This article is within the scope of WikiProject Radio, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Radio-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RadioWikipedia:WikiProject RadioTemplate:WikiProject RadioRadio articles
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This was an American format, wasn't it? Therefore needs info about the US edition. Lists of celebs ambushed would also be useful. Lee M 11:46, 30 May 2004 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The reference to Gary Glitter and paedophilia is relevant, since it would be unfair to the makers of the programme to suggest that they might have made a known paedophile a star of the show. PatGallacher 22:55, 11 November 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Why not split the difference and just identify the date of Glitter's appearance? Gamaliel 02:18, 12 November 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yeah, I see no point in identifying the paedophilia issue unless it is relevant and unless Glitter appeared on the show, like, a week before he was charged, then IMO this reference should be removed, and I have done so. The way this is worded, it appears Glitter appeared on the show c.1974, which makes sense as that was when he was at the peak of his popularity. The charges didn't come about until something like two decades later. Actually, I have an even better idea. If you feel strongly about this, why not remove Glitter completely? Surely there are "safer" pop stars to use as examples, such as Lulu or Dusty Springfield. 23skidoo 14:06, 18 November 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Mention of Glitter is relevant. If you read the article properly you will see that Glitter REFUSED to appear on the show (unlike e.g. Lulu or Dusty Springfield). This was literally headline news the next day. This is fairly important since it is sometimes wrongly claimed that Danny Blanchflower was the only person ever to refuse to appear. If someone knows the exact date feel free to add it. However the fact that it was before the paedophilia issue is relevant, since otherwise we might give the impression that they invited a known paedophile to appear. It's a matter of opinion whether it was a particularly good show, but they hardly sank to that level. PatGallacher 14:27, 18 November 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
– The original series no longer appears to be the primary topic judging by page views. The British and Australian series each get a comparable, or greater, number of views. Moving the dab page to the plain title will better serve a majority of users. (And the best disambiguation for the American series is certainly open for discussion as well.) —ShelfSkewedTalk 04:01, 12 November 2022 (UTC) — Relisting.Extraordinary Writ (talk) 01:08, 20 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Support clearly each set of readers will be looking for the show in their own country In ictu oculi (talk) 18:19, 12 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Weak oppose. The original program from the 1940s/1950s has greater long-term significance in this case, and the British and Australian versions are already linked from the current page as examples of international adaptations of the format. Dekimasuよ! 02:51, 14 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]