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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject British TV/Shows, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of British TV shows 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.
The tv play and the movie are different "items". We need two articles. --Pequod76 (talk-ita.esp.eng) 01:37, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
There's barely enough information here for a Start-Class article. I don't see what benefit there would be from splitting that information. Fortdj33 (talk) 13:24, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
What's bad in a Start-Class article?
If tomorrow John Doe makes a movie about Don Quixote would you "force" to put the information about the movie in the article about Cervantes' masterpiece (with category, infobox and everything) until the information is "sufficient" to create an indipendent article?
It's not a problem of "benefits": the point is "two independent items" that are forced together. If I create two good articles about the two items in another wp, the interlinks are "stopped" because of this strange decision. The three interlinks (polish, french, italian) are about the movie. Here you have a kind of Janus... Accidentally, the title is the same. What would you do if *just* the title were different? I'm about to create an article on the Potter's play: don't you see what interlinks mess is to be created?
We have a lot of stubs and this is not a problem at all. It's normal development of the project. I'm just suggesting to be precise and clear. It's not splitting. Quite the opposite, I suggest to avoid continuing to have a roughly made botch. The birth of Wikidata suggests not having any upset about stubs...