Talk:Life After Life (TV series)

This article was nominated for deletion on September 2, 2021. The result of the discussion was delete.

A fact from Life After Life (TV series) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 26 May 2022 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the TV adaptation of Life After Life was described as "bingeworthy", but also "practically plotless"?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2022/May. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Life After Life (TV series).

Wikipedia

Television: British Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the British television task force.

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by SL93 (talk) 17:50, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that the TV series Life After Life is about a woman who lives the same life over and over again? Source: https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2022/apr/19/life-after-life-review-a-thoroughly-addictive-weepathon
- ALT1: ... that the goal of the TV adaptation of Life After Life's was purportedly "apparent from the start: making people cry"?
- ALT2: ... that one reviewer said of the TV adaptation of Life After Life, "if you like the feeling of being overwhelmed by vicarious trauma and grief then you're in for a treat"?
- ALT3: ... that the TV adaptation of Life After Life was described as "bingeworthy", but also "practically plotless"?
- Comment: Article newly created from redirect

Created by Llewee (talk). Self-nominated at 02:01, 24 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Per WP:DYKSG#C7, hooks about works of fiction (such as TV shows) cannot solely be about plot points or other in-universe information. They must have some connection to the real world. As such, a new hook is needed here. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 22:39, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- As the nominator hasn't edited in a few days and hasn't responded to a talk page message regarding the hook, can a new editor propose new hooks so that the nomination can continue? Pinging two DYK regulars who have experience in doing TV show hooks: Theleekycauldron and Soaper1234. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:04, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Narutolovehinata5: suggested some review-based hooks; my thanks to The Guardian for using that evocative language Wikipedia avoids. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 01:23, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    - Thank you. I'll wait for Soaper and the nom's feedback before proceeding with the full review. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:29, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, @Narutolovehinata5: and @Theleekycauldron: I wasn't able to think of any interested non-plot based blurbs straight away and then I was busy with work for a while and forgot about it. The suggestions you came up with seem quite good especially given the slightly limited material available. I think alt 3 is probably the best one.Llewee (talk) 23:08, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Since Soaper hasn't edited in a while I guess I can proceed with the review without them? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:44, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Narutolovehinata5: Whenever you want to is fine by me Llewee (talk) 23:47, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Article was nominated on time and is long enough. No close paraphrasing was detected (the only matches were a Facebook page copying from Wikipedia and another source that also mentioned the quotes mentioned in the article). I agree with the nomination that ALT3 is the best option; it's verified in the source. No QPQ is needed as it appeared the nominator has no previous nominations. GTG. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:35, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]