Talk:James Acaster

File:James Acaster.JPG Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:James Acaster.JPG, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:10, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

The Great British Bake Off: An Extra Slice

This article could mention that James Acaster appeared as a guest on The Great British Bake Off: An Extra Slice on October 12 2018. Vorbee (talk) 19:12, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

I think this sort of minor appearance isn't really significant enough, in the context of Acaster's overall career, to be mentioned. (Consensus for this has been established recently here; though GBBO:Extra isn't exactly a chat show, the point is that it's a one-off appearance in a show where Acaster isn't the main presenter.) — Bilorv_(c)(talk) 02:27, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

The first section is really bizarrely written and could do with some polishing.

"James William Acaster (/ˈeɪkæstər/; born 9 January 1985) is an English comedian, writer, and presenter." Okay fair enough, he is that

"Acaster has performed for several consecutive years at the Edinburgh Festival Fringe, where he has been nominated for Best Show five times." For what reason is this the first line? It doesn't make any sense and isn't mentioned elsewhere. It makes more sense as a closing sentence.

In 2018, Acaster released Repertoire, a serialised Netflix special consisting of four separate hour-long stand-up comedy performances: "Recognise", "Represent", "Reset", and "Recap". Again just a sentence with no structure. Also there shouldn't be a comma after "2018".

He won the Melbourne International Comedy Festival Award for Most Outstanding Show in 2019 with Cold Lasagne Hate Myself 1999, which was also later released on Netflix. This is decent enough I would only make a handful of changes such as "He has won" etc, just aesthetically

He has also won four Chortle Awards and has appeared on panel shows such as Mock the Week, Taskmaster, 8 out of 10 Cats, and Would I Lie to You?" Remove "panel shows such as" and simply replace with "British Panel shows" and hyperlink to the list (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_game_shows#Panel_games) before mentioning the notable ones.

I'd be happy to make these changes if anyone agrees that they make more sense than the weirdness right now — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ruby.Boulton (talk • contribs) 23:15, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

@Ruby.Boulton: I'd say go for it. Be bold. --Noahfgodard (talk) 00:56, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

@Ruby.Boulton: in my opinion, this article is one of the worst-written we have on major British comedians, which is why it's on my longlist of things to fix—the problem is that my longlist is about 1000 entries long! As Noahfgodard says, we expect people to be bold in making improvements themselves, even if it's their first edit. Newcomers often expect that an article is in a particular state intentionally because experienced editors designed it that way, but it's much more often the random product of dozens of volunteers making small incremental changes. If you think there's a problem, change it yourself: if your edit is undone or partially undone then you will at least learn something new about Wikipedia from it, and if it sticks then you've improved an article.

Now you've asked, I'd say that: the comma after 2018 is optional but acceptable; "panel shows" needs a lowercase "p", you don't need to say "British" because we already mention that he's English, and the best link would just be to panel show. But otherwise, go ahead, and then I may still come along and make improvements on top of your improvements—editing directly so others can do the same is the best workflow, and we resort to discussion only if a problem is intractable. — Bilorv (talk) 09:28, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

I've got to be honest, this is about the 3rd time I've come back to do this and I have no clue where to start. Whoever manages to pull this off deserves an award. Ruby.Boulton (talk) 23:48, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

@Ruby.Boulton: okay, you've inspired me. Take a look and see what you think now. Feel free to say it's still terrible! But I'll tell you what I was thinking.

The lead should be a summary of the whole article, but the first paragraph of the lead is sometimes well-suited to being a summary of the lead itself. Here, where there is no single thing that Acaster is most famous for above all else, it makes sense to do that. I could be wrong but I think Repertoire, Off Menu and Hypothetical are his most high-profile things—maybe Hypothetical needs to go and maybe Classic Scrapes (the book) needs to enter, I'm not sure.

Now I want to divide each paragraph of the lead into themes. Wikipedians have an almost eerie agreement that the lead should almost never be more than four paragraphs long (and it's very rare for us to agree on anything). So that gives me three paragraphs to work with: thus, I need to divide his work into three parts. The three I came up with are: (1) solo comedy, (2) comedy with other comedians and (3) books and their contexts.

The second paragraph, on solo comedy, starts with a bit of background on early life, almost as a way to restart so that the reader gets that the first paragraph is just a short summary and the rest of the lead will be a summary at a higher depth (and repeat some stuff). Presenting some things chronologically and trying to draw connections (e.g. "as a presenter") are attempts to make the prose flow.

But I'm open to criticism and I'm sure there are parts that are clunky where another pair of eyes could spot what needs to be improved further. — Bilorv (talk) 22:01, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Just looking thru the history rn, insane crazy good job. A well needed update probably years late but /you/ are the one that actually did it. Ruby.Boulton (talk) 03:48, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! — Bilorv (talk) 13:24, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Birthdate

This article claimed for a long period that Acaster was born on 9 January, without a source. After a lot of searching, I couldn't find a reliable source except a local news source that clearly copied from Wikipedia. The claim of 1985 seemed more accurate, based on Headline Publishing Group for instance or ages given in interviews (though copying from Wikipedia is commonplace there). Per WP:CITOGENESIS, even if we can find a source it needs a lot of scrutiny. Worth noting is that Acaster frequently says it's his birthday as a joke so even comments by him would need scrutiny.

I contacted Acaster's agent to explain that Wikipedia currently gave this date and ask about accuracy, but they gave a short reply saying that they could not give out clients' personal information. — Bilorv (talk) 21:05, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

At the end of the chapter "Xmas Tree" of "James Acaster's Classic Scrapes" (p268 in the paperback I have), he writes "I didn't see the No Way Sis single again until my birthday on 9 January". In the chapter (section?) "Blackstar. Lemonade. Blonde." of "Perfect Sound Whatever" (p8 in the hardback I have), he writes "The day in between the record's release and Bowie's death, 9 January, was my birthday". Neither is in a context where the specific date given could reasonably be assumed to be a joke.

(Redditors have also found his entry in the births register for 9 January 1985, but that's a step too far!) 217.155.100.247 (talk) 11:44, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Ah, and his author bio in both those hard-copy books states he was born in 1985 - although I see that's been removed from the Headline webpage since it was archived in the article! 217.155.100.247 (talk) 11:56, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Fantastic! Yes, these should be usable. Next time I need to do a Google Books search on top of my other searches, though I might've remembered the Perfect Sound Whatever mention as I read that passage so recently. Both book mentions are usable, I think (I've cited Classic Scrapes for other biographical facts), so I've added this back. Funnily enough I have a paperback Classic Scrapes and hardback Perfect Sound Whatever too. — Bilorv (talk) 19:45, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

GA Review

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.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:James Acaster/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: AirshipJungleman29 (talk · contribs) 11:11, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

I'll take this review, which will count towards the WikiCup and current backlog drive. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:11, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:

   C. It contains no original research:

   See #spotchecks.

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

   See #spotchecks.

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

   The images of the Taskmaster building and of Rosenstock seem to fall under WP:DECOR, to my mind.

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Excellently written article. Just a minor image issue above. Hope the spotchecks don't go badly. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:59, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for taking this on, AirshipJungleman29! I think strictly speaking it's more MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE than WP:DECOR for images (not icons), but point taken and I've removed both of those images. — Bilorv (talk) 14:23, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Spotchecks

• 14 good
• 29 good
• 61 good
• 66 good
• 72 good
• 76 good
• 86 good
• 107 good
• 126 good
• 127 good
• 137 good
• 158 good

Cracking job Bilorv. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:26, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

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.

Define him as a musician?

Should Musician be added alongside comedian? i feel like his podcasting and other productions fall under comedy. But his work on temps isn't connected at all to comedy, so would it make sense to define him as a musician alongside comedian? Mature Cheddar (talk) 01:04, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Temps isn't his primary reason for notability (or in the top 10) and his role is as an organiser and producer; his drumming never exceeded the local level. Defining him as a musician alongside comedian would be undue weight. Though music is a theme in his comedy, calling him "comedian and musician" might make the reader think he's a musical comedian in the style of Bo Burnham, Tim Minchin, Bill Bailey et al. — Bilorv (talk) 19:11, 21 December 2023 (UTC)