Talk:Jigsaw (British TV series)

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.

Fair use rationale for Image:Jigsaw (screenshot).jpg[edit]

Image:Jigsaw (screenshot).jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:35, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Firefox Browser Crash[edit]

Whenever I visit this link:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/cult/classic/titles/jigsaw.shtml

Firefox crashes. Does this happen to anyone else? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.242.197.200 (talk) 02:48, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Noseybonk[edit]

The entire section on Noseybonk is just terrible. It seems horribly unencyclopedic. Describing the mask as having "dark, soul-less eyes"? Linking to a YouTube clip warning that it's only for "those brave enough to watch"? I suggest either cleaning it up or removing it entirely. Host Dunkelheit (talk) 21:26, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree 109.78.61.179 (talk) 18:10, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't. I understand that it isn't very "encyclopedia-ish", but come on. Firstly, this isn't a real encyclopedia. Secondly, it's entirely true. Thridly, it is very relevant. "Noseybonk" has been a highly hated thing among the children unfortunate enough to have seen him. the description truly is accurate, and I might even say that the warning is warranted in case someone has a heart attack watching it, and decides to sue Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.177.162.236 (talk) 04:41, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't think this is a real encyclopaedia, perhaps you should read more about Wikipedia before editing the articles...

Agreed - if this character was indeed known for causing fear to children (rather than just to a few vocal editors) then it should logically be verifiable; there should be something that can be cited to say so. --82.70.156.254 (talk) 00:47, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I remember watching Jigsaw (5 when it started, 10 when it ended), but I don't remember finding Noseybonk anything other than just odd. So this is all personal opinion, not fact. Probably best deleted. --109.145.181.123 (talk) 13:11, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.17.169.176 (talk) 00:50, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]