Talk:To the Manor Born

Richard's last name

After editing Dramatic's change, I pulled out my DVDs to check, and not only is Mrs. Poo's last name Polouvicka, so is Bedřich's. Confirmed from the BBC's episode guide. Gridlock Joe 04:02, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Audrey's last name

The spelling with the two small f's is correct. Marjory mentions this while they're reading Martin's obituary in the newspaper, saying "They've got the two small f's." -- Gridlock Joe 15:43, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

That's right. See also: Ff (digraph) where the spelling is explained. --AndreasPraefcke 16:45, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I have inserted notes in the text all through the article, having just reverted the spelling again. -- role^player 23:17, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Record audience

I think some sort of qualifier is needed here, as I seem to remember over 30 million people watched the 1981 royal wedding. Landolitan 12:13, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

The record To The Manor Born held refers to a television program, not a broadcast of an actual event such as the Royal Wedding, a football match etc

Cast

Should the article be expanding to include short sections of biography about each of the main charchters as there is on other articles about Sitcoms such as Penelope Keiths other most famous role Margo Leadbetter in The Good Life. Penrithguy 14:35, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Possible so, but any character biography should be a new section called "Characters" (see The Good Life#Characters for what I mean.--Berks105 17:18, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Dispute

Firsly, regarding the 24 million. This was for the last ever episode, as is widely known, and the Daily Mail source says "Penelope Keith holds hands with Peter Bowles". This is a clear indication to their marriage so the 1979 date is a typo. I have replaced with a correct source. Secondly, just because its reported in The Guardian and The Daily Telegraph does not change the fact they are rumours. In the reports about 2 weeks ago they said an announcement would be made with "days". Well that didn't happen. If we report rumour we look like a tabloid. It has no place on Wikipedia until CONFIRMED by the BBC. I would kindly ask you not to change the current version without a discussion here first otherwise an edit war starts. Thanks.--UpDown 07:40, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Quite happy to discuss here.

The "last ever episode" myth is easy to dispel. This is the wording from www.bbc.co.uk/comedy/tothemanorborn/index.shtml (in case the link is broken):

"To The Manor Born is one of the UK's finest sitcoms. And the numbers are there to prove it. One episode (not its last, contrary to popular myth) notching up 23.95 million viewers - enough to make it the fourth most-watched programme of the 1970s."

And if you need confirmation of the 11.11.79 episode, try the British Film Institute at www.bfi.org.uk/features/mostwatched/1970s.html

The rumour/report of a further episode (a dreadful idea anyway) is admittedly more controversial, despite the 'Reliable Source' non-tabloid nature of the links. Shouldn't the article contain some reference to it, even if of a sceptical nature? Otherwise, shall we wait to see what Santa brings us? OllyH 01:10, 12 October 2007 (UTC)OllyH

Firstly, I don't believe the article should contain any reference to reports about a further episode. Only if confirmed. To the second matter, I'm very surprised that such a well-known fact appears to be a myth. I note also here that a 1980 episode had over 21 million viewers. I will do some more research then rewrite the whole paragraph. --UpDown 07:15, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

regarding the last episode ratings, a look at the BARB site (who calculated the ratings starting August 1981) shows that the episode shown on 19th October 1981 (the last episode) had 17.80 Million viewers (and was beaten that year by an episode of Coronation Street, The Benny Hill Show, and an episode of This is Your Life) -

http://www.barb.co.uk/25years/top10.php?section=events&callyear=1981 Paul 1978 10:46, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I'll use all of them the above when rewriting the section.--UpDown 12:19, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Revival?

Yet another dispute! I am not claiming ownershi" of this article as Exxolon claims. Wikipedia is meant to be an encyclopedia and they do not report tabloid rumours. As any British person could tell you the tabloids report rumours every day of the week and it is not the place of an encyclopedia to report them. All the reports, about 3 weeks ago, all said it would be confirmed "within days". It wasn't, which makes the crediblity of the rumours less. But regardless Wikipedia does not report rumour. If its confirmed, which if its a 2007 Christmas special it will have to be soon, then we can include but keeping the rumour there makes Wikipedia look like a tabloid newspaper.--UpDown 07:50, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Last time I checked the Daily Telegraph wasn't a tabloid newspaper... Exxolon 16:57, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Indeed not. But its still a press report. It's still a rumour. --UpDown 17:32, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Mrs Poo? Mrs Poole?

In the show, Audrey refuses to bother saying the complete form of Mrs Poolovitska's name. So she humorously shortens it.

However, I am fairly sure she shortens it to Mrs. POOLE, not Mrs, POO .......????

Mrs Poolovitska is of course Richard's mother. His original name is Poolovitska's, too. He anglicized, or rather just changed, his name to deVere in the early days of his career to get on in England. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.149.36.207 (talk) 23:51, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

No, wrong. It is "Mrs Poo", as could be easily referenced. His orginal surname is also referred to in an episode as Polouvicki, which I've referenced/--UpDown (talk) 08:14, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean by "referenced". You have the DVD right? I also have it, and it is unclear to me what she is saying. Perhaps in the novelisations? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.149.36.207 (talk) 20:44, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

To be honest with you it does sound like "Pooh" rather than "Poole": given Penelope Keith's accent the "oo" sound is likely to be longer for the latter, and in the vast majority of cases from watching the DVD it's not. Also a google search brings up "Poo" or "Pooh" a considerable amount more often than "Poole". -- Roleplayer (talk) 21:26, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, it does, and the "Poo" being the start of her surname. For refs, apart from the programme, see [1], [2], [3].--UpDown (talk) 10:59, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Proposed changes as of December 2007

I'm not going to get involved in what should or should not be included in the article, however can I please remind both sides that references are needed for any statements made in the article: a lot of the new changes proposed by the anon user are quite sweeping and therefore if they are to stay, they need to be referenced. -- Roleplayer (talk) 21:30, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Which is why I have removed them. I have put a lot of effort in making sure this article is fully sourced, and indeed removed a earlier statement on the show's title being related to Hamlet. Sources are needed, and most of the proposed changes sound like OR and opinion. --UpDown (talk) 10:55, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

BBC playing games?

Is someone from the BBC "corpo-wikiing" here? Someone is obsessed with not changing anything on the page. ITS THE WIKIPEDIA -- ITS SUPPOSED TO BE CHANGED.

The article as it stands is moderately-OK at best. A "B". The grammar is acceptabl, the sentence clarity nothing special. Nothing startling here. As with all of Wiki, EDIT AT WILL.

Wait! Will this section be removed from the discussion page?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.149.36.207 (talk) 00:11, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

I will soon asked for you to be blocked if you continue with this vandalism. If there are spelling or grammar errors then correct them, as some have, but do not add unreferenced orginal research to the article. Who says the show is name after the Hamlet words? Who says most English speakers now mistake the words? Who says it is an example of an eggcorn? If you read the "Filming" section, you will see referenced details of Spence's connection to the house. As I said, any further unreferenced changes will be reverted and I will ask for a block to be considered.--UpDown (talk) 10:35, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

I second UpDown here. UpDown can sometimes be a little brash with their enforcement of the Wikipedia principles of no original research, however they still have a point. The edits you are trying to make to the article have no references, and make claims that, if they are to stay, need to be referenced. The whole idea of Wikipedia is indeed to make changes, however in doing so to make sure those changes are valid and truthful, otherwise they will indeed be removed fairly quickly. After all, what is the point of an encyclopedia if that encyclopedia can't prove that it's information is factual? -- Roleplayer (talk) 11:20, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Tothemanorborn.jpg

Image:Tothemanorborn.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 02:34, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Done.--UpDown (talk) 08:22, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Time between television and radio series

Concerning the radio series, it says that it originally aired in 1997 and that it was "14 years after the original television series ended". However, since the TV series ended in 1981, a time of 16 years (not 14) passed between TV and radio. Or, did the radio series air in 1995? Should it say 16 years or 1995? /Ludde23 ^{Talk Contrib} 11:57, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I think it should say 16 years, probably just a typo when I wrote it. Thanks!--UpDown (talk) 18:13, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Audrey's late husband's first name?

The present text cites Audrey's husband's name as "Marton" (sic). In an earlier version of the article he was Martin. The latter is certainly the standard British spelling of the name, and I have never come across Marton (though when someone English says the name I suppose it might sound like Marton). Admittedly the fforbes-Hamiltons spell their surname in a counter-intuitive way, but I wonder what the evidence is for Marton -- given that, in all likelihood, all any of us have to go on is the spoken rather than the written word. Do any users want to justify the article's current spelling of the name?? Nandt1 (talk) 00:46, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

There are plenty of hits for Martin. He's an unseen character, so something unusual about him would need to have been specifically mentioned for it to have legs. There is online discussion about how fforbes-Hamilton is spelt with 2 lower case f's, but nothing about how Martin spelt his given name. Thus, it can only be Martin. What we have now is either a well-intentioned mistake by an editor who really does think the standard spelling is "Marton", or vandalism. I'll fix it. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 01:21, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Jack, Thanks for your support, but it seems that you and I were wrong. Apparently "Marton" was originally a typo by the writer, but the producer said let's leave it in. Here is an account (which I found at: http://homepages.which.net/~roger.still/countylibrary.htm):

When Peter Spence the creator and writer of To The Manor Born was typing the draft copy of the original radio pilot he made a typing error. This was in 1978 and he was using a manual typewriter so there was no spell checker. instead of typing Martin he had typed Marton. Checking your keyboards will show how easy this is to do. Whilst it was being read through with the producer John Lloyd, this minor error ( amongst a few others ) was spotted. John questioned Peter about it, wondering if it was indeed an error or intentional. Peter confirmed it to be an error and said he would change it. John Lloyd, however, said that he liked it and that the aristocracy were always mucking about with the spelling of things, besides he said everone will pronounce it as Martin so what's the difference. So there you have it. On the insistance of the BBC producer John Lloyd, Audrey's husband was to be called Marton fforbes-Hamilton.

I'll revert the change. Nandt1 (talk) 16:19, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I've never come across a case like this before. What we have is an unusual fact about a character that the viewers could not possibly know or even suspect, because it is never mentioned in the program or even alluded to. It would be like having Audrey's late husband be a quadriplegic or a professional astrologer or a virtuoso concert xylophonist but nobody ever mentioning that fact. The only way anyone would ever know it's Marton and not Martin is to get hold of a script of the program, which very few people ever do; or read a page like our article or the program's website - and even then, 99.999% of readers would automatically assume it's a typo and not actually how the character's name is spelt, simply because the spelling variant gets no mention in the program itself. In light of this, I think we need to have a note explaining that "Marton" is not a typo - at least, not a typo on the part of Wikipedia - and explaining why it's correct and how it came about. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 01:18, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

You are quite right about how weird this is! And on the response, great minds think alike -- I've done that footnote and also marked Marton with (sic) in the text. Best of luck with all your edits! Nandt1 (talk) 12:12, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, O Great Mind.  :) -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 12:18, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

There's a close-up of his tombstone near the end of the last episode. I've only seen it on YouTube and can't make it out, but if somebody has the DVD and a proper TV they might be able to read it. Another method would be to check the closed captioning whenever they say his name. Ddawn23 (talk) 23:14, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Anachronisms

Applying to magistrates for a concert permit in 2007 is anachronistic as such licensing had been transfered to local councils in the 2003 Licensing Act. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.137.43.5 (talk) 15:16, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on To the Manor Born. 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/20051122221511/http://www.bfi.org.uk/features/mostwatched/1970s.html to http://www.bfi.org.uk/features/mostwatched/1970s.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070106191745/http://www.bfi.org.uk/features/mostwatched/1980s.html to http://www.bfi.org.uk/features/mostwatched/1980s.html

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) 12:54, 20 May 2017 (UTC)