Talk:CI5: The New Professionals

Television 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.

It is requested that an image or photograph of CI5: The New Professionals be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

"Half Season"?

Yeah, because there's a standardised "season" length for TV shows across the entire world, isn't there? 86.129.60.161 (talk) 23:26, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Broadcasting issues

I've had to rewrite the Broadcasting Issues section, because it was blatantly wrong. Sky was far from being in its "infancy" in 1999, in fact it was the dominant provider of digital television in the UK, with Sky Digital outpacing OnDigital (launched in 1998) by a wide margin. Sky was the only broadcaster that showed any interest in The New Professionals (the BBC, ITV and Channel Four all turned it down) and promoted it extensively in the run-up to the broadcast of the first episode; it was seen as being one of the flagships of its "home-grown" production effort.

It was only after the first episode aired and the majority viewer response was so massively negative that Sky realised it had a failure on its hands and decided to bury the show, letting the remaining episodes air without promotion. It is telling that they chose never to repeat it - normally Sky repeats its programming ad nauseaum - and that no other broadcaster decided it was worth buying. 213.132.48.105 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:46, 23 March 2012 (UTC).[reply]

Cuts

Is it really that necessary to hammer the cuts home by mentioning them quite so often?

Tom Prankerd (talk) 18:22, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]