Talk:Nineteen Eighty-Four (British TV programme)

Nineteen Eighty-Four (British TV programme) is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on September 11, 2004.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 19, 2004	Featured article candidate	Promoted
August 25, 2006	Featured article review	Demoted

Current status: Former featured article

Television: British

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the British television task force.

BBC B‑class 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

B

This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.

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.

Untitled[edit]

Could this part here:

Most were worried by the depiction of a totalitarian governmental regime controlling the population's freedom of thought, and four Conservative Party – the government of the time – MPs tabled motions in the House of Commons for the scheduled Thursday second performance to be cancelled.

be made a little bit clearer? As I understand it, 4 MPs, from the Conservative party, wanted to not see part II. Because -- why? They didn't like the depiction of a totalitarian state? How exactly did they voice their complaint, without sounding curiously ironic. They were in effect banning free thought, right? Or did they not care how it looked. Their names, and some of their other policy decisions, might shed light on this story.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.37.18.16 (talk) 01:11, 11 September 2004 (UTC)[reply]

It was an Early day motion. I've just had a look in The Times archive online and will add the info to the article. Timrollpickering 11:59, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

spelling error?[edit]

I believe that the location referred to the the Production section of the article should be Tavistock (not Taverstock).—Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.156.191.170 (talk) 13:22, 11 September 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Google has references to both spellings. I'd consult my copy of the London A-Z if it wasn't buried under a ton of rubbish....—Preceding unsigned comment added by Lee M (talk • contribs) 01:41, 9 April 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Also, unrelated, but, shouldn't the title be spelled Nineteen Eighty-Four (TV program). I mean, that is the way we spell "programme" in American English. Just wondering...--silverBULLET(x 3) 21:44, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The semi-formal Wikipedia rule is more or less to use British spelling when dealing with subjects having to do with Britain (in most cases). AnonMoos 00:35, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How does one get a copy?[edit]

Is it possible to obtain a copy of this program from anywhere? -Timvasquez 05:38, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not currently, I am afraid. There was a DVD release scheduled a couple of years back, but this was kaiboshed by the Orwell estate, who didn't want two versions of the book (this and the Burton / Hurt film) to be available. Goodness knows why. Angmering 07:34, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey[edit]

I am a United States Citizen, where can I watch this film—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.50.69.27 (talk) 02:13, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nowhere, at the moment, although there is some talk of a Region 1 DVD release this year. I am not sure if this will also go ahead or be stopped by the Orwell Estate, though. Angmering 07:44, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary hatnote[edit]

I suggest that the WP:HAT "For the American television version, see 1984 (1953 TV program)." is unnecessary per WP:NAMB, "It is usually preferable not to have a hatnote when the name of the article is not ambiguous." The title of this article, Nineteen Eighty-Four (UK TV programme), is most certainly not ambiguous and, likewise, the title of the other article, 1984 (Westinghouse Studio One), is not ambiguous.

Anyone typing "Nineteen Eighty-Four (UK TV programme)" or "1984 (Westinghouse Studio One)" already knows with great specificity the target article and needs no further direction. On the other hand, the great majority of users would not be typing such extremely specific article titles, especially with the inclusion of parenthetical qualifiers, but would simply type "1984" or "Nineteen Eighty Four" and, upon reaching the primary topic for either 1984 or Nineteen Eighty-Four, would continue on to the 1984 (disambiguation) page where all the other uses are listed.

Thus the hatnote atop "Nineteen Eighty-Four (UK TV programme)" is not needed and represents clutter. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 04:36, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"1984 (UK TV programme" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

The redirect 1984 (UK TV programme has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 21 § 1984 (UK TV programme until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 07:13, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"1984 (UK TV program" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

The redirect 1984 (UK TV program has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 21 § 1984 (UK TV program until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 07:14, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]