Talk:Downton Abbey

Television Start‑class High‑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 articles Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Template:British TV shows project

Yorkshire Start‑class Mid‑importance

Downton Abbey is within the scope of WikiProject Yorkshire, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Yorkshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page.YorkshireWikipedia:WikiProject YorkshireTemplate:WikiProject YorkshireYorkshire articles Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4

We have referenced info that this series is a co-production with WGBH. There are numerous other sources that note this available in print and on the web. In this day and age of tight budgets these co-productions are becoming the norm. The info should be noted in the article no matter how many SPA's show up to try and remove it. MarnetteD | Talk 16:31, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are two reliable sources that have been repeatedly removed, the one you restored and the PBS website source that both support this, as does the promotional materials for both the BBC and PBS. The real problem is that, for too long, the PBS/BBC and PBS/ITV (along with comparable BBC America co-productions) have been improperly identified as British rather than British-American productions. This isn't a matter of opinion, as too many editors seem to think. It's reliably sourced that this is a British/American production. --Drmargi (talk) 16:56, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Brideshead Revisited and The Jewel in the Crown were made without a penny of overseas money. Those days are gone, so the article should note that this is a co-production.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 17:11, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good example. PBS co-produced at least the last two seasons of Prime Suspect, and commissions a couple programs a year in collaboration with either the BBC or ITV, most recently Endeavour, I believe. Torchwood came over here and was made by Starz in the U.S. (that one is still not accurately reported in its article, but they're in the ballpark, anyway.) BBC America co-produces a fair few shows, including the now departed Robin Hood and possibly even the last season or two of Doctor Who (have to double-check that one.) There are others as well that don't spring to mind immediately. This isn't a judgment; this is accurate reporting of who produces what, and a full understanding of what constitutes production -- a process that is far more than geography and what takes place in front of the camera. International productions are becoming increasingly common, and not just for financial reasons. --Drmargi (talk) 17:19, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Downton Abbey is an international co-production. There is no real doubt about this, even though it is filmed in the UK. The sourcing is also clear on this issue.[1]--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 11:23, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. It's documented in the article, it's in the end credits, the American producer is given equal billing with the British producers, and there's even American cast. What more do people need to believe this? Geography does not determine what in country a production originates. --Drmargi (talk) 15:55, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is there some way to make it clearer in the opening sentence in what sense "British/American" is meant? I read it as meaning that the story/setting is equally split between Britain and America. While I know there are American connections and characters, the story is really primarily British, so I feel the current wording is a bit misleading. 86.176.210.150 (talk) 01:54, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think that means it's a joint production between the two countries, with Carnival Films being British and Masterpiece being American.--81.109.72.78 (talk) 19:27, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was planning to delete "British/American" and instead label those two companies as respectively British and American where they are mentioned in the lead, but now I am confused about what "Masterpiece" refers to. It links to WGBH-TV, but the only mention of "Masterpiece" in that article is as a TV series (Masterpiece (TV series)), not a production company, so I don't understand what is meant. It doesn't make sense to say that a TV series produced a show. Also, the infobox on this article does not mention "Masterpiece" as co-producers. Should it? 86.160.216.252 (talk) 20:39, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It should link to Masterpiece Theatre, actually. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 20:50, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops. I can't read. Uhm, it's considered an anthology series, so that's why it's labeled TV series. So, yea. If you think about it in a novel comparison: Masterpiece is the name of the series, and the TV series that run on Masterpiece are like individual books that were written by different authors by run under the same series title. I don't know if that's accurate, but that's how I'm understanding it... ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 20:54, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But I still don't understand how a TV series, whether an anthology series or any other type, can be the producers of the show. Producers are people or companies, not the names of series. It would only make sense if "Masterpiece" is also a production company with the same name, but that's not clear from the linked article. 86.160.216.252 (talk) 21:05, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea actually. The only thing I know is that in the credits, Downton is listed as "a Carnival / Masterpiece co-production" as do the credits on the PBS Downton page (here for series 1). I don't know, it doesn't make any sense at all. I've never really noticed this before. I'm not being helpful at all... ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 21:26, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think there needs to be a separate section about when the episodes air in the United States and their respective DVD releases. On the page describing the List of Downton Abbey episodes, it mentions that the series is British and produced by a British media company, but fails to mention that the series overview refers to UK dates for the series' premieres and finales. On Amazon, we will be able to order the Season 3 DVD on Jan. 29, 2013, but it does not air in the USA until Jan. 6, 2013. It has already begun airing in the UK (this information is available under "Episodes - Series three" in this article). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.14.138.138 (talk) 14:18, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the referencing is a bit of a mess here, but I'm not going to get into that now. If anyone ever finds that a reference on this article goes down or something, drop a line on my talk page. I just went through a created WebCites for every reference, including the news articles. I'm also going through the ITV and PBS websites and creating webcites for those should anyone need them. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 16:22, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Allen Leech was not an opening title credited member of the lead cast in series one-two, nor a member of the Crawley family. This probably should be clarified in the castr table. Eshlare (talk) 07:40, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Posting the positions of the characters as of their last appearance of the show allows for major spoilers (for example, William dying, or Anna marrying Bates). Maybe just including their position at the start of the show? Or leaving out their position altogether? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:C555:8470:E159:D5CB:2E65:653 (talk) 09:06, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Episode 1 Series 3 was shown on Prime TV in New Zealand tonight.Prime TV New Zealand Thanks Auda Auda (talk) 09:18, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done. Request must be formatted as "(add/change) "x" to "y" because (reason)." gwickwire | Leave a message 00:33, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Earl may be a Rt. Hon., but in that era his wife would not have been. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.167.237.113 (talk) 12:26, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am failing to see any sources that support this? Please can someone explain this to me? Thanks --JetBlast (talk) 23:17, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Masterpiece is an American anthology production, and Rebecca Eaton, one of the executive producers, works for WGBH in Boston (PBS) as the executive producer for Masterpiece. PBS/Masterpiece co-produce a fair few productions eventually shown under the Masterpiece umbrella, including Downton and Endeavour. It's all in the credits.

As an aside, thanks for archiving the page, but it might be wise to restore some of the more recent discussions, given the season is still underway, and their topics may come up again. I've pulled back the October discussions and one about the origins of the show from late September, which are clearly still needed on the active talk page given this discussion. --Drmargi (talk) 23:24, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(EC) This was previously discussed at Talk:Downton Abbey/Archive 1#British/American. As I originally stated, and as Drmargi stated above, it is stated to be "a Carnival / Masterpiece co-production" in the credits, on the official ITV press released (example here), and on the PBS credits page for series 1. (To provide some credits that can be seen right now) I can't really wrap my head around how Masterpiece, an anthology series, can produce something (unless it's also a production company). But since the credits say Masterpiece co-production, the series is British-American. At least, that's the reasoning and logic behind it. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 23:26, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Masterpiece is the banner for the network's co-productions; it functions as a production company and as an anthology. It's funky, I admit, but that's how it works. Oh, and sorry! As you were posting, I pulled the discussion you linked out of the archive and back onto this page, since it's still far too contentious to be archived yet, so your link won't go where you want it to. --Drmargi (talk) 23:31, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry i didn't notice the discussions where still going. I think you have missed my point, on the article itself i can't see the source that backs up the claim. Thanks --JetBlast (talk) 23:41, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your point. The links Parasol provides above, one from the US and one from the UK, provide the sourcing, if you feel the credits aren't sufficient, as they are for the British side of the production. They get removed constantly, when nationalistic editors take exception to the show being described as British/American. --Drmargi (talk) 23:44, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Other than the credits do we have anything to support it please? Something that specifically says it, this is cuasing some confusion amongst us. --JetBlast (talk) 23:49, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just been looking into this more, IMDB says that it is a co-production with Masterpiece (GB), maybe its a British arm to the production company? If this is the case it wouldn't be joint British-American. --JetBlast (talk) 23:57, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First I am not seeing the (GB) that you mention in that link but I can only copy and paste what Dr Margi has already pointed out above "Masterpiece is an American anthology production, and Rebecca Eaton, one of the executive producers "of Downton Abbey", works for WGBH in Boston (PBS) as the executive producer for Masterpiece." There is no British production company called Masterpiece. The credits and the reference that we have provided certainly meet Wikipedia's requirements for reliable sourcing. There are other sources out there if you search a little. Be aware that since the economic collapse of 08 co-productions like this occur all the time. At least in part because no one company has enough money to produce show like this on their own. MarnetteD | Talk 00:06, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

IMDB is also an unreliable source. Someone can simply assume Masterpiece is British, add GB, and there is no oversight to be sure it's accurate. It's likely someone saw the GB in the middle of the station's call sign (which actually stand for Greater Boston, if I remember correctly) and jumped to the wrong conclusion; it doesn't help that the station's studios are in Brighton, Mass. Bottom line: Marnette has it nailed. The BBC and ITV have a done a fair number of co-productions with both Masterpiece and with BBC America, particularly in recent years. This has been adequately sourced by both ITV and Masterpiece from the beginning; this continued questioning beyond the standard of WP:VERIFY is simply nationalistic refusal to accept this program is a joint production. --Drmargi (talk) 00:16, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• If it's a British-American co-production then fine, the article should say so. The problem I still have is that the opening sentence "Downton Abbey is a British-American period drama television series..." makes it sound like the series is set in the US and Britain. While there are US connections in the storyline, the setting is primarily British, and in that respect I believe the opening sentence is potentially misleading. 81.159.107.19 (talk) 03:46, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see how the sentence in any way suggests that the series is set in Britain or the United States; based on that sentence, the series could be set in France for all I know. Grammar-wise, British-American is a modifier for the word series, so I don't see how it can be mistaken as the setting; if you drop all the modifiers it reads, "Downton Abbey is a series." But that may be besides the point. Series articles of any type are typically formatted as "NAME is a(n) COUNTRY OF ORIGIN GENRE TYPE series yadda yadda yadda" so I still don't see how there could be any confusion. But then that may be because I've watched the series. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 18:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The way it reads made it sound like Downton Abbey was filmed in and about the UK and America. Although it is filmed in the UK and that it is supposed to be set in Yorkshire, i think that the opening sentance needs to be re-written. So what if it is produced by English and American companys, but both writers are british, the show was first aired in the UK, set in the UK and should there for be classed as a british drama with production from both the UK and America as that would be much clearer for readers. Thank god Australia havent had an input on this as that would make a much more messy situation! JMRH6 (talk) 00:34, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I removed Gareth Neame from the opening sentence as the credits list Fellowes as the sole creator.

I seriously think I just know the sentence too well and am having a hard time seeing if it's potentially confusing. I'm considering notifying WikiProject Television to get fresh opinions on the sentence.

I still think the sentence clearly states only what country (or countries in this case) created the series. And because of that, I do not see how the sentence suggests in any way where the series is set or filmed. Country of origin does not in any way state where the series was filmed or is set. For example, Firefly is an American production but is set in another star system; Baccano! is a Japanese series and it's set in the United States. As for country of origin being confused for where the series is filmed: Game of Thrones is an American production, but it is filmed in Northern Ireland, Scotland, Malta, and Morocco (and is set in a fictional world), and there are plenty of American series that are filmed in Canada (Suits, Once Upon a Time, to name two. These examples are set in the US though). So I still don't see how calling Downton a British-American series states in any way that it is set in Britain, the United States, or both. Third sentence is the one that addresses setting.

But maybe my problem is that I am too familiar with the sentence and the show in general, so I cannot spot any potentially confusing bits. (Again, maybe we should call in fresh eyes from the WikiProject?)

Though I am now leaning toward this change: "Downton Abbey is a British-American period drama television series created by Julian Fellowes and co-produced by London-based Carnival Films and American-based Masterpiece." This way it's clear as to why it's British-American. Though maybe American-based should read Boston-based? Or maybe London-based should say England-based or something that sounds nicer than that. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 02:52, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just not happy at all with "British-American period drama television series". As I said before above, to me it reads as if the series has a British-American setting, which, despite certain characters' American connections, is hardly true. 86.160.222.44 (talk) 03:42, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find a credit sequence that refers to him as anything more than Molesley. Same with the press packets. But I can confirm that both The World of Downton Abbey and The Chronicles of Downton Abbey list Molesley's first name as Alfred in the cast lists. Not entirely sure where Joseph came from. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 00:39, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I did the same thing, and can't find Joseph either, although I'm sure I've seen it somewhere. I also checked the DA site for Masterpiece, and he's listed solely by his last name there. My only guess is that it comes up in dialogue; at one time I thought that might have been his father's name, but that turned out to be something like Thomas. It would seem we've got two options: leave it as credited (last name only) or let the books be the authority and add Alfred as a first name. He's definitely listed as Alfred Molesley at the end of the first book. So the it come down to whether the book is sufficiently canon to be a reliable source. I would say, given that it's written by Julian Fellowes' daughter, and has the various attributions to the show (tangentally clearing up any doubt that this is a US/UK co-production), that the book is a reliable source. I have the second one, too, but am keeping my hands off it until Downton 3 runs here in the US; I assume it has the same pedigree as the first. You certainly don't get a more reputable published than St. Martin's Press. --Drmargi (talk) 04:07, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A question by a non native speaker: Is it normal for an English country house to be called "Abbey"? Or does this imply that, in the fictional setting, the house is an actual former abbey that was turned into a secular dwelling during the English Reformation? -- 84.63.248.169 (talk) 14:43, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A real-life example is Woburn Abbey. A house with "Abbey" in the name would be expected to be on or near the site of a former abbey, though sometimes little if any of the original monastic building might remain. 86.160.214.104 (talk) 00:17, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If this article is going to list characters by their titles and styles, that should be done correctly. It is not correct to refer to an incumbent holder of a peerage title and his wife by both name and title, except in legal documents. "Cora, Countess of Grantham" would only be appropriate if she divorced the Earl of Grantham.[2] It is also inappropriate to refer to "the Earl" or "the Countess"; it is always "Lord Grantham" and "Lady Grantham".[3] Lady Sybil Crawley did not become Mrs Branson on her marriage. She took his last name but remained daughter of an earl and was thus Lady Sybil Branson (see Lady Cynthia Mosley, Lady Cynthia Colville, etc).[4] Surtsicna (talk) 13:48, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The number 1 priority for the character list is to make it clear which character is being referred to when there are multiple ways to refer to them and also when a particular style can mean more than one person (e.g. "Lady Grantham"). That take should precedent over a "correct" listing and scattering the names & titles across different columns is unhelpful. And Sybil herself was content to use the form "Mrs Branson" and was not someone who ran their life according to Debretts. If a person drops a style does it get automatically reattached to them? Timrollpickering (talk) 00:00, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I do not disagree with you; I would have nothing against listing them as "Robert Crawley, Earl of Grantham" and "Cora Crawley, Countess of Grantham". They were listed as "The Right Honourable Robert, Earl of Grantham", which was very odd. Sybil's decision to be styled as "Mrs Branson" was an exception, not a rule, as has been suggested in the archive of the this talk page. That is why I brought it up. Surtsicna (talk) 00:43, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What does "CS1-3" mean in the cast list? 86.160.222.44 (talk) 03:44, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 -> Christmas Special 1 (2011); CS2 -> Christmas Special 2 (2012), etc. --EliOrni (talk) 16:36, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that. However, I do not understand what "CS1-3" means. 86.167.19.105 (talk) 18:42, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

First Christmas Special to Series Three, perhaps? Opera hat (talk) 19:54, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

CS1, 2, CS2, 3? Could be, I suppose, but I find it confusing. At first it looks like CS1, CS2 and CS3, but that is not possible. I think it should be rephrased, depending on what actually it does mean. 86.167.19.105 (talk) 20:19, 4 January 2013 (UTC) [Actually, not sure if "CS1, 2, CS2, 3" is even possible either...][reply]

I think the Christmas Specials should just be categorized in the cast lists as the last episode of that years series. So instead of CS1-3 It would just be series "2-3". This would avoid a lot of confusion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.145.118.166 (talk) 20:51, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would prefer to see "Series 1", "Series 2", "Christmas 2011", "Series 3" and "Christmas 2012", so CS1–3 would become "Christmas 2011–Series 3". I believe it's much clearer and there is room. DBD 15:56, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can't help feeling there should be some kind of spoiler warning on the character table. It's quite likely someone will look at it in order to find the actor who played a certain character etc. and at the moment it is too easy to see certain details (eg. Sybil/Matthew's deaths) without wishing to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.145.105.174 (talk) 21:50, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think this has been debated a great deal in the past, and the policy at the moment is that Wikipedia does not have any spoiler warnings anywhere. 86.179.7.159 (talk) 18:07, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

great, I've been spoiled thanks to you. Can't you just put basic information on the table? Like stopping after "Youngest daughter of Lord and Lady Grantham" for Sibyl for example? 197.15.206.182 (talk) 23:43, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Spoiler. As I say, there was a big debate about this in the past, and the decision was made that there would be no spoiler warnings anywhere, and also "It is not acceptable to delete information from an article because you think it spoils the plot" (per Wikipedia:Spoiler). It seems unlikely that that decision would be changed. 86.179.7.159 (talk) 04:01, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it spoils the plot, it does. We are talking about the death of two main characters that will occur after the second season, how can that not be a spoil? Besides, we're talking about the character table, it should contain basic information, you can put all the spoils you want when each character is developed, the information will not be deleted from the article but from one part of it. 197.6.127.227 (talk) 20:36, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I should make it clear that I had no involvement with that wording, or with the decision or discussion that led to it, or with the table in this article that you refer to. I am just alerting you to the relevant policy, for information. 86.160.223.3 (talk) 01:15, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]