Talk:The Blue Planet

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.

Marine life (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Marine life, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Marine lifeWikipedia:WikiProject Marine lifeTemplate:WikiProject Marine lifeMarine life articles

BBC Mid‑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

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-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.

Television: British Low‑importance

	Television portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the British television task force.

9/11

Possibly irrelevant to the main article, but perhaps worth noting: Episode 1 was broadcast on September 12, 2001, and was the first scheduled programme that the BBC transmitted after the previous day's atrocities. It may be pretentious or passé to say so, but I couldn't help being struck by the contrast between the serenity of the oceans and the chaos of human affairs. - Lee M 02:51, 5 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I thik thats a very interesting thought and it might be worth looking into if it proved a relaxing break from 9/11 or was overlooked because of it. But otherwise its probally wouldn't fit into the encyclopedia.

I'm sorry, I really don't see the relevance. Lots of things happened the day after September 11th 2001, there's no connection to the Blue Planet except maybe the ratings for that night might not have been as high, which isn't even that notable. Stanlavisbad (talk) 21:58, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Special Edition DVD

Csn someone please describe the extras on the special edition DVD? Thank you. Andy Mabbett 22:02, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Expanded article

In line with my efforts on David Attenborough's 'Life' series articles and Planet Earth, I have expanded this one and will be shortly adding episode summaries of equal length. I dropped the POV about 9/11 (though kept the date reference) and also removed the unsourced series budget. This could be re-inserted if a citation can be found. Chris 42 14:12, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Technical Specification

Can anyone detail how the production was shot? Mostly film 35mm, 16mm, video, hi-def, or a mixture of all the former? I'm curious because Warner just announced a new DVD release of this without a BluRay/HDDVD counterpart; since Planet Earth was the best seller set in both formats, it stands to reason they would also release Blue Planet, if the original was hi-def...

Virgin Media, a UK cable tv company, has The Blue Planet available in HD via video on demand, so a BluRay/HDDVD release is technically possible. 82.34.176.101 17:12, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IMAX movie

The IMAX movie titled "Blue Planet" is an entirely different space-themed piece which does not have it's own Wikipedia page. As a result, there is some confusion between this movie and the Blue Planet re-cut movie. It is available on Blu-Ray and occupies that same shelf as Planet Earth, leading to much confusion. I believe that there should be some mention of it in this article, if not just to say that it is different from the 1990 Smithsonian Institute / Lockheed Corporation IMAX movie by the same name.

Narrator on Discovery Channel Broadcast?

While David Attenborough narrates the BBC broadcast and DVD release of Blue Planet, The Discovery Channel has again deemed it necessary to overdub their broadcast episodes with another narrator. Any idea of who is providing the new narration, and whether this information would prove beneficial to the article (to differentiate between different airings)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.231.65.28 (talk) 04:36, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

The narrator in the Discovery Channel re-dubs is Pierce Brosnan

Any sources? Google search shows that you're probably right, but I couldn't find any actual sources (just people claiming it). --V2Blast (talk) 09:14, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Environmental films?

This series doesn't really go into any depth on environmental issues - there was no mention of global warming, marine pollution, mass extinction or anything like that that I can recall, so I don't really think it warrants placement as an 'environmental film' any more than any other wildlife documentary.

Actually, there is one program on the DVD about environmental issues, the last one that I'm watching just now, though I still don't think it qualifies. Richard001 (talk) 07:33, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it is almost a full hour, and there's no way to include it in the category except by placing Blue Planet there... I guess I'll leave it. There's not much information about it in the article though. Richard001 (talk) 08:26, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

British spelling

A polite request, recently the article has received one or two 'corrective' edits: please observe British spelling per Wikipedia's MoS. Thanks. Antarctic-adventurer (talk) 10:29, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism

The point noted does not properly fall under the nomer "criticism". Some sequences can only be filmed in aquarium conditions. It is no secret and anyone who knows something about the technical aspects of the process would be unsurprised.

Likewise, many sequences in this and other wildlife documentaries are cut together into narratives about a particular individual, when in reality the shots were executed in different set-ups involving different animals. Again, this is simply a matter of narrative conceit, not of misleading the audience.

It is important to reserve the term "criticism" for cogent objections raised by serious people with the relevant knowledge, since anything worthwhile will attract gripes from imbeciles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.110.119.179 (talk) 14:47, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You mean when they show clips of pantropical spotted dolphins and long-beaked common dolphins in the same sequence off South Africa? SaberToothedWhale (talk) 02:36, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well what's wrong with that? Antarctic-adventurer (talk) 06:44, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

They're supposed to be only showing long-beaked common dolphins off South Africa, yet they have surface sequences of pantropical spotted dolphins mixed in. Some editor unfamiliar with cetaceans probably made the mistake (the commentary also only mentions long-beaked common dolphins). A recent doc on pbs made a similar mistake (mixing footage of long-beaked common dolphins off South Africa with dusky dolphins off New Zealand, yet only mentioning the latter). SaberToothedWhale (talk) 18:20, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't checked that section myself, but it sounds like a plausible mistake. However unless there is a trusted source clearing stating this "criticism" from a balanced view then that would constitute original research and therefore can't be included in Wikipedia. Of course you are also making the assumption that they are only supposed to be showing long-beaked common dolphins. Still I expect that there are some editing mistakes in a series of this size. Antarctic-adventurer (talk) 08:10, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I know such criticism couldn't be included. I was just being a dick. But watch this The Sardine. In particular, notice the pantropical spotted dolphins shown (but never mentioned) at 2:35-39, 2:50-53, 3:07-08, and 3:10-11. South Africa is near the extreme of their range, and I doubt their anything but vagrants in that region. SaberToothedWhale (talk) 17:52, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In 'Tidal Seas' he states that the tidal forces are larger at the poles that at the equator. This is untrue: in the Northen hemisphere only there are larger tides at higher lattitudes due to the arrangement of the land masses, this is not the same thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.6.84.97 (talk) 13:37, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on The Blue Planet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090330133317/http://theblueplanetlive.com:80/ to http://www.theblueplanetlive.com

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:23, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]