Talk:The Met

The Subject of this article

This is an article about The Met, the TV series, not about the Metropolitan Police Service. I just removed a section ("Murder inquiry by the Met") which had no particular relevance to the TV series. I will add an object template help clarify the difference. Please ensure that material posted on this page is relevant to The Met, the TV series. Robin (talk) 03:48, 10 June 2015 (IST)

Because it has been extensively referenced on Facebook, Twitter and elsewhere, I have reinserted the article heading "Murder inquiry by the Met" with a wikilink to the removed section.--Patrick Haseldine (talk) 11:30, 10 June 2015 (IST)

Patrick, I just re-removed it. I have just clarified Wikispooks:Style_Guide#Focus for your benefit, and may I particularly refer you to Wikispooks:Style_Guide#Avoid_Repetition, since the material in question is repeated on several pages elsewhere on the site, and perhaps would be better deleted from some of those too. Like you, I would like to see a murder inquiry, but this page is not about that, it is about a television series. Robin (talk) 16:24, 10 June 2015 (IST)

Dear Robin, I wrote formally to the Met's Commissioner Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe on 28 May 2015 requesting that Scotland Yard launch a long-overdue murder inquiry into the targeting of Bernt Carlsson on Pan Am Flight 103 in December 1988. That historic letter appears just once on Wikispooks: here. I continue to be puzzled by your reference to "focus" in relation to The Met but to say I'm extremely vexed with your admonition for me to "avoid repetition" has to be an understatement. Will you undo your latest edit, or shall I?--Patrick Haseldine (talk) 22:11, 10 June 2015 (IST)

In your honour, Patrick, I've just added a new subsection on relevance of material. Does this letter even mention the BBC TV series, The Met - which is the main subject of this page? If not, then I don't see how it is germane here. Just to clarify, it is helpful to have you pushing the boundaries, by the way - establishing a policy would have been impossible without it. As always, since this discussion is not private, any third parties are welcome to contribute their own thoughts. Robin (talk) 02:07, 11 June 2015 (IST)

The issue is simple: A page on any subject is one thing; a page on a TV program (fiction or documentary) about that subject, quite another. The latter is clearly not the place for factual historical information other than as it may bear on the TV program itself. Why not create a separate page on the Met which, being the incorrigably corrupt institution it so clearly is, deserves one - plus a whole series of sub-pages? BTW, when I tried to find a copy of Flyn and Gillard's book 'Untouchables' about 7 years ago, the only libary copy I could find in the UK from an extended internet search was at Sudbury open prison!! - fact. Copies were changing hands then at aound £100 on Amazon. I eventually got my hardback copy from the US, with postage costing more than the book! --Peter P (talk) 07:25, 11 June 2015 (IST)