Talk:The Apprentice (British TV series) series 15

BBC Low‑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 articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tasks for WikiProject BBC:

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.

Television: The Apprentice UK / British Low‑importance

	Television portal 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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Apprentice UK task force (assessed as High-importance).
	This article is supported by the British television task force.

Gandhi controversy(?)[edit]

A seemingly well-referenced and neutral section was removed. I protected the page to facilitate discussion here. Please discuss the content's merits/demerits.-- Deep fried okra 18:07, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The merits of this section's paragraph of information is to highlight an incident considered to be controversial with viewers and likely experts and critics of the programme, regarding the behaviour of candidates both on and off-screen. A particular part of this is regarding what sort of conversations and messages are made and the context of the text used. In this case, the context focused on a sentence involving the use of well-known historical figure in India's history as a possible form of slander/insult against another, in reference to that person's racial background, and the response to this sentence from viewers of the programme, any possible critics (should they speak), and the production company and broadcaster. The reason given for its removal is a highly personal one that makes a claim of deeming it a form of Hate against the individual mentioned in the information that made the sentence, yet the information was written out from an encyclopedic viewpoint and has references to articles on the internet that confirm what happened and the reaction as a result, thus such a reason is rather absurd. GUtt01 (talk) 19:57, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Context around reduced episode summaries[edit]

I've noticed a bit of edit-warring in the history of this article around adding what has generally been considered to be "Original Research" to the episode summaries. As someone who used to relish in writing long paragraphs for these, the change was significant, but I abide by the community decision to significantly simplify the episode summaries to be just that - a summary, that doesn't delve into any significance on any point sans the named firing of a candidate and the result of the task.

Please see:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Apprentice_(British_series_13)#Episode_table

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Apprentice_(British_series_14)#Episode_descriptions

For the detailed ramblings of how this conclusion was met, and please do avoid going against this as it will just be reverted to the standard accepted across all series. I would recommend editors reverting the article to point concerned users either to this or the linked talk pages so that they too can understand the decision made. Cheers, eeveeman (talk) 22:59, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree - that should be done for editors who add more than they should, such as information that consists of a breakdown of a scene. I had to revert such edits because of how unacceptable it was, given the consensus about how these article should be written out since the discussion on the matter.GUtt01 (talk) 08:43, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]