Talk:Card Sharks

Model

Does anyone know the last name of the model named Bettina who was on the earlier shows of Card Sharks?

Losing Ripoff?

Weren't the Losing Horns taken directly from The Price is Right?

Hardly a ripoff since they were from the same production company Lambertman 23:39, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Neither Bob Barker or Alex Trebek hosted Card Sharks, though Trebek was a contestant on CS in 1981, but not a host.

- Yes I know. I'm the one that was fixing it...before I got an account here. --Crinos43 15:28, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

- Let us not forget that some of the Price Car cues were used on Card Sharks as well.--142.167.30.94 (talk) 02:19, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link

Under "Misc. Show Information" is a link to STP, the disambiguation page. Where's it supposed to link? I'm not wholly sure. Rosuav (talk) 12:48, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Split the 2001-2002 version into it's own article?

It is my belief that since the 2001-2002 version of Card Sharks varied so wildly from the original versions (1978-81, and 1986), and since the 2001-2002 section is so poorly written and sourced, that it would thrive more as a disambiguated page, entitled Card Sharks (2001). Thank-You for your time in looking into this matter. Adg2k7 (talk) 19:32, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Nah. It's a short section that doesn't have nearly enough info to warrant splitting...and the show doesn't warrant adding any more info than what's already there. Lambertman (talk) 20:29, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Maybe you think so. I say it's an extra, un-needed section that deserves it's own page, especially after seeing how much extra clutter it adds to the page. Removing this section and giving it it's own article would probably make it only a stub, but it could always be expanded, and furthermore, doing so would probably be a huge step towards trying to make the current Card Sharks article at least a GA on the quality scale. Adg2k7 (talk) 20:37, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

It really doesn't add much clutter. I have to agree with Lambertman here. The article would only be a stub, and any expansions would be too trivial to even add to the article in the first place. I say that the article should stay as it is. FamicomJL (talk) 05:01, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I respectfully disagree. I think the 2001 version of the series is too dissimilar to the other two versions to warrant being on this page. I say split. --ChrisP2K5 (talk) 06:01, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Game Show Marathon is in other game show articles...

So why do Daedlus keep reverting the info here, as he is doing on The Price is Right? Appears to be a troll from what I can tell. Even an external link doesn't please him at all. Landofpartinggifts (talk) 03:01, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

I am not a troll, however you appear to be because of your refusal to read the polices I cited. You must provide a 3rd party source for the information, a link to a youtube-like site does not meet our policy, as videos can be edited by anyone, and therefore cannot be verifiable. As per another policy, you cannot list WP as a source. It must be 3rd party.— Dædαlus^T@lk / Improve\ ^Contribs 03:11, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Gladly, but Let's Make A Deal and Match Game do have the same kind of information, uncited, in their articles. Namely, the infobox has Ricki Lake and Gameshow Marathon listed in them also. I suppose you'll go and delete that too, probably. It is misleading to have that same kind of uncited information in an article stay posted, but not over here. Landofpartinggifts (talk) 03:20, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Indeed I shall, the editors who added the original information have had ample time to cite sources, but still have not, can you please list the specific lines that need to be delt with? Also, if you may note, concerns have have already been raised by other editors, in regards to the very top header, which states there may be uncited information in the article.— Dædαlus^T@lk / Improve\ ^Contribs 03:23, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Merge proposal

Any reason why Card Sharks (2001 game show) is a separate page and not a subsection in this article? Sottolacqua (talk) 00:28, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, the extreme dissimilarities. --ChrisP2K5 (talk) 07:42, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Card Sharks 2001

The 2001 version doesn't need its own article. Yes, it is way different from the original, but it's still a revival. The various individual versions of Pyramid don't warrant their own articles, as different as they were. Please ask for consensus before splitting the 2001 version back off. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Many otters • One hammer • HELP)} 21:17, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Pyramid had the exact same format in ALL its revivals! That's why this is different. And Classic Concentration has its own article, too. 71.43.255.222 (talk) 21:18, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Nobody's contested Classic Concentration having its own article, but there is a dispute over Card Sharks 2001 having its own article. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Many otters • One hammer • HELP)} 21:21, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

King of the Hill

Please don't add information on the King of the Hill pilot. It's sourced to a personal wiki, which falls under WP:SPS and is therefore not a reliable source. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Many otters • One hammer • HELP)} 17:31, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about that. That was mostly me. Daniel Benfield (talk) 18:39, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Started to copy edit the article...

I tried a little to copy edit the article. I'm still fairly new to copyediting so I need to read more about the rules, but I think I did an OK job. If there is any immediate issues anyone else has found with this article please message me, as I am happy to help! Chevymontecarlo 18:13, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

If you don't mind, I'm going through and editing it a little. I've already gone through the lead paragraph, so now I'm working on the next section. --Song (talk) 19:26, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

No, that's fine. Go ahead! You'll probably do a better job than me :D Chevymontecarlo 05:11, 11 June 2010 (UTC)