The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Allen3 ^talk 03:25, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

The Adventures of Abney & Teal[edit]

• ... that the setting for the children's show The Adventures of Abney & Teal was inspired by Victoria Park, London?

• Reviewed: Danbury Trashers

Created/expanded by FruitMonkey (talk). Self nom at 20:36, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

• (Please note this is my first review so please have patience, help from experienced reviewers would be appreciated). The article seems eligible (and is a solid one), the hook is cited, the article and hook lengths are both good, close paraphrasing doesn't seem to be an issue. What worries me is the article's sourcing. Three of the five come from the BBC, IE it's those involved talking about their own creation, leaving this which is just about merchandise being produced and this piece which does contain good information but is again sprinkled with quotes from the creators. It's a little one-sided without much in the way of secondary coverage. Is this an issue for DYK? Someoneanother 23:47, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

The BBC is an independent and trusted source. Even with their own shows (Take Top Gear for example) they will report news about themselves in an open journalistic manner and are a trusted and neutral source. If we are going to doubt the neutral stance of the BBC (even on their own shows) then a vast swathe of Wikpedia is in trouble. I will also defend the comments sourced by the linke referencing the thoughts of the creators, as this was intentional. No facts were taken from this link, just the views of the creators; in the same way you would accept the views of Akira Kurosawa if he was discussing Rashomon, his own creational views are valid if you report them as such. I took the quotes and referenced them, nothing more, nothing less. (Not that I wish to compare Rashomon with Abney & Teal; I would obviously burn in Hades.) FruitMonkey (talk) 00:05, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm not questioning the reliability of any of the sources, the integrity of the BBC, or the use of any of the sources in the article. All I am highlighting is that this is a post by the creator Joel Stewart, this is a BBC programme listing issued by the BBC's press office and this is a quote-heavy article quoting those involved with the production of the series and production of merchandise. There's nothing within them that's a problem, it's the lack of external voices that's concerning me, particularly as this is about merchandising (audience data aside) and this is mainly quotes with some outline details about the show. There may well be no issue at all, but I'd rather ask the question first than give it the go-ahead than have you messed-about because someone else takes issue with it. Someoneanother 00:44, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

• My take is that it should be fairly easy to find external coverage, as this is an ongoing TV show in a very technologically advanced society. Have you tried The Telegraph or similar sites? Google News? Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:36, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

• After a second look I did find this which at least offers opinions on the show itself and comes from non-associated parties in the TV business. Coverage is extremely thin, from what I've found. Just knowing that there's something which can be used for reception is enough for me, since nobody else has an issue with it I'll O-K this for the main page. Thanks for responding. Someoneanother 02:40, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

• As per discussion above, three additional cites from third party sources have been added. FruitMonkey (talk) 19:53, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Per the above discussion, ready to go. Someoneanother 02:42, 7 February 2012 (UTC)