources.
- Some of the statements with citations do not reflect the content of the source. One issue is the claim that the show has been "praised and criticised for the similarity" to QI. One cited source (Lezard) mentions the similarity but does not seem to base his opinion of the show on it in any way; the other source seems to be criticizing the show for not being similar enough. The Lezard review is also rather lukewarm about the show; I do not believe the article's claim that he "praised" it is justified.
Some of the gift information in the "Episodes" section is difficult to understand. I'm not sure why scarf is wikilinked, when the gift did not involve any clothing. Some are wikilinks unclear, like the giant hornet, which links to an animal species. Was the entire population of this species the gift? Just one specimen? Or is this referring to a sculpture? The same questions apply to yeti, angler fish and pineapples.
The lead section is too long. Per WP:LEAD#Length an article of this size should have only one or two paragraphs as a lead. I would suggest moving some information from the lead into the "Format" section.
As an American not familiar with the BBC lineup, it was not immediately clear that Radio 4 was actually a radio show and not just an artsy name for a television show. This is more of a personal opinion than the rest of the review, but it would be nice to have in the lead a specific statement that The Museum of Curiosity is a radio show.

These are criticisms relating to Good Article criteria 1 and 2. I consider this article to meet criteria 3, 4, 5, and 6 quite nicely; I enjoyed reading the article. I encourage the nominator to continue working on the article and renominate it in the future. Lyrl^Talk _C 22:43, 4 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

I've carried out the changes that you asked for and I believe that the article is now good enough to be of GA status. ISD (talk) 06:57, 5 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

I've moved citations to be closer to the statements they support (let me know if I'm just missing the information when reading the source). I used the external link as a source for the "has yet to be broadcast" statement, and requested sources for two other statements. I also modified some of the language in the "Reception" section. Let me know what you think of the language modifications, find those last two sources, and I don't see any other obstacles to GA status. Lyrl^Talk _C 21:49, 5 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

I couldn't find any references for the information so I had to remove it. Still, I think everything else done to this article now makes it good enough to pass GA now. ISD (talk) 06:55, 6 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for all the work on this article (both in the past few days and over the article's history), and congratulations! Lyrl^Talk _C 11:03, 6 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Graham Linehan's choice

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The entry on the table for Graham Linehan puts his entry as a cassette tape. Was it not more than this, but a tape of all the ways in which we used to live? ACEOREVIVED (talk) 14:32, 11 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

production and research lists are incomplete

Latest comment: 3 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The show has had multiple producers and researchers over its long run, but the Production section lists only a few. Suggest either rephrasing to add "include(s)," removing the sentences (which may redundant, since the information is elsewhere in the article), or including a more complete list 2600:6C67:6DF0:8520:39FF:673D:23D1:FEB1 (talk) 16:31, 21 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

GA concerns

Latest comment: 3 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I am concerned that this article no longer meets the good article criteria. Some of my concerns are listed below:

There is uncited text, particularily in the "Production" section.
The "Reception" section has large quotes. I suggest that this is reduced, summarised, or removed.
The "Reception" section does not have new information post-2016, even though the show is still producing new episodes.

Is anyone interested in addressing these concerns, or should this go to WP:GAR? Z1720 (talk) 00:46, 5 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

GA Reassessment

Latest comment: 2 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The Museum of Curiosity

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • GAN review not found

Result: Delisted. Charlotte (Queen of Hearts • talk) 23:49, 23 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

The article has uncited text, including large sections of the "Production" section. There is also large quotes in the "Reception" section, which should be summarised and reduced per copyright concerns, and the "Reception" section does not have post-2016 commentary, even though the show is still producing episodes. Z1720 (talk) 02:14, 14 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add topic