Talk:Nicholas Courtney

message: I made a slight change to the wording regarding his appearances with other Doctors because, while it might seem unlikely, we don't know that he might not someday work with Eccleston. 68.146.41.232 (talk) 19:01, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well okay we might now know he won't someday work with Eccleston, but never say never about Courtney working with David Tenant. Even if it's just a cameo. We can hope! ZachsMind (talk) 00:26, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Supposedly he was going to make a cameo in the Sarah Jane Smith episode Sarah Jane's Wedding where he would meet David Tennant's doctor. Sadly he had a minor stroke and was unable to make the filming. 91.84.13.71 (talk) 22:37, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Never say never

message: I know it's bad form to mention rumors, even on talk pages, but I do so here because this has shown up on Wikia sites and fan pages. There is a rumor that Courtney suffered a stroke in the spring of 2009 that prevented him from appearing in the Sarah Jane episode (in fact, I just noticed a comment from December 2009 above that states this). There is no reputable source that has been located to support this, and by reputable source I include major Doctor Who fan sites and Doctor Who Magazine. Also, Sarah Jane Adventures creature Russell Davies published an exhaustive day by day account of this era (The Writers Tale) that makes no reference to this happening. Who fandom is notable for recording when its actors buy new shoelaces, so had Courtney suffered a stroke, it would have been more widely reported. I'm not saying it's bad faith info, but for the sake of WP:BLP there needs to be a good source used should anyone want to add the information here; it has already been removed from the applicable articles at the Tardis Index File Wikia site. 68.146.64.9 (talk) 13:47, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Health rumour from 2009

message: Nicholas Courtney reportedly died in his sleep.  His name is trending worldwide on Twitter now.  It's a sad day for Who fans.  I don't think there is an official source available on the web for this yet...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.223.65.209 (talk) 01:15, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Twitter is not a reliable source, and until we do find a reliable source, we cannot state that he has died, per the policy on living persons. --Redrose64 (talk) 01:19, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Which is exactly why I didn't edit the article and put the notice here...  98.223.65.209 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 01:22, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't appreciate the rudeness.  This is why I don't contribute to Wikipedia very much.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.223.65.209 (talk) 01:27, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: 98.223.65.209, I used to be more sensitive too, when I first started on Wiki, and took rebukes too seriously. In today's context, I think Redrose64 was just responding to two previous attempts by some editors to put the date of death before there was any evidence in the article. This is usually seen as vandalism or mischief. Thanks for posting here at the discussion. You started a new thread and it was timely. --Skol fir (talk) 03:53, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: No, Redrose64 was snapping for no reason. He should have thanked 98.x instead. I echo the IPs sentiments exactly. Do not make him out to be "oversensitive". Unfriendly established Wikipedians are a horrible detriment to the project, they drive away potential volunteers by the droves. The ones who don't mind the tone are the people you don't want around as editors in the first place. You should be scolding Redrose 64, not the IP. --87.78.131.12 (talk) 04:00, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

text: Just for the record, I do not condone Redrose64's behavior, I just put it in context, since I happened to be here when premature edits were made to this article without RS (reliable source). Sometimes all it takes is a little common sense to see that a busy editor who has more on his mind than one article, may be jumping to conclusions and forgetting that other editors are here for a friendly chat. :-) If you noticed, I did thank 98.223.65.209 to let him know his input was appreciated. Why would I waste time commenting otherwise? --Skol fir (talk) 04:21, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Just to show how busy our friend Redrose64 has been in the last little while, he had to make 6 reversions in a row over 15 minutes for the very same reason, because no one was looking at his summary edits. The first one earlier this eve. stated clearly "rv, unsourced, see WP:BLP - presume still alive until reliable sources confirm otherwise." I think that some editors need to wake up and read the messages so we can get on with more interesting tasks than reversions ad nauseum. --Skol fir (talk) 04:40, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

text: This seems to be the source of all the Twitter reports.  — Edokter (talk) —  01:29, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

text: Folks blogs, twitter etc are not reliable sources for Wikipedia's purposes. This info may well be correct and it is very sad news at that. If so it will get posted here in due time. IF it isn't correct then you will see the dilemma of not checking on the facts before you go running around with something that my friend on twitter said. MarnetteD | Talk 03:27, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  http://www.doctorwhonews.net/2011/02/dwn230211003008-nicholas-courtney-1929.html has it, but nothing on the Times, BBC or Daily Express websites, who you think would have it too if it were true. Let's hold off a bit until we have something verified. Reynardo (talk) 03:48, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The accusations that Redrose did anything wrong are baseless. Pointing editors to the relevant wikipedia policies is not snapping, rude or anyting else. Please note the box at the top of the page. talk pages are for commenting on content not editors. Any further attacks will be removed per wikipolicy. MarnetteD | Talk 04:20, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

text: I know it's a primary source, but if his own official website is reporting his death I think it can be taken as fact and the article updated accordingly. Consensus?--ThePaintedOne (talk) 08:38, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  The official website should be the canonical, reliable source here, so it definitely makes sense to update the article now accordingly. Mike Peel (talk) 08:57, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

text: SFX (magazine) (Future Publishing): http://www.sfx.co.uk/2011/02/23/nicholas-courtney-rip/ SFX are an extremely reliable publication, Europe's best-selling sci-fi magazine. Andrew Oakley (talk) 09:20, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Far from saying he's dead, his official website sees him spruiking for work with the tag "And he's still getting away with it!". It doesn't seem to have been updated recently, so we can't take that either way. SFX better have their facts right! I'm cutting through all this by going to his management. MartinSFSA (talk) 09:31, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You must be viewing a cached version of the page, his personal website very clearly states he has died and also that they will be putting up a memorial page for fans to contribute to in the next few days.--ThePaintedOne (talk) 09:36, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

text: The Stage: http://www.thestage.co.uk/news/newsstory.php/31367/doctor-whos-brigadier-nicholas-courtney-dies This is an extremely reliable source, the UK's weekly entertainment industry newspaper which has been in print since 1880. Andrew Oakley (talk) 10:25, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Died today

message: I apologise for angering several people: maybe I was snappy; or just too blunt, but I believe my actions in reverting were entirely proper within WP:BLP (or, to go straight to the section dealing with presumed death, WP:BDP). When I made my post above I seemed to be the only one, other than MarnetteD and Edokter, who seemed to care that "contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion", and that "Any individual born less than 115 years ago is covered by this policy unless a reliable source has confirmed the individual's death." I considered the alleged death of Mr. Courtney to be "contentious material", and so felt justified in removing it.
I did make an effort to find sources. As soon as the  went on the article, I searched with Google; and all that I could find were Tweets; blogs reporting what they'd seen on Twitter; fansites reporting what they'd seen on both Tweets and blogs; and our own article (cached copies stick around for some time after an edit). There was absolutely nothing that could have been considered a reliable source, so I felt that I had no choice but to revert. As a matter of courtesy I notified a relevant WikiProject - specifically, WP:DOCTORWHO - although I should probably have notified WP:BIOGRAPHY as well.
On MarnetteD's suggestion I requested semi-protection (which took nearly 45 mins to be granted); and a few minutes after the semi-prot was granted, I went to bed. You will see from my contributions that at the time that I posted above, I had reverted the article eleven times, and had previously been fixing vandalism on other pages. I'm in the UK, so my clock shows UTC, so 01:19 was very late for me, which may, in part, account for my bluntness. My going to bed at that point certainly accounts for my non-response to later postings. both here and on my talk page.
That said, now that his death has been confirmed, I too am saddened by the news. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:33, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Apologies

message: This page is now protected from editing until the above issue is resolved.  Edits may be requested using the  template (please demonstrate consensus for any requested change).  Once the issue is resolved, an unprotect request may be posted on the WP:RFPP page.  -- Tom N (tcncv) talk/contrib 04:48, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I've unprotected the article accordingly. Mike Peel (talk) 09:32, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page protection 

message: The article currently states that Courtney died on the 23rd.  Have any worthwhile sources specified that date?  I know that most current sources were published on 23 February 2011, and therefore some will assume that as his date of death, but that's not verification. --88.104.39.55 (talk) 09:44, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The Twitter tributes started at around 10.30pm on the 22nd (UK time), so I'm inclined to believe it was not the 23rd. --Canley (talk) 09:46, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

text: Courtney's employers Big Finish Productions have given the date as the 22nd http://www.bigfinish.com/news/Nicholas-Courtney-1929-2011 so I've updated the article accordingly. Andrew Oakley (talk) 11:08, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Not sure they can be referrd to as his "employers", but I know what you mean. DavidFarmbrough (talk) 15:47, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Has the date of death been specified? 

message: In his tribute, Tom Baker indicated that Courtney had been battling cancer. Given the source, I have added this to the Death part of the article (attributing the claim to Baker, of course). 23skidoo (talk) 16:38, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Cause of death

message: Nicholas Courtney is definitely the author of "Five Rounds Rapid",  - but is he also the author of these other books listed by Google Books? --Redrose64 (talk) 17:54, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Author 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Nicholas Courtney. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110225235348/http://www.bigfinish.com:80/news/Nicholas-Courtney-1929-2011 to http://www.bigfinish.com/news/Nicholas-Courtney-1929-2011
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:39, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified