Talk:It's That Man Again

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Catchphrase section update[edit]

Hi there folks and folkesses. After saving this comment, I'll be updating the catchphrase section of this article, by combining the material I erroneously placed into the Tommy Handley article. I for some reason I didn't spot the ITMA link, or I'd have worked the updates into the existing list here. Thanks to Rothorpe (talk) for bringing it to my attention. No worries. The groundwork is not lost, and it's essentially a copy-edit exercise now. Wotnow (talk) 02:07, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

After this edit, I will save the catchphrase section update. I did not find an ITMA reference for the catchphrase: "I am as happy as a sandbag". This appears to be the title of a musical ('Happy as a sandbag'), rather than a catchphrase from ITMA, the catchphrases of which are fairly well documented - for the very reason that they became catchphrases. "Happy as a sandbag" may be a catchphrase in its own right, but it does not appear to have originated from ITMA. I have therefore deleted it.
If a reliable citation is found by anyone, please feel free to add it back. Conversely, if you aren't too good with citations, just chuck the weblink here, and I'll format it. Beyond a reliable citation, the only other way to check whether this was ever an ITMA catchphrase is to listen to some of the recordings, which can be found. Again, if anyone happens to do this, please state the title/date of the recording, and I'll track it down. Wotnow (talk) 03:51, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Re "happy as a sandbag": this is a malapropistic rendition of the traditional simile 'happy as a sandboy' and as such it would have been rendered by the character Signor So-so as played by Dino Galvani. It would be a one-off and therefore would not qualify as a catchphrase; the custom was to get at least one such malapropism in per episode. It will undoubtedly show up in the surviving scripts but as a one-off, searching for it would be a 'needle in a haystack' job! Gamelyn Chase (talk) 01:48, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

I've finally got around to crediting Diana Morrison as the first person to pronounce the ejaculation ‘d’oh!’ in any broadcast sound medium, notwithstanding the much vaunted 'claiming' of it by The Simpsons some 43 years later. The actual ‘D’oh!’ page is top heavy. On the available evidence the term is clearly generic; the referencing of the subject ‘The Simpsons’ belongs later in the narrative. Gamelyn Chase (talk) 11:26, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Origin of name[edit]

The Oxford DNB article about Herbert Gunn says he joined the Daily Express in 1936 in Manchester, and "he later transferred to London as assistant editor and then between 1943 and 1944 was managing editor of the Daily Express. It was there that he created the headline referring to Hitler as ‘It's that man again’, which afterwards became the title for Tommy Handley's long-running radio show ITMA". But It's That Man Again started on the National Programme of BBC Radio at 8.15 PM on 12 July 1939. The title must have decided before that.

I've had a look and found on the top of page 19 of the Daily Express for 29 April 1939 is a banner "FORGET THAT MAN HITLER: Here's all you want to known about today's Cup Final". But note that 'that man' still had to be named. The only direct use of the phrase comes in the Jonah Barrington column on 15 May 1939 (page 19) at the end of an article about the prospect of television opening in the Midlands:

But the Treasury have not yet said yes. "You can have your £250,000," they replied, "just as soon as the international situation settles down a little. But at the moment, well . . ."

In fact, it's That Man again . . .

Could this be the origin? Sam Blacketer (talk) 21:32, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Scratch that, found it on 2 May. Front page. Sam Blacketer (talk) 21:37, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

"trans-jurisdictional trademark"[edit]

This article included a claim that Fox had made an application for a "trans-jurisdictional sound trademark" covering "D'Oh", but that this trademark is invalid because of the previous use of "D'Oh" in ITMA. This is incorrect:

1) All registered trademarks are jurisdictional. The US trademark linked to in the piece covers only the US, any corresponding European Community trademark would only cover Europe etc. There are mechanisms (e.g., the Madrid protocol) which allow you to essentially make an application to many countries through a single initial application, but all that is happening here is that WIPO acts as a clearing office, and that the initial application then results in multiple trademark applications in multiple jurisdictions each being handled separately. There is no such thing as a "trans-jurisdictional trademark".

2) There is no concept of prior art in trademarks. You can make an application for a trademark that has been used before by others. ITMA's prior use of "D'Oh" therefore has no relevance to a registration of "D'Oh" by another. The only case in which this would be relevant is if you are trying to argue that the phrase is in common use in the relevant class ("Entertainment services in the nature of an animated television series" - BTW, the trademark only covers activities in this area), something that no-one would argue, and that ITMA was not an example of.

Finally, this entire section appears to be be original research (WP:NOR) and should be removed for that reason.FOARP (talk) 06:02, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

EDIT: I see the same argument (ITMA 'invented' D'oh, so Fox's trademark is not valid) has already been made at D'oh!, and was rejected. FOARP (talk) 05:23, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Since this involves a sound trademark the only ‘research’ was the necessary sourcing of the controverting ITMA sound files, something not beyond the wit of a maladjusted amoeba. As to the necessary praecognita, it was not necessary for me to do any research whatsoever on aspects of ITMA; I was there.

Other than a residuary reference and link, I voluntarily transferred the topic out to ITMA because it otherwise seemed to be susceptible to the depredations of chagrined Simpsons’ aficionados. I have reinstated the deleted material with augments that might satisfy your pulsating circumspection. You were, and are, entirely free to make linear edits for any syntactical nuances you might have issue with. What you are not free to do is diminish the sum total of knowledge on any topic and thereby frustrate the purpose and intent of Wikipedia. Gamelyn Chase (talk) 03:24, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

It would appear that your real argument is about the origin of D'oh, and that this argument is therefore the same one you've had over at D'oh. I apply the same reasoning they did. This is original research, there is no credible source for a controversy involving ITMA over Fox's sound trademark. Even from a point of view of trademark law, there is no issue here since trademark law has no concept of prior art. You try to counter this by saying "I was there", but this is the very essence of original research. EDIT: WP:SOAPBOX is also worth mentioning here, as is WP:POVFORK.
Finally, please refrain from using insulting language and editing other users comments. FOARP (talk) 08:21, 18 October 2013 (UTC)


The febrile editing tells its own story. Since the objective here is to re-discover and fix for posterity the role of Diana Morrison in the history of this ‘catchphrase’ I have retreated to an earlier position short of the apparent sticking point. The outline of the character and the retrievable sound file links are reinstated and if the page (as at 03:54, 29/10/2013) remains unmolested, that objective will have been achieved. Gamelyn Chase (talk) 04:04, 29 October 2013 (UTC)