Template talk:BBC News

Purpose??
Is this template about the BBC News Channel, commonly refered to as BBC News, or is it about the organisation BBC News who run the news channel, BBC World News plus lots more. The reason I ask relates to the content of the box. The presenters listed are all the domestic TV ones, i.e. news channel, however BBC World News and World News Today are both listed as programmes, yet they belong to BBC World News. Surely we need to decide the purpose of the box so it is clear whether all BBC News related presenters and programmes should be added (would be a long box!) or, as I would favour, remove items that aren't relevant to the news channel and create a seperate World news template. Any thoughts? Uvghifds (talk) 19:25, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
 * The scope of the template is the BBC division, BBC News. I am strongly in favour of this remaining the case to keep things simple and avoid unnecessary duplication. Many of the people and programmes included are in any case relevant to both the UK and international news activities of the BBC.Rangoon11 (talk) 19:31, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Can I take it from that you would support adding BBC World News programmes, such as GMT and The Hub to the list in addition to all the BBC World News presenters? Uvghifds (talk) 19:51, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes. How many additional links (very roughly) do you think that would be?Rangoon11 (talk) 19:53, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I should add that, if the presenters section starts getting out of hand then I would be open to a re-think on the inclusion scope, although for the moment the section seems reasonable to me. There is clearly an excellent argument that not every person who has ever been a presenter of any current or past BBC news programme and who has a WP article should be included. Rangoon11 (talk) 20:00, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
 * The page List of BBC newsreaders and reporters lists 22 World News presenters, although a few are already included. One way to get round the problem of having too many presenters in the template would be to only include those who have permenent slots e.g. take out people like Julia Sommerville, Adam Parsons etc. who only act as relief.  Only and indea.  I also think that it might be a good idea to take out the 'defunct programmes' section as it is by no means extensive and should include many older programmes of which it would be far more difficult to bring together. Uvghifds (talk) 21:00, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree with your idea re presenters and would support the removal of non-permanent presenters. Re defunct programmes, as I understand it many defunct BBC news programmes do not have a WP article, although of those which do the template currently includes the majority. I do think that this is useful content and far less at danger of causing the template to explode than presenters.Rangoon11 (talk) 21:56, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Having considered this template again I think we still have more work to do. Although it now includes both domestic and international TV services, it excludes all BBC News on the radio (Radio 4/ World Service/ 5 Live news) all coming from the News department. It also doesn't include any correspondents, who are also a key part of BBC News. Any thoughts? Uvghifds (talk) 17:11, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Correspondents would be a good addition. As would radio news programmes (we already have stations).Rangoon11 (talk) 18:37, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Newsroom (BBC 2)
Should the former BBC 2 news programme Newsroom be added to this template? Dunarc (talk) 18:54, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

BBC vs BBC World Service
There should be as much delineation as possible between the BBC (the domestic corporation responsible for output of domestic news) and the BBC World Service (organisation under indirect control of the FCO which has to meet its political objectives), as the two are often conflated (and indeed, the World Service is often given the same reputation for editorial independence and policy-free objectives that the domestic BBC has), despite them being very, very different in scope.

With that said, I almost feel like the template should be spun off, so as to differentiate between the two, lest anyone mistakenly thinks all BBC News is propaganda, or the World Service has a stellar reputation for objectivity. PeaceThruPramana26 (talk) 18:18, 20 February 2022 (UTC)