Talk:Question Time (TV programme)

message: Is this true? As I understand it the BBC stated back in 2006 they weren't banned per se, but that they did not have a significant enough vote to justify inclusion, specifically having members of the European parliament was mentioned, which would then initiate a review for their inclusion in the programme -- milkmeister 09:33, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: BNP blanket ban...

message: I watched the episode after 9/11, but I don't remember any tears being shed by the American Ambassador, can anyone verify it or state a source? -- Joolz 22:04, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Tears...

message: I notice references to things happening when "recording" had finished.  I was under the impression that QT is transmitted live via London, except where it is "time-shifted" by the regions (BBC Wales in particular have a nasty habit of inserting such things as Dragon's Eye or Belonging, depending on the season) — in particular, doesn't Dimbleby read out a selection of email and text messages received during the programme at various points?  81.104.165.184 18:00, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know if things have changed but when I was in the audience in 2003 (in Stratford) it was pretty much live - perhaps a slight time delay of a few minutes but it certainly wasn't recorded earlier in the evening. Having said that, some editions clearly are recorded in advance (particularly special editions) as the 10 o'clock news has sometimes run stories about what's been said on the show. Timrollpickering 22:30, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "recording"? 

message: I don't feel the Peruvian earthworms topic should have a page by itself.. it is essentially cruft, and the main QT article is still short enough that it would make more sense to merge it. Zargulon 08:49, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge Peruvian earthworms here

message: The SMS message that started off the whole Peruvian Earthworms thing is misquoted. I cannot remember the exact text, but the text quoted in the article is definitely not right, and shouldn't be presented as a direct quotation. They commented that their book on Peruvian Earthworms appeared very attractive - they did NOT say that they were going to go back to reading it as quoted. Any objections to removing the quote marks? 
217.155.138.250 20:36, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peruvian earthworms quote 

message: :Image:BBCquestiontime2005.PNG 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) 06:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I edited this page on July 9, 2009 after the Schools Programme had been broadcast.Just in case any one insists on a source, I should say that this information can be found on the BBC website. I put in a reference to BBC Three, where this programme was first broadcast, but it will be broadcast on several other channels.  ACEOREVIVED (talk) 23:16, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:BBCquestiontime2005.PNG

message: There's a lot of confusion on this because of seemingly sloppy reporting in the media. Remember that when QT launched there were only three channels (one of which was out of action due to strikes at the very beginning) and limited VCR penetration, in an era when 3.8 million was considered low and it's doubtful the show would have been considered a success and taken off.
This Guardian article suggests the 3.8m record only applied to the modern, multi-channel era of the last decade and before that viewing figures were higher, which seems a lot more sensible than most reports. Does anyone know of a good source beyond hack journalism for 1980s and 1990s viewing figures? Timrollpickering (talk) 16:27, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Record viewing figures 

message: I have just deleted the piece which restates the bogus claim that BBC Question Time's Twitter hashtag was "bigger than the X Factor". The media have got this completely wrong and the misquoting continues. See my detailed rebuttal of the claim at http://pubqt.wordpress.com/2010/11/25/bigger-than-the-x-factor/ Cluetrainee (talk) 12:32, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bigger than the X Factor - NOT TRUE 

message: Is the number of episodes (1102) true IMDB claim there has been 1096 . Is anyone counting? Wilbur2012(talk) 20:56, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  No Of Episodes 

message: Wasn't there a junior version of the programme at one time? If there was, it could go in the article. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 00:41, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Junior question time

message: Serial killer Dennis Nilsen was, allegedly, once a member of the studio audience. He had been primed to ask a question but wasn't called. . This might be added. One wonders what the question may have been. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:20, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that the fact he did not actually ask the question might rule out the relevance of this.  Lots of people have been in the audience over the years and I am sure many there are many notorious individuals amongst them.  My fear would be a section that random editors could constantly add names of half-noteworthy people who were once in the audience. Uvghifds (talk) 22:12, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like a great new Category to me. But you are probably right. Most of those politicians are pretty notorious. The BBC might know what Nilsen's question was (but very unlikely), or at least which episode it was. I am assuming it must have been a London one. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:22, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably wanting to know what the politicians were going to do to get his drains cleared.Paulturtle (talk) 16:28, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Great serial? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Question Time (TV series). 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20111125140921/http://www.tvgenius.net:80/socialtvstats/ to http://www.tvgenius.net/socialtvstats/
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20050206094842/http://www.mutualofamerica.com:80/articles/Fortune/2001_11_29/American.asp to http://www.mutualofamerica.com/articles/Fortune/2001_11_29/American.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:49, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: In the Format section, this article states "Question Time began with a panel of four guests, usually one member from each of the three major parties (Conservatives, Labour and SNP) and another public figure".
At the time QT started, the SNP were not the third-largest party. It was less than six months after Margaret Thatcher was elected, not last week.
Plus - for some strange reason - the article lacks a "Controversy" section, Instead it's wrapping this up in an absurdly 'politically correct' "Famous Episodes" section. Whilst it might be a "living" programme - as in still being produced - it doesn't need treated with the kid gloves of BLP. --Brian McNeil /talk 13:53, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  "SNP"? 

message: I don't see how Bruce can be shown as a presenter of Question Time when she has never yet presented it and when the series in which she will have her debut does not start until next year. I think it's quite fair that the announcement of her future position is added to the article. But to include her in the infobox, with a date of 2018, seems wrong. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:06, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Fiona Bruce]] 

message: Is it me, but the first three sections of this article seem has pointless links to other Wikipedia articles:
For example, under Presenters, Robin Day the following items are linked:
"News Presenter"
"Chairman"
"Popularity"
"Wit"
"Interrogation"
"Catchphrase"
"London Bridge"
"Paris"
This and repeated linking to the same articles turns the article into a hyperlinked car crash.
Johnkenyon (talk) 13:04, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Excessive linking