Talk:Ashling O'Shea

Ashling O'Shea has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: July 14, 2025. (Reviewed version).

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Arts and Entertainment

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Women in Green: 2025

This article was created or improved as part of the Women in Green project in 2025. The editor(s) involved may be new; please assume good faith regarding their contributions before making changes.Women in GreenWikipedia:WikiProject Women in GreenTemplate:WikiProject Women in GreenWomen in Green

Women in Red

This article was created or improved as part of the Women in Red project. The editor(s) involved may be new; please assume good faith regarding their contributions before making changes.Women in RedWikipedia:WikiProject Women in RedTemplate:WikiProject Women in RedWomen in Red

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

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women 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.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women

LGBTQ+ studies

This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies

Wiki Loves Pride

This article was created or improved during Wiki Loves Pride, 2024.Wiki Loves PrideWikipedia:Wiki Loves PrideTemplate:Wiki Loves Pride talkWiki Loves Pride

GA review

Passed. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:47, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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:Ashling O'Shea/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk · contribs) 16:34, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: AirshipJungleman29 (talk · contribs) 10:54, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take this review. Comments to follow soon. Please consider reviewing another nomination at WP:GAN.

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

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:
Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

C. It contains no original research:

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
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):
Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
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:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

Sourcing

For consistency and ease of verifying, I would cite the "Theatre credits" table line by line as done with "Filmography" above. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:59, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done - I initially did the table differently as most of it comes from the same source but I have now made the tables the same DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 14:26, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

General comments

The tone of the article needs work. It is more often conversational than encyclopedic. When writing up information from more "informal" interviews such as [1] you must be careful to isolate the encyclopedic information and to summarise it neutrally and professionally. The most egregious example is "O'Shea also enjoys spending time and having conversations with other people", but numerous other instances need work. Focus on the facts, rather than what the article subject said she felt about the facts. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:05, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have tried to trim some things to make it more encyclopedic DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 14:27, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Much more is there: ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:26, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Speaking about the episode, O'Shea explained in an interview, "As a Queer Brown woman, I'm very aware that my moments of joy and safety are a result of people before me fighting, I owe that same fight to the people around me and the people that come after me."

This lengthy quote says nothing about the episode, character, or herself, and thus is effectively a PR statement.

"O'Shea also explained that she was enjoying working with Malik, saying that they "clicked" from the moment they met."

"Person doesn't publicly say that colleague is unpleasant to work with."

"O'Shea enjoyed playing Rumi and thought of her co-stars as a "little family"."

See above.

"O'Shea was happy that Nadira had a "happy ending" as she felt that the character had grieved a lot during her time on the soap."

This article is about the actress, not the character.

@AirshipJungleman29: I have trimmed and/or removed the fact below. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 15:44, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The lead also needs work. Focus on the key biographical facts and events that establish her notability, and minimal detail on the less-important early career.

The first paragraph of "Career" is entirely sourced to two paragraphs in an interview. This is WP:UNDUE and needs to be cut down severely. Again, focus on the facts, not feelings, beliefs, or PR quotes. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:23, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@AirshipJungleman29: Done. I think this was too much cutting but I have done so anyway DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 17:31, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Link theatre therapy and theatre studies

@AirshipJungleman29:

Done DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 21:38, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@AirshipJungleman29: Is everything okay? DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 18:21, 13 July 2025 (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.

Did you know nomination

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that actress Ashling O'Shea found joining the cast of Hollyoaks "surreal" as she had grown up watching the soap?

Source: [2]

ALT1: ... that the Irish play Eris was one of Ashling O'Shea's favourites due to being half-Irish herself? Source: [3]
Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Genora Johnson Dollinger
Comment: Please let me know if I should suggest another hook

Improved to Good Article status by DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 24 past nominations.

DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 11:06, 14 July 2025 (UTC).[reply]

@DaniloDaysOfOurLives: An interesting hook for this good article. Approved. Moondragon21 (talk) 19:50, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy compliance:

Adequate sourcing:
Neutral:
Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:
Other problems:

Hook eligibility:

Cited:
Interesting:
Other problems:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: