Talk:This Week (2003 TV programme)

Learn more about this page

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the This Week (2003 TV programme) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

BBC Mid‑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 articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-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.

Politics of the United Kingdom

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom 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.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

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 (assessed as Mid-importance).

Spelling

Latest comment: 16 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I was wondering what the policy on UK vs. US spelling was in cases where it is clearly more relevant to one of those that the other. I only mention this because of the spelling of pajamas over pyjamas is used. --87.194.118.205 23:40, 25 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure if there is an official policy but I feel all articles relating to the BBC should be in British English. (Morcus (talk) 11:57, 19 March 2008 (UTC))Reply

Controversial figure

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Why is Michael Stipe described as a "controversial figure"? ACEOREVIVED (talk) 23:28, 14 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

I agree it is very poorly written but it says "serious and/or controversial". Presumably Stipe falls into the serious category. Exok (talk) 23:37, 14 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Requested move 6 August 2018

Latest comment: 6 years ago5 comments5 people in discussion

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. (non-admin closure) The editor whose username is Z0 16:25, 13 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

– There are two issues here. The first is that both of these British TV programmes are currently incorrectly disambiguated under WP:NCTV (disambiguation "by network" has been deprecated as being too obscure for most readers, especially for international readers). The second is that, under WP:NCTV, neither of these is a "TV series" (i.e. with "continuing story elements"), but they are both "current affairs... television programme(s)" as both articles' own ledes makes clear. So they should be disambiguated with "TV programme" as per WP:NCTV, with additional "by year" disambiguation to disambiguate them from each other. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 06:32, 6 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

Support per WP:NCTV. --Gonnym (talk) 08:57, 6 August 2018 (UTC)Reply
Support per nom. Unreal7 (talk) 09:37, 10 August 2018 (UTC)Reply
Support per nom. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk | contribs} 22:27, 12 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Add topic