Talk:Jekyll (TV series)

Jekyll (TV series) has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 25, 2010	Good article nominee	Listed

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 Mid‑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

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-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.

Genre comments

Instead of talking about it being a postmodern updating, blah blah blah, couldn't it just (or additionally) be referred to as a sequel to the original story? Also, would it be acceptable in Wikipedia terms to provide a more precise "genre" description, say "Horror", instead of the catch-all "Drama"? -88.109.33.60 08:53, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not really horror. I'd say it's a thriller, of the soft science fiction or fantasy type. --Tony Sidaway 12:00, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright infringements

Please don't restore copyright infringements to this article. If this continues the material will simply be removed, and there may be blockings. --Tony Sidaway 16:51, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cast And Characters

This has been bugging me for weeks now: what's with the constant adding and then almost instant removal of the Characters section? Sometimes there is a detailed section of the characters, and other days there is just a cast and character listing. What's going on? Either keep it or chuck it out, instead of this annoying edit battle. I'm not sure if it has anything to do with the article being locked or the 'copyright infringement' comment above, but whoever is constantly adding/removing that section better come to their senses. King Wagga 11:42, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The section contains verbatime copies of content from the BBC site, subject to copyright and obviously not licensable under the GFDL. I remove it whenever it's added, but with different (mostly not logged-in) editors continually adding it and failing to discuss on this talk page that's a losing battle, so it's now semi-protected. --Tony Sidaway 11:58, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A while ago I did add detail for the Benjamin character which wasn't taken from the BBC site, because he isn't listed there. The last episode should air this weekend, maybe we could write out a short paragraph or two on each once it's done? Hewinsj 15:54, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, for some reason the character of Benjamin has his last name listed as "Maddox", when in the series you can clearly hear him introduce himself as Benjamin Lennox(sp?) with a pronunciation similar to Linux. Just thought I'd point it out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.171.196.40 (talk) 10:00, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Spoliers in the Episode Listing

Perhaps the descriptions in the episode list could be tweaked to not include spoilers? After all, the show story relies on suspense and careful revelation of details. Knowing some of the information beforehand could ruin it for people. Theangryblackwoman 15:27, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As per WP:SPOILER, spoilers are to be expected in articles, as articles are supposed to cover a subject in detail. Equally, there is no need for spoiler tags for this same reason, and the fact that tags mess up the style of a page. _TheIslander 15:43, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would not expect there to be a spoiler in the main article for a TV show or in a summary listing of the episodes. Now, an article ABOUT the episode, surely. I would have no quibble. But in this case, it's just gratuitous. And also the summaries are badly written, which is another issue. Theangryblackwoman 14:15, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would I be going too far by suggesting that the summaries have been boiled down to just moments that could be considered spoilers? Hewinsj 05:06, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sush, don't tell Daddy....

After the airing of the last episode I realized there are still many unanswered questions [the most interesting of which is Tom's children telling their mother to "hush", possibly about them "swapping" (bodies?) in the life caskets (the containment coffins) - which would lead one to believe they have a similar curse of their father]. I'm not asking for speculation, I just posted this comment to ask if anyone knew if a second series was in the works? With the unanswered questions and the open-ended issues (such as will Hyde continue to exist as a persona?), on top of the DVD being titled "Jekyll: Series One", can anyone confirm if the BBC plan on continuing the Jekyll story? King Wagga 19:45, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are no definite plans yet for a second series, but please bear in mind that this page is for the discussion of the Jekyll article, not Jekyll itself. _TheIslander 20:47, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, you're right about this talk page. That said, if there are plans for a second season, it should be reflected in the article. Someone on the IMDb discussion board for Jekyll (I know, not a reliable source) says that there was a second season, to air before Christmas, was mentioned "on This Morning or GMTV and also in the T.V. guide". Can anyone verify this? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 22:25, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can't verify or deny it, but I will say that it sounds extremely unlikely to me. Before Christmas? I can't see it happening... _TheIslander 22:58, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

'TheIslander', I apologize for my comment seeming as though I was talking about the actual Jekyll TV programme, I only inquired to a second series so that we could have a mention on the actual article. And 'Josiah Rowe', I will have a search on the net for anymore info, although I agree with TheIslander that it sounds unlikely. King Wagga 22:55, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The American Woman

Who played the sinister American woman who turned out to be Jackman/Hyde's mother? And what was the name of the character? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.145.241.154 (talk) 18:21, 11 August 2007

The credits of Episode 4 list it as "Ms. Utterson" (the head person of Klein & Utterson) played by Linda Marlowe. There isn't a wikipedia article on her, so I suggest visiting the IMDB entry for her. King Wagga 18:10, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Second series

The article still lists the original run as "present". Does anybody know if a second series has been commissioned or if it's been cancelled? If it's been cancelled the infobox should be updated to reflect this. Matthew 19:27, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think either, right now. Series 2 certainly hasn't been comissioned, but I don't think it's been cancelled either. Still a possibility. _TheIslander 19:32, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Stage says maybe.[1] Brad 16:04, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The BBC DVD reads Season One, so I doubt it's cancelled.

sepmix 23:41, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let's not speculate - this is Wikipedia, after all. Besides, the "Season One" on the DVD cover might imply a second coming, but after the large October 2007 money cuts, the shows' future remains unclear now that the BBC are planning on showing repeats of old stuff for an unspecified amount of time, rather than buying new series content. King Wagga 18:08, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This of course doesn't mean that there will be a second series, but according to an interview with the writer of Jekyll, Steven Moffat: http://www.sliceofscifi.com/2007/08/03/moffatt-talks-about-jekyll-doctor-who/ he does say that he has a sequel ready, if the BBC are interested. Gaunt 21:30, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Episode Guide

I notice the synopsis for episode six has big spoilers in it, should they be left like this, the episode descriptions?

sepmix 23:43, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's an episode summary thing, so it's to be expected. If the spoilers are really big and detailed, it may be best to add a spoiler banner. (You know, the thing that reads "Spoiler warning: plot details may follow"). I'd do it, but I haven't yet learnt how to. King Wagga 15:29, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:SPOILER, spoiler tags aren't needed - as you yourself point out, it's a summary, so you'd expect to find spoilers. _TheIslander 16:17, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Overseas Edits

I'd have thought that the overseas edits of the series would warrant a mention - not least because they were dreadful. Episodes were sandwiched together into 3 'movie-length' episodes and a heap of swearing was edited in for entirely elusive reasons. I don't have all the details but thought it was relevant... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.1.205.249 (talk) 07:36, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any reliable sources? The JPS ^{talk to me} 15:55, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are various unsourced mention on the IMDb forum for the series, threads such as this one[2] and this one [3]

IMDB is not considered a reliable source for such things. Doniago (talk) 17:39, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not suggesting that it's used as a verifiable source, but the comments about running length, edits, etc have been mentioned in many other places, INCLUDING the commentary track by Steven Moffat on one of the DVDs.--Gaunt (talk) 22:04, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can vaguely recall him saying something about it on the commentaries. I'll have to listen again. There are great chunk sthat need referencing anyway. The JPS ^{talk to me} 22:49, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Second Series quote from Moffat

There appears to be some 'dispute' here regarding the original reference to a Moffat quote to The New Jersey Ledger which was reproduced on sliceofscifi.com ( http://www.sliceofscifi.com/2007/08/03/moffatt-talks-about-jekyll-doctor-who/ ) - as it's a direct quote, why can't the reference remain? Newslibrary.com can be searched for the original Ledger article (do an advanced search for the three words 'Moffat' 'Jekyll' 'Sequel') but then you need to pay $2.95 to read the whole article. Not a big deal, but presumably this article can't be linked to from Wikipedia, even when paid for? So I'll say it again - what's wrong with the original reference to sliceofscifi.com ? It's a valid quote and article. What's the problem? --Gaunt (talk) 08:06, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gaunt -- it's pretty academic now that the original article is cited. sliceofscifi.com appears to fail the criteria at WP:RS. The JPS ^{talk to me} 15:41, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that the link to the cited reference now goes nowhere - why not keep the sliceofscifi.com reference until the original source can at least be linked to?--Gaunt (talk) 17:53, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gaunt, the Star Ledger citation will exist forever; someone can access the original article anytime they like to verify it (either by looking up the hard copy in any major US library or by accessing it in an online repository--like Lexis or Newslibrary or Newsbank--which again will be available for free in major libraries worldwide). This is preferable to what is, frankly, an ephemeral website that we cannot prove has accurately reproduced the quote. Bradley0110 (talk) 19:05, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Censorship

I read, a long time ago, a quote from Moffat where he said the language edits were at his own behest because he realised his own children would enjoy the series. If anyone can find a reference, please include this in the article. 87.115.18.214 (talk) 18:20, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Characters

We should not try to get around the limits of WP:PLOT by introducing a separate 'characters' section that is based 'in-universe'. Characters should be discussed with 'real-world' context outside of the 'plot' and 'episode summary' sections, with references. The JPS ^{talk to me} 21:31, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dissociative identity disorder…?

The article contains the line, the Robert Louis Stevenson tale of dissociative identity disorder - surely that is both original research, as well as inappropriate? Apart from there having been no such diagnosis in his day, RLS’s book is about a fictional chemical substance which carries out a physical and mental transformation of the subject, whereas DID is a controversial diagnosis of a mental condition; there really isn’t anything other than supposition to link the two. Jock123 (talk) 08:34, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Jekyll (TV series). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:51, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jekyll (TV series). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927004231/http://www.bbcamerica.com/content/260/nesbitt.jsp to http://www.bbcamerica.com/content/260/nesbitt.jsp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:32, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Jekyll (TV series). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:43, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]