Talk:Star Cops

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Star Cops article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Star Cops was one of the Media and drama good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
January 11, 2007	Peer review	Reviewed
January 30, 2007	Good article nominee	Listed
November 28, 2023	Good article reassessment	Delisted

Current status: Delisted good article

Science Fiction Low‑importance

	Speculative fiction portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction 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.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Television: British 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.

BBC 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.

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.

Old comments

Have expanded, though more information could undoutedly (always) be added, so have removed expansion tag. Stephenb [[User talk:Stephenb|(Talk)]] 14:37, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Should we let the episodes have their own indivial pages, and perhaps we should do the same for the characters also, just that the episode summarys are merely synopsises. Tenchi Muyo 20:03, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Update

Returning to this article after a long absence I have expanded significantly. However, length is now c. 45 kilobytes. I could separate the episode guide but guidelines seem to indicate this should only be done for series with more than one season. Opinions? Joe King 18:37, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Passed GA

Article passed GA, pretty nice. It really presents it in a good fashion, and is well referenced. My only suggestion is to trim down wherever possible, and perhaps another peer review to work towards FA. Dooms Day349 01:40, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tense

Hope I'm not treading on anybody's toes here but I corrected the tense from "was" to "is" as the show is still in existence. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 19:51, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I tried to do this earlier to a couple of old TV series articles, but was reverted by someone who claimed that the standard style according to the Wikipedia TV project (see above) is to say "was" for defunct shows. I'm not sure what the policy is these days, but some have "was" and some "is"! Stephenb (Talk) 09:37, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

stereo?

The infobox says stereo. I remember hearing at the time it was going to be one of the first BBC series in stereo, but the DVD and the VHS releases are both mono. Fuddle (talk) 19:16, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It was supposed to be, but the stereo mix was never on the transmission tapes. At the time very few transmitters had been upgraded for NICAM, and hardly any receiving equipment (i.e. TVs and VCRs) was available, so it went un-noticed at the time. The original stereo recordings apparently exist in private hands, and the BBC has no copies, hence they weren't available for the VHSs/DVDs. Nick Cooper (talk) 09:13, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

Star Cops

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • GAN review not found

Result: In addition, a large amount of non-independent sourcing means that the article does not meet the GA criteria. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:49, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This 2007 addition relies on many IMDB and other self-published sources, which need to be replaced. Spinixster (chat!) 02:03, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.