Talk:Taskmaster (TV series)

Television C‑class 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
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Bolders!!

why are some of the names bold, be nice to know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.98.105.246 (talk) 10:15, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that the Bold names are the contestants who "won" the series. Philedmondsuk (talk) 20:03, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How tasks are delivered…

The declaration in the format section: “All the tasks are delivered in an envelope with a wax seal” is demonstrably wrong. They are often on a piece of paper, folded into three, and sealed, or (on at least one occasion) rolled into a sealed scroll, and sealed in a toy balloon. I’m not even sue that an envelope is used that often, or may have been used less after a certain point in the series. Jock123 (talk) 10:54, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 13 September 2017

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved as follows:

Taskmaster → Taskmaster (comics)
Taskmaster (disambiguation) → Taskmaster

— Amakuru (talk) 19:52, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Taskmaster (TV series) → Taskmaster
Taskmaster → Taskmaster (character)

– The television show is now in its fifth series and has an American adaptation, which I believe now makes it the primary topic over the comic book character. Pageviews (see here) for every page listed on Taskmaster (disambiguation) show that the television show is the page receiving most views – on most days, more than the other three pages combined. I imagine that this will increase dramatically as the fifth series continues (there was a noticeable spike about a week ago when the first episode was released online), and also that some views on the Marvel Comics character are unintentional (I have visited it a few times by accident looking for the television show). — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 11:20, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose first this is a generic term and UK TV comedy game show cannot pass the second criteria of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC any more than the Marvel character does. (and in fact doesn't pass the first according to page views above 1,204 of 2,369 isn't primary). Support second, but to Taskmaster (comics), then move Taskmaster (disambiguation) into vacant slot. Also Taskmaster (US TV series), means moving the UK original to Taskmaster (UK TV series) doesn't it? In ictu oculi (talk) 14:42, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
1204 is more than half of 2369, so the page views are accounting for more than every other topic combined, as the first requirement specifies. I'm not sure I understand your objection to the second requirement, which is: "it has substantially greater enduring notability and educational value than any other topic associated with that term". What other topic are you associated with that term? Plenty of words and phrases in the English language will take you to a page about a specific topic that took its name from that term – Friends and Cheers spring to mind. We're not comparing it to word meanings (we're not wiktionary), only other topics associated with the term,; I don't understand why we would put neither article at Taskmaster if one is clearly more commonly searched for than the other. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 16:42, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Come on, you should know that 55% is not enough to be automatic. and if we wind the view out to 12 months we can see plenty of days where the other colour lines not just together but even individually outdo the blue line. And besides THERE ARE TWO CRITERIA TO WP:PRIMARYTOPIC (caps for shouting :) because it appears normal text wasn't enough above). In ictu oculi (talk) 18:09, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose first move for the TV series. Support second move, but to Taskmaster (comics). Fortdj33 (talk) 17:42, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Would support making the disambiguation page, the primary topic. -- WOSlinker (talk) 19:09, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose first move. It's a generic term. Support second move to Taskmaster (comics). Move Taskmaster (disambiguation) to Taskmaster. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:10, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I agree with the opposition with @Fortdj33: and @Necrothesp:. If the consensus is the merge to Taskmaster (comics), perhaps the Taskmaster link can be redirected to the disambiguation or something. --Rtkat3 (talk) 16:09, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

List of contestants?

Why was the list of contestants (and consequently winners) removed? It's one of the main reasons I check this page. I agree that it might've been better in table form, but removing it completely is wrong. Also the 'International Broadcasts' section is duplicated in the top section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.48.95.224 (talk) 20:02, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It hasn't been removed - it's been converted to prose and moved to the History section. See also List of Taskmaster episodes. We call the "top section" the "lead" and its purpose is to summarise points from the "body" (rest of) the article, hence why it contains duplicated information. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 20:07, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well personally, I still think that a table would be a better suited for this, as it would be faster and easier to read. Also what I meant with "duplicated" is that almost the entire 'International Broadcasts' section appears in the lead word for word just copied, making the section below kinda pointless. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.15.29.154 (talk) 05:57, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'm still a bit conflicted about the article's layout and structure, but I think you're probably right. I've added the list, reformatted to (hopefully) look better, back. Feel free to summarise the International broadcasts paragraph in the lead more concisely, or add more detail to the section in the body. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 13:31, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Have any of the original 20 taken part in the TV version of the show? (Mobile mundo (talk) 22:15, 18 May 2018 (UTC))[reply]

(Just so you know, Wikipedia is not a forum, and talk pages are for discussion of the article not the topic itself.) Yes, Tim Key (series 1), Joe Wilkinson (series 3) and Mark Watson (series 5) have all taken part in the TV show. — Bilorv_(c)(talk) 01:42, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

2010 Fringe Festival

Mike Wozniak won the original internet version in 2009 but who won the 2010 Fringe festival version? Strangely enough it revealed who won the second fringe festival version. Mobile mundo (talk) 22:13, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

2010 Fringe festival was the climax of the internet version. The last task was done live.(Mobile mundo (talk) 23:55, 18 May 2018 (UTC))[reply]

Ordering of contestants

Yesterday, I changed the layout of the Contestants section to this and 15schaa has reverted me, explaining that "When talking about the contestants, they are typically listed in alphabetical order (how they sit). This system provides more information." Using bullet points and numbering seems very confusing and redundant to me – we already note in the section that "The guests always sit in alphabetical order by first name" – and it's not easy to see the order they came in at a glance when this is permuted into alphabetical order.

Readers understand already what alphabetical order is and could easily place the contestants in this order, so it seems to me like we should instead list them by the position they finished in, and do away with the alphabetising. — Bilorv_(c)(talk) 23:04, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ironically, I'd forgotten about this until 15schaa removed my comments in this edit, but I've now changed it to the version I've justified above. — Bilorv_(c)(talk) 21:06, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with List of Taskmaster episodes

Per User:Bignole/Episode page

The main Taskmaster page has 11 kb of readable prose so the episodes shouldn't be split. Matt14451 (talk) 10:36, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. The nine tables on the episode list page would be overwhelmingly disproportionate on the main Taskmaster page. The current situation is standard, as evidenced by the articles for any other show you can think of with at least seven series. — Bilorv_(c)(talk) 12:13, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging author of linked evidence @Bignole:. Looking at other examples like Go 8-Bit then maybe they should be merged as well. Merged in sandbox User:Matt14451/sandbox2 to see how it looks. Matt14451 (talk) 12:56, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry but it's just too long. You're also comparing a three series show to one with seven series, plus specials, and at least two more series planned. — Bilorv_(c)(talk) 13:43, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It was the closest show I could think of at the time. I used the tool suggested in the page above by Bignole and it said there was only 11 kb of "readable prose" which is below the splitting threshold. Matt14451 (talk) 13:49, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, but you need to measure the readable prose of the page before the split, and the episode list is almost entirely tables, so this doesn't make sense to do. We also need to abide by policies like due weight, rather than giving a disproportionately large part of the article to details of every episode's transmission. Note also that WP:SIZESPLIT says that the readable prose recommendations "apply less strongly to list articles". — Bilorv_(c)(talk) 16:30, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What happened to this page? There was a list of scores per episode a few weeks ago which was much more useful than in it's current form!