Talk:Oh, Doctor Beeching!

message: The description of the plot in the main article contains an error that has been annyoing me for some time. The article in question states that "a letter is found threatening the station with closure", which contrasts with the information on the List of Oh, Doctor Beeching! episodes page.
A letter was featured in the episode. It was dated September 1939, and since the series is set in 1963, the letter plays no part in the plot; instead being used as a gag emphasising how little the station master's office has been used.
I have thus altered the incorrect information.
TurboJ (talk) 13:21, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you, TurboJ. We can all sleep a little easier now. Rozenberg (talk) 13:55, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Incorrect plot information

message: I have mad some corrections to the character`s list, where it discribes what some of them do in some of the episodes e.g Mr Orkindale who "cheats Mr Parkin out of a place on the bowler`s outing", it originally said that this happens in "Episode 17", but I have whatched the series on DVD and it happens in "Episode 16", therfore Lady Lawrence comes to meat Dr Beeching in "Episode 17" not "Episode 18". Also we learn in "Episode 14" that Percy (the gaurd) "keeps promising to take Ethol out but never does", not in "Episode 2".Daninewton (talk) 15:15, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Episode corrections 

message: "...and being generally well received".
I seem to recall the show being received like a German pig in a synagogue. Does anyone have any evidence of a positive reception (beyond people who get an erection at the very idea of Su Pollard)? AuntFlo (talk) 13:50, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, you're probably right - the whole article needs some references, if I'm honest. Maybe I'll give it a lookover at some point soon. Thanks. Bob talk 14:35, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I had exactly the same thought on reading that line. My recollection is that show was abolutely panned by the critics and it was considered a miracle (or a travesty) it made even a second series. DWaterson (talk) 23:56, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Reception

message: A good version has been rolled back to a version riddled with errors and inconsistencies. Previous edits were made by a sockpuppet, but that's no reason to leave an article looking like it's been ravaged by Gaiseric. Oniscoid 01:32, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: All edits by a sockpuppets are rolledback even if they are good edits because leaving them in encourages them to continue sockpuppeting. You are welcome to fix any issues you see. This particular sockpuppet is known for making alot of bad edits, so their edits are not necessarily good. -DJSasso (talk) 11:48, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Djsasso for your answer which I understand and accept. However I feel that whoever rolls back an article bears some responsibility for ensuring that it is rolled back to a good version, even though this could be time time-consuming when dealing with sockpuppets. I don't have in-depth knowledge of the subject, but will try and correct some of the more obvious errors. Oniscoid 23:31, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: 10 December 2018 rollback by [[User:Djsasso|Djsasso]]

message: All three external links and the Titlescreen in the article suggest the program was called Oh Doctor Beeching! with no comma. Should this page be renamed accordingly? --Robin84F (talk) 16:30, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point - it doesn't look like the Radio Times knew even at the time Rob (talk) 20:19, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Programme name