Talk:To the Manor Born
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Richard's last name
After editing Dramatic's change, I pulled out my DVDs to check, and not only is Mrs. Poo's last name Polouvicka, so is Bedřich's. Confirmed from the BBC's episode guide. Gridlock Joe 04:02, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Audrey's last name
The spelling with the two small f's is correct. Marjory mentions this while they're reading Martin's obituary in the newspaper, saying "They've got the two small f's." -- Gridlock Joe 15:43, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
That's right. See also: Ff (digraph) where the spelling is explained. --AndreasPraefcke 16:45, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Record audience
I think some sort of qualifier is needed here, as I seem to remember over 30 million people watched the 1981 royal wedding. Landolitan 12:13, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
The record To The Manor Born held refers to a television program, not a broadcast of an actual event such as the Royal Wedding, a football match etc
[edit] Cast
Should the article be expanding to include short sections of biography about each of the main charchters as there is on other articles about Sitcoms such as Penelope Keiths other most famous role Margo Leadbetter in The Good Life. Penrithguy 14:35, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
- Possible so, but any character biography should be a new section called "Characters" (see The Good Life#Characters for what I mean.--Berks105 17:18, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Dispute
Firsly, regarding the 24 million. This was for the last ever episode, as is widely known, and the Daily Mail source says "Penelope Keith holds hands with Peter Bowles". This is a clear indication to their marriage so the 1979 date is a typo. I have replaced with a correct source. Secondly, just because its reported in The Guardian and The Daily Telegraph does not change the fact they are rumours. In the reports about 2 weeks ago they said an announcement would be made with "days". Well that didn't happen. If we report rumour we look like a tabloid. It has no place on Wikipedia until CONFIRMED by the BBC. I would kindly ask you not to change the current version without a discussion here first otherwise an edit war starts. Thanks.--UpDown 07:40, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
Quite happy to discuss here.
The "last ever episode" myth is easy to dispel. This is the wording from www.bbc.co.uk/comedy/tothemanorborn/index.shtml (in case the link is broken):
"To The Manor Born is one of the UK's finest sitcoms. And the numbers are there to prove it. One episode (not its last, contrary to popular myth) notching up 23.95 million viewers - enough to make it the fourth most-watched programme of the 1970s."
And if you need confirmation of the 11.11.79 episode, try the British Film Institute at www.bfi.org.uk/features/mostwatched/1970s.html
The rumour/report of a further episode (a dreadful idea anyway) is admittedly more controversial, despite the 'Reliable Source' non-tabloid nature of the links. Shouldn't the article contain some reference to it, even if of a sceptical nature? Otherwise, shall we wait to see what Santa brings us? OllyH 01:10, 12 October 2007 (UTC)OllyH
- Firstly, I don't believe the article should contain any reference to reports about a further episode. Only if confirmed. To the second matter, I'm very surprised that such a well-known fact appears to be a myth. I note also here that a 1980 episode had over 21 million viewers. I will do some more research then rewrite the whole paragraph. --UpDown 07:15, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
- regarding the last episode ratings, a look at the BARB site (who calculated the ratings starting August 1981) shows that the episode shown on 19th October 1981 (the last episode) had 17.80 Million viewers (and was beaten that year by an episode of Coronation Street, The Benny Hill Show, and an episode of This is Your Life) -
- http://www.barb.co.uk/25years/top10.php?section=events&callyear=1981 Paul 1978 10:46, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for that. I'll use all of them the above when rewriting the section.--UpDown 12:19, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Revival?
Yet another dispute! I am not claiming ownershi" of this article as Exxolon claims. Wikipedia is meant to be an encyclopedia and they do not report tabloid rumours. As any British person could tell you the tabloids report rumours every day of the week and it is not the place of an encyclopedia to report them. All the reports, about 3 weeks ago, all said it would be confirmed "within days". It wasn't, which makes the crediblity of the rumours less. But regardless Wikipedia does not report rumour. If its confirmed, which if its a 2007 Christmas special it will have to be soon, then we can include but keeping the rumour there makes Wikipedia look like a tabloid newspaper.--UpDown 07:50, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
- Last time I checked the Daily Telegraph wasn't a tabloid newspaper... Exxolon 16:57, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
- Indeed not. But its still a press report. It's still a rumour. --UpDown 17:32, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Mrs POO? Mrs POOLE?
In the show, Audrey refuses to bother saying the complete form of Mrs Poolovitska's name. So she humorously shortens it.
However, I am fairly sure she shortens it to Mrs. POOLE, not Mrs, POO .......????
Mrs Poolovitska is of course Richard's mother. His original name is Poolovitska's, too. He anglicized, or rather just changed, his name to deVere in the early days of his career to get on in England. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.149.36.207 (talk) 23:51, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- No, wrong. It is "Mrs Poo", as could be easily referenced. His orginal surname is also referred to in an episode as Polouvicki, which I've referenced/--UpDown (talk) 08:14, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what you mean by "referenced". You have the DVD right? I also have it, and it is unclear to me what she is saying. Perhaps in the novelisations? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.149.36.207 (talk) 20:44, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- To be honest with you it does sound like "Pooh" rather than "Poole": given Penelope Keith's accent the "oo" sound is likely to be longer for the latter, and in the vast majority of cases from watching the DVD it's not. Also a google search brings up "Poo" or "Pooh" a considerable amount more often than "Poole". -- Roleplayer (talk) 21:26, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- Indeed, it does, and the "Poo" being the start of her surname. For refs, apart from the programme, see [1], [2], [3].--UpDown (talk) 10:59, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what you mean by "referenced". You have the DVD right? I also have it, and it is unclear to me what she is saying. Perhaps in the novelisations? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.149.36.207 (talk) 20:44, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Proposed changes as of December 2007
I'm not going to get involved in what should or should not be included in the article, however can I please remind both sides that references are needed for any statements made in the article: a lot of the new changes proposed by the anon user are quite sweeping and therefore if they are to stay, they need to be referenced. -- Roleplayer (talk) 21:30, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- Which is why I have removed them. I have put a lot of effort in making sure this article is fully sourced, and indeed removed a earlier statement on the show's title being related to Hamlet. Sources are needed, and most of the proposed changes sound like OR and opinion. --UpDown (talk) 10:55, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] BBC playing games?
Is someone from the BBC "corpo-wikiing" here? Someone is obsessed with not changing anything on the page. ITS THE WIKIPEDIA -- ITS SUPPOSED TO BE CHANGED.
The article as it stands is moderately-OK at best. A "B". The grammar is acceptabl, the sentence clarity nothing special. Nothing startling here. As with all of Wiki, EDIT AT WILL.
Wait! Will this section be removed from the discussion page?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.149.36.207 (talk) 00:11, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- I will soon asked for you to be blocked if you continue with this vandalism. If there are spelling or grammar errors then correct them, as some have, but do not add unreferenced orginal research to the article. Who says the show is name after the Hamlet words? Who says most English speakers now mistake the words? Who says it is an example of an eggcorn? If you read the "Filming" section, you will see referenced details of Spence's connection to the house. As I said, any further unreferenced changes will be reverted and I will ask for a block to be considered.--UpDown (talk) 10:35, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- I second UpDown here. UpDown can sometimes be a little brash with their enforcement of the Wikipedia principles of no original research, however they still have a point. The edits you are trying to make to the article have no references, and make claims that, if they are to stay, need to be referenced. The whole idea of Wikipedia is indeed to make changes, however in doing so to make sure those changes are valid and truthful, otherwise they will indeed be removed fairly quickly. After all, what is the point of an encyclopedia if that encyclopedia can't prove that it's information is factual? -- Roleplayer (talk) 11:20, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Tothemanorborn.jpg
Image:Tothemanorborn.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 02:34, 12 February 2008 (UTC)