Talk:Secret Cabaret
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Re: Credits info
It's fair enough to keep that section in if it adds information to the article and it comes from a citatble source. But I edited it to focus on the info it adds to what is already in the article because it was repeating stuff that was dealt with in the main text and also because Wikipedia text shouldn't just be a reproduction of the text of credits. I tagged it because it really needs a footnote specifying which edition the credits were taken from - they may well have differed from series to series and there may have been certain credits that only appeared on particular shows (although more likely related to acts rather than production team). If we're going to have credits info like this there's an argument that the article should also include the names of onscreen assistants who, if memory serves me right, also appeared in the credits. Circusandmagicfan 11:59, 18 March 2007 (UTC)Circusandmagicfan
Hi - this list is from the only copy of the programme I've got (the closing episode of the first series) and it would obviously be useful to compare with other tapes. However I have *not* edited the list in any way (i.e. that's all there is, so no credits to assistants or whatever). I thought this source more reliable than e.g. "memory" (from you or whoever, not pointing fingers!) or the BFI database (notorious for substandard entries, themselves drawn only from onscreen credits) - particularly as TV companies traditionally save the fullest list of credits for the last episode of a series. Also, at the time I first put the list in there was next to nothing in the entry, so it is somewhat strange for you to complain it repeats what was in the entry: so far as I can tell from the history it was you who removed the list and then used it to add things to the entry. Hope that clears things up! Testbed 14:02, 18 March 2007 (UTC)TestBed
- Thanks for the info, I'll put a reference to series one epidode six - that's all that I meant. And to clarify on my contributions, I worked from scratch from the published sources (Open Media, BFI etc), although obviously the text that was in the article previously was what prompted me to do so.Circusandmagicfan 16:09, 18 March 2007 (UTC)Circusandmagicfan
All clear - thanks! The issues with the Drake entry itself seem a little more complicated - maybe you can join in as your work is helpfully in the spirit of W (unlike some of the edits which have been going on there)Testbed 18:18, 18 March 2007 (UTC)TestBed
[edit] Broadcasters
BTW where do you get the line about "praised by broadcasters" from? Is this private infomation, published material, or are you deducing it from the RTS nomination? If the last, then there is probably a better way of characterising things: RTS nominations are decided by the membership of the RTS, which includes broadcasters but also many other categories of people working in the television industry (I just spent some time looking at their website www.rts.org.uk which makes this clear)Testbed 14:12, 18 March 2007 (UTC)TestBed
- If you really want to contest that wording then I'll see what I can do in terms of finding sources and coming up with something that's absolutely 100% incontestable. But I don't think we really disagree over the gist of what it should say. Maybe the best thing is for me to take out anything that says exactly who praised it for the time being. I mostly did the revert because I think the intro should make reference to the shows getting attention for their dark, edgy presentational style. One recent example of that sort of praise was in last year's BBC2 documentary on the history of magic - I'll see if I can cite the full details.Circusandmagicfan 16:09, 18 March 2007 (UTC)Circusandmagicfan
Sounds fair (I like the way you've left it btw) Testbed 18:18, 18 March 2007 (UTC)TestBed
