Talk:The Secret of Crickley Hall (TV series)

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.

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 (assessed as Low-importance).

Merge[edit]

Maybe if the pages are to be merged then this can be renamed "The Secrets of Crickley Hall (episodes)", also the character list could be kept too and merged onto the other page. Also to take into consideration is that this is the TV series and which also comes from a book, so should the (TV series) bit be axed from the page name or kept? Just a thought as a lot of hard work went into typing this out... JMRH6 (talk) 01:52, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion this is the article to be retained, and the other should be merged into this one.
The title is fine – don't rename it!
I have done some copy-editing of the section, Overview, and if you wanted me to, I would be happy to merge the plot summary into this article.
Cheers! -- Gareth Griffith-Jones/The Welsh Buzzard 22:59, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gareth that would be great thanks as im not sure how to merge things, really pleased my work will be used. Thanks again JMRH6 (talk) 00:06, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I look forward to working with you on this project. -- Gareth Griffith-Jones/The Welsh Buzzard 10:00, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to turn The Secret of Crickley Hall into an article about the novel with a link at the top and to the TV series along with a section referring to its adaptation into a TV series. The plot may need adjusting to compensate, as I haven't read the book, someone who has may need to tweak this themselves. I hope this resolves the problem. Let me know if there are any objections to this. ~~ Peteb16 (talk) 12:02, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent idea! – I have been worrying about this since posting yesterday (!) – certainly no objections from me. Thank you very much. Sincerely, -- Gareth Griffith-Jones/The Welsh Buzzard 12:51, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Post script: ... and you won't need to change the title of the article. Cheers! -- Gareth Griffith-Jones/The Welsh Buzzard 13:04, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that is a great idea and when I created this page I thought that it was best as TV series as someone may want to do the novel version in the future but that is great that the other has now been converted. I will write up episode 2 once it has aired tomorrow may take me till some time on Monday to complete as it isn't that easy to write up. So please keep that in mind. Thanks again for the recent work on the page too JMRH6 (talk) 16:54, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You are very welcome. Also, I am very impressed with the amount of work you have done so promptly following the transmission of episode 1 . Sincerely, -- Gareth Griffith-Jones/The Welsh Buzzard 22:17, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the kind words, I have put a lot of work into correcting and providing information to many articles over the last few years and this is the first official thanks I have had ever, I have been demoralised and didnt use wikipedia for a period as I was edit stalked on here until i came back on here under a new name which seems to have settled, although the pages i once edited are watched by the person like a hawk still. Anyway I hope to do the same for episode 2 tomorrow, i will write up a full summary of the episode tomorrow evening which will run into Monday im sure! Thanks again JMRH6 (talk) 23:12, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

With regard to c/e the plot summaries of each episode, I have been thinking about how best to present – merge – the two time frames within one section. The only other example like this, in which I have been quite heavily involved,(second biggest editor) is The Godfather Part II. What do you think about presenting them like that? -- Gareth Griffith-Jones/The Welsh Buzzard 18:23, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Initially I wasn't sure, but the more I look at it, the more I think it'll help the reader better than anything else I can currently think of. ~~ Peteb16 (talk) 19:29, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article / section size[edit]

Can I just raise a point of concern sooner rather than later. The episode one summary is big, if you're going to attempt to add episode 2 and 3 plots to a similar weight, we're going to have a very big article which may be hard to follow. Can we discuss ideas of preventing this from happening such as cutting down on plot detail or possibly creating episode specific articles moving over the full plot and replacing it with a summary on this page with a 'main article' link? ~~ Peteb16 (talk) 19:29, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree it was a bit lenghty... maybe we could do an episodes page but i like what has been discussed above re what has happened on the Godfather Part II page I will try it now JMRH6 (talk) I have given it a go, but it looks longer now, hmmm... please feel free to revert it if you wish when you see it but I think that we may have to cut it down a lot or more to an episodes page maybe?JMRH6 (talk) 02:06, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As both of you seem to be giving support to my idea – GFII – I shall proceed with the copy-editing with that in mind. Any objections? -- Gareth Griffith-Jones/The Welsh Buzzard 08:21, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

None at all. If it still looks oversized we can always go to plan b; splitting the article. ~~ Peteb16 (talk) 10:56, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good. I have just rewritten the Lead. What do you think of it? Is it long enough? (bearing in mind the size of the episode summaries ...) -- Gareth Griffith-Jones/The Welsh Buzzard 11:07, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmmm... being pick now, but the first sentence seems a bit choppy. Not sure what to suggest to improve it though. The rest works well though. I've seen much longer leads so I wouldn't worry about size at this point. ~~ Peteb16 (talk) 12:37, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A thought ... one way of reducing duplication would be to eliminate actors' names in the episode summaries. We do have a comprehensive cast list after all. What do you think? -- Gareth Griffith-Jones/The Welsh Buzzard 18:19, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Post script: The viewing figures held up well for episode 2. -- Gareth Griffith-Jones/The Welsh Buzzard 00:33, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re:actors names in episodes yes lets remove them as the cast list is great! the figures held very well, from the reactions i have seen I would have thought that it was more popular!JMRH6 (talk) 12:42, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Glad you agree with me over the showing of actors' names in the summaries and thank you for doing it. What do you think of it after my copy-editing last night? -- Gareth Griffith-Jones/The Welsh Buzzard 13:01, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Critical reception?[edit]

A section that talks about the critical reception of the miniseries is far more urgently needed than the copious quantity of information about the plot. — OwenBlacker (Talk) 23:25, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]