This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

BBC Top‑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 Top This article has been rated as Top-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. Websites: Computing Mid‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

I am new to Wikipedia so don't know what to do but I know that BBC Blast has actually been cut by the BBC last year. I know that the website is still intact however Blast has actually stopped running. Feel free to look this up yourself I just wanted to point it out. Best, Musicmaestro123 (talk) 17:59, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is "In February 2001, BBC Online incorporated Douglas Adams' previously independent h2g2 project into its group of web sites." really a worthy comment to appear on the article page - has it been a significant development for many people in their usage of bbc.co.uk? Tompagenet 16:54, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

DNA (the system that powers h2g2) produces a significant proportion of bbc.co.uk - including h2g2, getwriting, ww2, actionnetwork - plus all the message boards. Jasoncart 22:48, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The details of the early history given here differ from the account at http://support.bbc.co.uk/support/history.html, which says that www.bbc.co.uk went live in April 2004 and the BBC Networking Club didn't start until June in that year. 132.185.132.12 13:28, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Something that needs correcting - beeb.com didn't merge to become BBC Online in 1998. beeb.com actually remained a commercial operation (a shopping guide) until 2002 when it closed ^[1]. It's probably worthy of its own article, rather than re-direct to Bbc.co.uk. Bods 10:36, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

bbc.co.uk is now displaying advertisements for non-UK users; this needs correcting.

MondoCane75 03:35, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The BBC cult site is being disassembled, please update — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.93.200.136 (talk)

I have put a few citation needed tags here :

• I was under the impression that radio stations were blocked outside the UK.
• Whilst I have heard about government grants for the website, I havent seen concrete evidence of this. Is there a citation available for this?
• "It has been suggested in the past that the BBC block users outside the UK" who suggested that? Was it a recommendation of a report, an MP perhaps, a common suggestion from verifable sources? or an opinion of "Joe Bloggs"? Pit-yacker (talk) 23:52, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm making several improvements to the article. However I want to declare a possible conflict of interest. I work for the BBC in its online dept and this should be clear when I make any of my edits. I will find references and sources for most edits... Jem 14:24, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jem, giving your comments it would be appropriate if you could make yourself aware of the conflict of interest guideline at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Cheers. Catchpole 14:35, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've had another look at the guidelines! . Thanks Catchpole. I've therefore decided to see if community wish to evaluate this as a better intro to the current article...

The URL bbc.co.uk is the brand name and home for the BBC's UK online service. Currently the 4th most popular web service in the UK, it is a vast popular website including such high profile sites as BBC News and Sport, the pre-school site Cbeebies, learning services such as Bitesize and the on demand radio player; Listen Again. The BBC has had an online presence supporting its TV and Radio programmes and web only initiatives since 1994 but didn't launch officially as BBC Online until Dec 1997 following government approval. The BBC's plans to direct licence fee revenue into what the BBC DG John Birt described as the "third medium" joining the BBC's existing TV and Radio networks required a change to the BBC Charter. Throughout its short history, the online plans of the BBC have been subject to various public consultations and government reviews illustrating concerns from commercial rivals that its large presence and public funding distorts the UK market. Its current key plan to launch free on demand TV services is awaiting final approval from the BBC's regulator; the BBC Trust.

Also currently under consideration are controversial plans to raise revenue by including advertising on BBC News pages served to non UK users. bbc.co.uk is currently freely available worldwide (via various URLs including BBCNews.com) but planned video services and a lower than expected licence fee settlement paid for by UK residents only has caused the BBC to consider ways of monetising its global popularity online. BBC Worldwide who exploit BBC brands commercially have had several attempts at launching services online including Beeb.com in the late 90s.

thoughts Jem 15:00, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wish someone would improve this article. Its partial, incomplete and full of errors. i'm happy to help. I work there and can point to sources. Who would like to start ?. Its a year since i suggested the opening paragraph above but nobody seems to have taken me up on my offer.

thoughts ? Jem (talk) 21:14, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This was the largest contribution to the article in a very long time, and I am disappointed that your offer has been ignored. I suppose those that did not like it or did not feel confident to use it thought it inappropriate to say 'no thanks'. I rarely edit articles on the media (I only came here to find the history of Action Network), but I think that any conflict of interest in the above text can be quickly dealt with, and we can make use of your information. My own COI is that I have paid TV licence fees, but I am not afraid to try to edit the page, as long as other editors look over my shoulder, and shout if it goes too far.

Let's get cracking.

--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 08:50, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I had a go. I followed your original example and left the last paragraph of the original lead (referring to Alexa) in place, but in hindsight, it doesn't flow together as a whole quite right. I added some of your material to History and Funding, cutting the lead back to brief summaries of those additions.

I will leave it for now, for copyeditors and those who know the media (or have time to research it), to improve and expand the article further.

--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 09:52, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Google found: http://reportr.net/2008/04/23/bbc-closes-13m-experiment-in-grassroots-online-democracy/

about this: http://web.archive.org/web/20070519041538/www.bbc.co.uk/dna/actionnetwork/

I know this blog is no good as a source, but how accurate are its facts, and how much weight should we give this piece of history in the article?

--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 08:50, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article cites the launch date of the BBCNC as April 13, 1994. I have found a quote from the Sunday Times here which puts it back to 11 May, so I'm putting that in the article with citation. If anyone has more info (e.g. was it a soft launch first) do please add info. Cnbrb (talk) 11:01, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that page count of 2m is now well out of date since the introduction of /programmes and the new /music section that have vast database based systems with millions of pages each.

Actually, didn't the 2m refer to news.bbc.co.uk rather than bbc.co.uk? Is this English only pages? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.41.243.253 (talk) 10:09, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just thought I'd re-mention this - please note I work for the BBC hence won't make this edit myself. However this paragraph is factually incorrect as beeb.com was never merged into bbc.co.uk (it was actually shut down):

For a time, www.bbc.co.uk was used for the organisation's corporate and educational site, while entertainment-based content appeared on www.beeb.com. The two sites were merged c.1998 to become BBC Online [5] at www.bbc.co.uk. In 1999, the BBC bought the www.bbc.com domain name for $375,000, previously owned by Boston Business Computing [6], but the price of this purchase was not revealed until 6 years later.[7] As of 2005, www.bbcnc.org.uk no longer exists. The beeb.com address now redirects to the BBC Shop website run by BBC Worldwide, at www.bbcshop.com. beeb.com was a commercial operation run by BBC Worldwide, and entertainment content was included on bbc.co.uk.

My suggested wording would be something like this - possibly with beeb.com as a separate heading?

As well as the licence fee funded www.bbc.co.uk, BBC Worldwide launched the commercially funded beeb.com, featuring mostly entertainment focused content, with sites including Radio Times, Top Gear and Top of the Pops. Later, BBC Online launched licence fee funded web sites for Top of the Pops and Top Gear, resulting in some duplication.

Beeb.com was later refocussed as an online shopping guide ^[1], and was closed in 2002^[2]. beeb.com now redirects to the BBC Shop website, run by BBC Worldwide.

In 1999, the BBC bought the www.bbc.com domain name for $375,000, previously owned by Boston Business Computing [6], but the price of this purchase was not revealed until 6 years later.^[3] As of 2005, www.bbcnc.org.uk no longer exists.

Bods (talk) 13:52, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please be aware that I have now made this change. I also no longer work for the BBC, having left about 16 months ago. It is extremely unfortunate that despite it being flagged with citations, that this error remained on Wikipedia for so long Bods (talk) 15:30, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am from the Philippines, but I am aware of the differences between the versions of BBC Online UK and BBC Online International. Do we need to represent BBC Online International to this article? Kiddie Techie Talk 09:59, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have proposed that the contents of the article BBC Student Life be merged into this article. The article in question refers to an old but still active service on BBC Online about advice for student life at any level. There is so little content and not much prospect for expansion that in my opinion it is best to merge the small contents into the article under the Children's heading in the Content section as there is already a link there at present. Rafmarham (talk) 22:39, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea, I support it. Dougweller (talk) 07:21, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have been bold and merged BBC Student Life into this article. Rafmarham (talk) 15:40, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have been bold and have done a slight rearrangement of the sections. This has included adding introductions and links in the content areas to explain better what is on the site. Before, the page focused on certain areas in detail while missing a lot of the biggest areas, such as News, Sport and iPlayer. This was mainly because of mergers to the page. I have therefore added a section on Democracy Live (the page redirected here but there was no info on the subject) as well as restructured to make it easier to understand. Rafmarham (talk) 19:35, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone please sort out the recent problem of Wikipedia displaying the crappy Mobile version of the site on tablet devices. It looks bollocks and is close to unusable. Have they hired a bunch of retarded babies to redesign the site?!?! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.144.211.147 (talk) 13:04, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing to do with Wikipedia, also the BBC is having problems with the site, which is currently displaying: "Due to technical problems, we are displaying a simplified version of the BBC Homepage. We are working to restore normal service." -- [[ axg // ✉ ]] 15:41, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on BBC Online. 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:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.bbcnc.org.uk/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20061220042031/http://www.bbc.co.uk:80/cbbc/yourlife/index.shtml to http://www.bbc.co.uk/cbbc/yourlife/index.shtml

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} 12:15, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on BBC Online. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090302215553/http://www.alexa.com//site//ds//top_sites?ts_mode=global&lang=none to http://www.alexa.com/site/ds/top_sites?ts_mode=global&lang=none
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://bbc.com/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080706020214/http://news.independent.co.uk/media/article1219009.ece to http://news.independent.co.uk/media/article1219009.ece

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:58, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on BBC Online. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080227083913/http://paper.ijcsns.org/07_book/200703/20070348.pdf to http://paper.ijcsns.org/07_book/200703/20070348.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050414020056/http://creativearchive.bbc.co.uk/ to http://creativearchive.bbc.co.uk/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:21, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

At time of writing, this article claims that the BBC Britain site and its various subsites (BBC Future, BBC Travel etc.) are inaccessible to UK users. However, at present this only remains true for the main BBC Britain site itself - all the subsites can be freely browsed by UK users but do display a disclaimer at the top of the page about how "This website is produced by BBC Global News Ltd, a commercial company owned by the BBC (and just the BBC). No money from the licence fee was used to create this website. The money we make from it is re-invested to help fund the BBC’s international journalism."

The problem that I have is determining when exactly this change was made. There is a post on BBC Future's Facebook page dated 14 July 2017 about BBC Travel becoming accessible to UK users but I do not know if that post applies to BBC Travel specifically (i.e. BBC Travel was made accessible to UK users on 14 July 2017) or to all of the subsites (i.e. all BBC Global News-produced subsites were made accessible to UK users on 14 July 2017), and in any case Facebook posts usually do not constitute a reliable source according to WP:RSE. Better sources on the subject have thus far eluded me.

I do plan on publishing an edit to the article about the regional accessibility changes regardless, but it would be better if I was able to include a date for the changeover and a source for that date. Dvaderv2 (talk) 16:53, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Berrely: What was the issue with the edits to the early years? The article was not consistent with the source I provided so I updated the article in line with the source in the usual way. Can you expand on which aspects you have a different view about? I reverted your undo because you reverted my edits without explanation or discussion with reference to the source I provided. Please discuss with reference to sources if you have a different view on what should be included in the article/ Whizz40 (talk) 19:51, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Whizz40,

Apologies for the mistake, it's just I was slightly confused as to what you meant by, "Aberdeen did a guide to their site", could you please elaborate? I did a rollback on the edits because I notice that a few of the templates had been messed up and I wrongly assumed this may have been done by you. What I meant by the article needing updating was that it constantly referenced to things from around 2010.

Apologies,

Bᴇʀʀᴇʟʏ • ^{Talk to me}∕_{What have I been doing} 08:40, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

'BBC Studios who exploit BBC brands commercially have had several attempts at launching services online including Beeb.com in the late 1990s.' I think this statement is not presented as WP:NPV, as it seems more like somebody's opinion, the word exploit suggest that BBC Studios is doing something unfair or underhand. I know BBC Studios is a controversial subject, but Wikipedia is not the place to be stating this sort of thing as fact.--Wurbl (User talk:Wurbl) 08:57, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There are actually two meanings of "exploit" - according to the OED one is pejorative, meaning "unfair or underhand", but there is also a neutral meaning, to "make full use of and derive benefit from (a resource)", which is clearly meant here. But you can always replace it with a synonym if you still feel it is not apprpriate. Cnbrb (talk) 15:05, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Where is there name such as "BBC Online"? There is just "BBC". Eurohunter (talk) 20:27, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"It was then renamed BBC Online again in 2008, although the service uses the branding "BBC"." Jamo62 (talk) 11:39, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Warum lese ich wnglisch verstehe kein Wort 2003:E0:1F49:355E:5F6:150E:BA3D:DBF8 (talk) 07:00, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]