Talk:Homesick (Only Fools and Horses)

BBC: Sitcoms Low‑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

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by BBC Sitcoms Task Force.

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.

Comedy Low‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy 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.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

London Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London 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.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Television: British / Episode coverage 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 Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force.

Do Gilly Flower and Renee Roberts really play Miss Tibbs and Miss Gatsby?

The credits on the show, the credits on all but one site and the credits given in the book "Only Fools And Horses - The Official Inside Story" only name Flower and Roberts as "First Old Lady" and "Second Old Lady".

Given that they aren't in any scenes at the same time(they were never apart in Fawlty Towers), don't act like their characters in Fawlty Towers did and are never named in the episode, I think you have to conclude that the one person on the one site(Radio Times) which says they're reprising their roles from Fawlty Towers and are playing "Miss Tibbs" and "Miss Gatsby" has made a mistake.

I know a page from a book about OFAH is also cited but we aren't told what that page says and the person who wrote that book could well have got their information from said Radio Times site.

I'm going to remove what I believe is incorrect information but if people really want to ignore the evidence and say the Radio Times takes precedence over lots of other sites and info on the show itself, I'll begrudgingly-accept the reversal of my edit and won't change anything on this page in the future.

Ron Stowmarket (talk) 22:45, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]