Talk:BBC Look North (Yorkshire and North Midlands)

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.

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.

On 28 October 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved. The result of the discussion was not moved.

Old discussion

Homes in southern areas of North Yorkshire such as York, Selby and Harrogate tend to have their aerials directed at Emley Moor, meaning they receive the Leeds Look North.

Is this true? At a cursory glance, homes in Harrogate seem to have their aerials pointed north east towards (I would guess) Bilsdale, meaning they would get the Newcastle Look North. I've seen a few aerials facing Emley Moor but these seem to be in the minority. I'm not sure which of the two transmitters provides the best reception quality in Harrogate but I guess that might be a factor for some viewers.

It would be interesting if most York viewers get the Leeds show, as I thought the Newcastle show "officially" covered York. Which BBC region are York's Sky TV viewers allocated? 217.155.20.163 (talk) 16:11, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Most people in York watch Leeds, but York is covered by both regions. Shouldn't the information about coverage be moved to the BBC Yorkshire page? Look North is just one of many regional programmes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.39.136.92 (talk) 18:39, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All the information about people watching North West Tonight and Look North (Newcastle) and where their antenna is pointing and which relay they may be receiving their TV signal from is irrelevant to the topic of the actual program Look North (Leeds) and its editorial content. Surely all the statements making pronouncements about most homes and the direction of their antennas comes under "original research" which is supposed to be banned from Wikipeda articles. 107.183.29.213 (talk) 07:11, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Charlotte Leeming

She is still definitely on Look North. 51kwad (talk) 13:42, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move: (BBC Look North (Yorkshire and North Midlands) → BBC Look North (Yorkshire and the North Midlands))

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus. --BDD (talk) 23:38, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

BBC Look North (Yorkshire and North Midlands) → BBC Look North (Yorkshire and the North Midlands) – A more grammatically-correct name, reflected by the disparity of numbers (412,000, in contrast to 62,400), in the same way as the name "Yorkshire and the Humber" (5,500,000) is more correct than the name of simply "Yorkshire and Humber" (771,000). Relisted. BDD (talk) 21:53, 22 October 2013 (UTC) --- 212.50.182.151 (talk) 19:36, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. As titles are not sentences, grammar doesn't come into it. -- Ohc ^¡digame!_{¿que pasa?} 04:25, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

With all due and the greatest possible respect, but says who? In the Far East, or in England? The names "Midlands" and "Humber", except when being the opening word or part thereof, have almost always without much exception preceded in England and in the English language by the article. --- 212.50.182.151 (talk) 07:09, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment the programme's home page [1] and Facebook page [2] don't seem to mention North Midlands at all, they just call it BBC Look North (Yorkshire). Is there a reason not to use that title? — Amakuru (talk) 10:34, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps an historical title for past coverage. A simple new title [of] "BBC Look North (Yorkshire)" is no more unacceptable. --- 212.50.182.151 (talk) 07:09, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably matching the division name BBC Yorkshire, although the BBC like us are using it to disambiguate it between the two other Look Norths, however just using 'Yorkshire' alone is certainly not as accurate as 'Yorkshire and the North Midlands'. -- [[ axg // ✉ ]] 19:03, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

"Incorrect name"

Given that we have at least three articles about different versions of "BBC Look North" (see also BBC Look North (East Yorkshire and Lincolnshire) and BBC Look North (North East and Cumbria)) in different local broadcasting regions of the same country, what other name is even possible here besides disambiguating them by region? England ain't gonna cut it given that all three of them are in England, so what other alternative could possibly be any more compliant with WP:NCTV or WP:NCBC? Bearcat (talk) 03:22, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 28 October 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Consensus to not move and remove tags. (closed by non-admin page mover) Frostly (talk) 04:44, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

– WP:NCTV problem that's unresolvable without discussion. Officially, NCTV permits television programs to be disambiguated by country, by year and/or with a genre tag on top of year or country when necessary for added clarity, and deprecates anything else — but in this case, what we have is three regional newscasts in the same country, which are disambiguated by region and thus tagged with the "Television incorrect naming style" template for "attention".
But it's unclear what NCTV-compliant alternative names would even be possible here — country won't work at all, and disambiguating them by their own individual years of premiere would be utterly opaque and useless since they're concurrently-running newscasts. So I really see disambiguating them by region as the only viable option here, though I'm all ears if somebody's got some brilliant new alternative idea.
There have been instances (e.g. Big Brother (Quebec TV series) as the only viable way to effectively disambiguate it from Big Brother Canada, etc.) where consensus has landed on "permit special-case variation here", but that requires a discussion to establish a consensus, and I can't just unilaterally decree that.
And the only other solution I can think of would be to merge them all into one article that covered all three shows in the same place, and thus could have their disambiguators totally wiped out, but that's also not a solution I'm prepared to implement arbitrarily either.
But there's no point in just leaving them tagged for "incorrect naming style" in perpetuity — one way or another, we need to figure out how to get the pages out of the "naming problems that need to be fixed" queue, since there's no value in just leaving them there forever. Bearcat (talk) 20:13, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Leave it. While it's true that the status quo doesn't follow WP:NCTV, the current titles are precise, concise, and unambiguous. There's nothing to improve on here. 162 etc. (talk) 20:58, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is one thing to improve here: ensuring that there's a clear consensus to get the unresolvable maintenance template off the pages. Bearcat (talk) 00:34, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Leave it & remove tags unless someone proposes a better solution.--MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 08:15, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Leave: the current titles reflect the situation perfectly well. YorkshireExpat (talk) 13:18, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The standards-compliant names are BBC Look North (1959 TV programme) (North-East and Cumbria), BBC Look North (1968 TV programme) (Yorkshire and North Midlands), and BBC Look North (2002 TV programme) (East Yorkshire and Lincolnshire), if anyone is interested in the "official" alternative to the status quo. Tevildo (talk) 21:22, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That would be very unclear as not many would know the years. Keep the existing titles. Keith D (talk) 23:22, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It would be possible to move the articles to the compliant titles and use {{DISPLAYTITLE}}, if it's necessary to keep the bots happy. Tevildo (talk) 00:05, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Displaytitle doesn't work that way. It just imposes formatting changes, such as italicizing the page title or lowercasing the first letter when needed, and doesn't cause the title to "display" different words than the page's actual location. Bearcat (talk) 16:14, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Awful. Please leave it alone. WP:IAR. YorkshireExpat (talk) 18:10, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yikes. That’s an awful lot of letters and numbers and parentheses that don’t clearly add necessary clarification. I’d be interested in seeing a WP guideline that calls for this but would continue to advocate for an exception blessing the current titles unless I’m missing something. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 04:12, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That would be absolutely opaque and useless, since none of those titles would give a reader the foggiest clue which one of these topics they were going to land on. Bearcat (talk) 16:14, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Leave it. Whilst this may not follow NCTV It would still confuse readers even moreso with the year names, Better left as is imho. –Davey2010^Talk 21:50, 5 November 2024 (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.