Talk:List of Spooks episodes

This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Lists Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Television: British / Episode coverage / Spooks Low‑importance 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the British television task force (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force. This article is supported by the Spooks task force (assessed as Low-importance). 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Tasks for WikiProject BBC: edit history watch purge 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. London Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Season 8, Episode 1 The article states that: "Harry is brought to the Sacred Army of Righteous Vengeance, a terror group." In actual fact it is a group led by an Indian Intelligence Bureau officer posing as S.A.R.V. in order to throw the off the scent in the quest to find Harry. This was discovered by the new Technician and Data Analyst of Section D, Tariq Masood, who analyses the speech patterns within the faked footage of Harry's execution. Would anyone like to confirm/edit this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.171.253.95 (talk) 17:11, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I know, that was an error from my part. I will coreect it now. -- Matthew RD 18:15, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PS, it was Malcolm, not Tariq; he wasn't introduced yet. -- Matthew RD 18:17, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

please help me with the cleanup, ive rejgged all the eps, and ordered them all

I notice the episode list is being cleaned up a bit. To those editing this article, please leave in the episode descriptions - other than the episode name, I (and I'm sure many others), find it to be very useful in remembering which episode was which without having to look through all the main episode pages. Thanks. Jaws87 19:49, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For the same purpose, I suggest that a column be added that gives the episode number in the series: 5x08 besides 42 for example. That's even how some of the individual episodes pages are named. (De fideli (talk) 16:04, 22 October 2008 (UTC))[reply]

So far, in the 2007 series, each episode on BBC1 (Tuesdays at 21:00) has been followed by the following episode at 22:30 on BBC3.

The final episode, does not appear to be being broadcast on BBC3 - certainly not at 22:30 the same evening.

As one who is often out when the BBC1 programme is broadcast, and who likes to record something else that's on at that time, I am anxious to know whether the final episode will be broadcast on BC3 - and if so, when.

I cannot find this information on the BBC website.--80.177.28.141 (talk) 02:26, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Wikipedia isn't a forum / helpdesk for discussing things like this. That said, the final episode is not previewed in advance on BBC Three. Whether it is repeated later on BBC Three, I don't know. The best way to find out (and you'll have to do it in the week before the episode) is to use the BBC What's On guide at http://www.bbc.co.uk/cgi-perl/whatson/search/advance_search.cgi?keyword=spooks. ~~ [Jam]^[talk] 09:39, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All Spooks episode articles are in an extremely poor shape, and I already merged several stubs here. The other articles consist of overlong plot summaries with no (sourced) critical commentary or production information, so they violate WP:NOT#PLOT. I am unable to determine WP:NOTABILITY. This LoE already has summaries for most of them, so redirection is sufficient for most individual episode articles (but there is no template for redirection proposals). Comments or volunteers for article improvement before I proceed? – sgeureka ^t•c 18:39, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hm. Allegedly, there is a WikiProject associated with the Spooks articles. Anyway, I'd support merging (there is some RW info, such as viewers bawling about characters being killed off) and redirection. Although, if anyone (say, a member of the Spooks WP) made the effort, some wonderful season articles could be created, especially for the more recent serialised series. Bradley0110 (talk) 19:31, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Against - notable enough series. Also plenty on most of the episodes to support. Still need work and more sources but not merge to list!. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 20:00, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Against - What Kevinalewis said --SGCommand (talk • contribs) 13:46, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can't take your word for notability (Spooks never aired in my country, and too many wiki editors have misstated notability for other shows previously), so can you establish notability for at least one article please? I'd rather avoid being seen as the deletionist antagonist (I am neither), but the other parts of my merge rationale still apply, and in the absense of article improvement (take your time), merging is the only long-term solution. – sgeureka ^t•c 20:51, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On notability; they play in the UK and USA to large ratings and any series that has run for seven multi episode series must have financial support that strongly suggests notability. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 15:40, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The notability of episodes is questioned here, not that of the series. The New York Times is read by over a million people each day, but nearly no issue is ever notable enough for its article. – sgeureka ^t•c 15:47, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would be for the merge, most of the episode articles are just a plot. The only really interesting bit of information might be notable celebrity appearances but that could be included on this page. Also the wikiproject appears to be inactive. --Lemming64 22:23, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per Sgeureka's comments. Most of the titles are unsourced anyway (episodes don't air with episode titles) and many of the articles are just extensions of the plot summaries provided here. ~~ [ジャム]^[talk] 11:48, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Agree with merger to list per User:JGXenite; each episode lacks individual notability, and it is not our function here to regurgitate the plot, per WP:NOT#PLOT. Notability for an individual article relies upon multiple, independent sources, and the analogy with the New York Times is, in my opinion, well-taken. It seems to me that only one episode, Series 1 Ep 2, with the "chip-fan immersion" incident, would appear to be independently notable. For a treatment of how this should be dealt with, may I suggest a look at List of Two Pints episodes#Series Seven (2008), where the notable first episode of series seven gets its own treatment, but within an encyclopedically defensible context. --Rodhullandemu 23:12, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's been 4.5 months, and the notability-tagged and proposed-merged articles haven't been improved one iota. I have therefore redirected all articles except Thou Shalt Not Kill (Spooks) (the pilot episode) and Looking After Our Own (Spooks) (because I didn't know where to merge the two lines of real-world information). Furthermore, I have redirected Series 5 Episode 10 (Spooks) and Series 5 Episode 5 (Spooks) - I must have forgotten to tag them accordingly in October, but this doesn't change that there is neither established notability nor an editor who can or wants to establish it. – sgeureka ^t•c 21:13, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There doesn't appear to be any episode titles for season 7, as you can see here they are all referred to simply as episode #. --Lemming64 16:41, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unless we can find a reliable source for any of the titles given here, I think they should be removed and replaced with Series #, Episode #. ~~ [ジャム]^[talk] 00:13, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The names come from the US DVDs which DO give names for the episodes. Reverting back Season 1-6. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.107.42.98 (talk) 13:52, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In which case, they are the US titles - not the UK ones. Also, it has been mentioned before that the US titles don't always match the UK "development" titles anyway, so they aren't really reliable. Anyway, I'll keep them there for now but please source them. ~~ [ジャム]^[talk] 20:12, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have those episode titles ever been confirmed? And where did they even came from, can't have been the US DVD release this time. Also episode 708 "TBC" [[1]]sounds like a placeholder, not like the real episode title to me. Judging from the plot outline the title "Nuclear Strike" seems to be more likely. Still unverified but at least it would make sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.225.199.212 (talk) 14:44, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.britannia.org/TVArchives/episodes/00001482/

English working titles for the first 4 seasons. We don't need to individually source each name - it would look weird (put the source somewhere at the top). London prophet (talk) 00:35, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

http://movie-tv-episode-database.com/Drama/Spooks-87877/season-all/

All episode names inc. season 7 London prophet (talk) 00:44, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Neither of these appear to be reliable sources. The first one seems to be a fan built website (judging by the "About ASH" section) and I can find nothing to say who developed the second site. ~~ [ジャム]^[talk] 09:50, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On what basis is the second website unreliable - just because you don't know the names doesn't mean they aren't real. Quit trying to remove all the names from spooks episodes. Some more websites detailing the episode working titles: http://www.experiencefestival.com/a/Spooks_-_Episodes/id/5480745 http://epguides.com/Spooks/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0160904/episodes#season-1

In the episode "The Seventh Division", the deaths of two Customs & Excise agents are shown (actually, their deaths per se are not shown, but they are shown dead). Later in the episode, however, Harry Pearce mentions that a total of eight had been killed, in separate incidents, by the Chala Cartel. Should the plot summary reflect what was shown (2 deaths) or what was said (eight deaths)? –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 06:09, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, There seems to be something happening with the episode titles for Series 4. They are completely different to when I recorded them off Wikipedia a year or so ago. It appears that someone has substituted the American titles in place of the English ones. My list is as follows: 1. Surreal World 2. The Possibility of a Mole 3. Campaign of Terror 4. Infiltration of a New Threat 5. A Journalist, a Minister and a Conservative Group 6. Beyond the Cell 7. Where Trouble Lies 8. Traitor in a Friend Episodes 9 and 10 (The Sting and Diana respectively) appear unchanged. Does anyone know what's going on? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gemg52 (talk • contribs) 07:38, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you see the those numbers straight after the title (like [27])? Those are sources I have put in place. They are linked to the BBC website. I cannot find a source (at least reliable) to prove the titles you put down are accurate. -- Matthew RD 18:13, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Spooks episodes. 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/20120409061852/http://www.ezydvd.com.au/DVD/spooks-series-10/dp/6110923 to http://www.ezydvd.com.au/DVD/spooks-series-10/dp/6110923

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) 11:52, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]