Talk:Private Passions

A fact from Private Passions appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 11 February 2007. The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Private Passions, a weekly classical music programme on BBC Radio 3, has occasionally featured interviews with hoax characters played by comedian John Sessions?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2007/February.

Wikipedia

Classical music

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical music, which aims to improve, expand, copy edit, and maintain all articles related to classical music, that are not covered by other classical music related projects. Please read the guidelines for writing and maintaining articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.Classical musicWikipedia:WikiProject Classical musicTemplate:WikiProject Classical musicClassical music articles

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.

Radio

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Radio, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Radio-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RadioWikipedia:WikiProject RadioTemplate:WikiProject RadioRadio articles

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

To-do List:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Create: Missing years and articles in radio, National Association of Radio Distress-Signalling and Infocommunications (Hungary)
Assess : Unassessed Radio articles; Unknown-importance Radio articles
Cleanup : Radio articles needing attention
Expand : Midweek Politics Bob Crane
Maintain : Portal:Radio
Stubs : Expand: Radio stubs
Verify : Unreferenced BLPs
Other : Collaboration of the Week:
Requests for Radio peer review:

Section sizes

Section size for Private Passions (4 sections)
Section name	Byte count	Section total
(Top)	3,924	3,924
Episodes	343	343
References	30	30
External links	241	241
Total	4,538	4,538

Splitting proposal

I propose that sections [[1]] be split into a separate page called List of Private Passions episodes. The content of the current page seems off-topic and these sections are large enough to make their own page. Splitting it into decades, with the most recent details remaining in the article Fundamentalbase (talk) 17:55, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dissect the beast!

This article is unreasonably large. At the very least, break the (apparent) two production runs into separate articles. pauli133 (talk) 15:11, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pauli33, I fully support that. Onetwothreeip (talk) 22:36, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Which "two productions"? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 04:17, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

From the main article, "The production was formerly made by Classic Arts Productions, a British radio and audio production company that provided programmes to the BBC until June 2013. Since June 2013, it has been produced by Loftus Audio. The producers are Elizabeth Burke, Jane Greenwood and Olivia Seligman." That sounds like two production runs to me, and a natural point to split the list. pauli133 (talk) 02:16, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the explanation. I only looked at this list for an explanation. // I have no objection to splitting, but size is the least of this list's problems. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 04:42, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The size is over 600,000 bytes, so this is certainly a major problem for the article, if not the most serious. Splitting it at 2013 would leave one article being 500,000 bytes, so another split would be needed afterwards. Onetwothreeip (talk) 05:22, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Five year chunks, then? pauli133 (talk) 14:04, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That would be good. Ten years at most. Onetwothreeip (talk) 23:38, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So something like List of Private Passions episodes, 1995-1999, List of Private Passions episodes, 2000-2004, List of Private Passions episodes, 2005-2009, List of Private Passions episodes, 2010-2014, List of Private Passions episodes, 2015-2019, List of Private Passions episodes, 2020-present or List of Private Passions episodes, 1995-2004, List of Private Passions episodes, 2005-2014, List of Private Passions episodes, 2015-present? pauli133 (talk) 19:32, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally - do we just want to link those articles from Private Passions (eliminating this article entirely), or transclude them into List of Private Passions episodes? pauli133 (talk) 19:50, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Pauli133: If you're willing to make those articles, I would support you. In this current article, I would link to those articles. We certainly shouldn't be having an article that contains a list of all these episodes. Onetwothreeip (talk) 06:07, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This article and all the other by-period names ought to use an endash for the range of years. E.g. not List of Private Passions episodes, 1995-1999, but List of Private Passions episodes, 1995–1999. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 00:33, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fair point! Feel free to rename them. pauli133 (talk) 01:26, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]