Talk:Top of the Pops

	Top of the Pops was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones Date Process Result June 22, 2006 Good article nominee Not listed

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Top of the Pops article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 12 months

This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

BBC High‑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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Tasks for WikiProject BBC: edit history watch purge 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. Rock music Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock music 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.Rock musicWikipedia:WikiProject Rock musicTemplate:WikiProject Rock musicRock music Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Television: British / Episode coverage High‑importance 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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the British television task force. This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force.

At the moment there are two date ranges shown - one for the weekly series and one for the Christmas specials - but they are both labelled simply "Release". There used to be headings showing which was which, but these were removed, and when I tried reinstating them they were removed again, apparently because formatting them in that way doesn't conform to the Infobox standards. How can we resolve this? Mark and inwardly digest (talk) 15:12, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that if anything more than a date is put in a date field, this gets flagged as an error and someone comes to "fix" the error. (The infobox isn't really designed to cope with two parallel "releases".) So I've tried to fix this by adding explanations to the "network" fields.  Dr Greg  talk  16:48, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The subsection "Audio recordings of lost episodes" (in the Lost Episodes section) is both extremely lengthy and rather dubiously sourced. Should it be removed? Mark and inwardly digest (talk) 17:31, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is not true - it was recorded on a Wednesday evening and shown on the next evening (Thursday). I know - I worked for the BBC in the 70s. Jaycey (talk) 22:35, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've amended it to request a citation. Masato.harada (talk) 08:57, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]