Talk:The Wednesday Play
Page contents not supported in other languages.
 | This article is ratedC-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale. It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The imageImage:Cathycomehome.JPG is used in this article under a claim offair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets therequirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have anexplanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
This is an automated notice byFairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, seeWikipedia:Media copyright questions. --06:37, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"The Wednesday Play was a British television play" No, it was a series of plays.—Precedingunsigned comment added byGowt (talk •contribs)16:44, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thisedit, apparently byDavid Benedictus, was added to the article earlier today. Despite not being written in the Wikipedia house style, now corrected, it is highly authoritative, but is always likely to stand out from the rest. A season by season breakdown is likely to be tedious to read, and onlythis admittedly useful site takes such an approach. It does not appear to be based on an 'official' source as to a breakdown though.
I am trying to build up an article based on personnel, the Loach-Garnett section simply benefits from a good deal of easily accessible source material on the web, and Peter Luke's involvement in seasons 1, 4 & 5, following the just cited website, is somrething which needs to be developed if the article is to be as comprehensive as the series deserves.Philip Cross (talk)19:17, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I cut back the reference to this programme to allow the inclusiuon of more details into the paragraph. I did not cut anything which is absent from the linked Wikipedia article.Philip Cross (talk)18:39, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A few days ago, the article read: "The success ofUp the Junction led to a 1968 cinematic version, setting a trend for film versions of successful or controversial BBC television plays that would continue for some years." This is inaccurate, "successful" television dramas in the UK had been turned into films for some years, thinkQuatermass, so I cut it. "Controversial" is wrong too, the1954 television version of1984 received strong responses, and was followed by a UK cinema version. So a removal of the sentence looks entirely legitimate.Philip Cross (talk)12:48, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Inthis edit I reverted another editor's change. In January 1966, almost a year before the first broadcast, there were 17,8 million homes (households) in the UK of which 15.4 million possessed a TV set. (See here.) So less than 90% penetration, but still substantial enough in a mere three-channel environment forCathy Come Home to have had the impact on public debate sources indicate.Philip Cross (talk)07:58, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link onThe Wednesday Play. Please take a moment to reviewmy edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visitthis simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set thechecked parameter below totrue orfailed to let others know (documentation at{{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018.After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored byInternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other thanregular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editorshave permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see theRfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template{{source check}}(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot(Report bug)14:14, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link onThe Wednesday Play. Please take a moment to reviewmy edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visitthis simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored byInternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other thanregular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editorshave permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see theRfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template{{source check}}(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot(Report bug)00:58, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The article currently identifies six seasons (one per year), while the detailed external site[1] identifies nine seasons (splitting the first three runs into two seasons each) and one special before Season 9. This may be a mis-interpretation of wording in the Radio Times, but could be clarified by reference to production documentation. It is further complicated by the inclusion of several productions 'flown in' from other sources or postponed.CaptainZond (talk)11:21, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
