Talk:List of The Goodies episodes

Comedy Low‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy 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.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

London Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London 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.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Television: British / Episode coverage 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the British television task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force.

BBC: Sitcoms Low‑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 articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by BBC Sitcoms Task Force.

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.

Montreaux Festival 'The Golden Rose'

This is listed on the BBC's treasure hunt page with a tx date of 10 May 1975. I'd add it to the list, but cannot find any info on it elsewhere - anyone heard of this 2nd Montreux special [the first being the expanded Kitten Kong] (Etron81 18:17, 8 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I've foudn that this looks to eb a documentary about the Montreux Festival presented by the Goodies. See Here! (Etron81 18:22, 8 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Transmission times

These should be added for each episode. One of the criticisms levelled at the Goodies (perhaps not so much in jest) by John Cleese was 'kids programme !' because some shows were shown before the 9pm watershed and were consequently less adult in humour than those transmitted after the 9pm watershed.

Displaying the transmission times might make the differences easier to understand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pgb62uk (talk • contribs)

The Goodies series was actually intended as an adult programme (in the same way that Monty Python’s Flying Circus was), and The Goodies episodes were originally shown, in the UK, in an adult timeslot. However, the Goodies' slapstick comedy was also popular with children and it was for this reason that "The Goodies" episodes began being shown in times suitable for viewing by children. As a result of this decision, some adult content of the episodes was suppressed by not being aired during the earlier transmission times of the series, to make the series more "child friendly". There are comments about this on The Goodies page.

With regard to John Cleese's comment, this was written by Graeme Garden and Bill Oddie, themselves, for John to say during the Goodies' episode The Goodies and the Beanstalk, so I think that the comment was intended (by the Goodies) as a jest (against themselves) — or perhaps the comment was written (and said) because the Goodies were not happy about the episodes being treated as a children's programme by television personnel.

If, as you mention, you feel that transmission times should be given for The Goodies' episodes, could you please help with this.

Also, could you please sign your comments on talk pages in future (as requested by Wikipedia of people who edit the talk pages). Thanks. Figaro 14:37, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Single episodes

I plan on redirecting these per WP:EPISODE soon. Information from multiple secondary sources must be present for a single episode to need an article. This includes reception and development. Single plot summaries and trivia don't make a substantial article. I suggest Wikia and tv.com as alternate venues for this information. TTN 18:09, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly why do you consider the format being used at the moment is at fault? A lot of time and effort has gone into the creation of the episode articles, as well as work which has been done on the articles since then — all of which you evidently do not consider as being worthwhile.

With regard to the reception and development of the single episodes, this information can always been researched and added sometime in the future. As for references for the individual episodes, I will begin adding them now and I will continue adding the information over a period of days until the task is finished. Figaro 11:03, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have now added references to all of the episode pages — and will add further information to the reference sections of the pages later on. Figaro 12:23, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just providing possible references doesn't help. They need to contain information. If you can prove that the material can possibly make articles that can stand on their own, I'll be fine, but you need to actually show that they're more than trivial. TTN 15:02, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I thought that I had already intimated that I intended to add more than just the references with regard to the individual episodes. However, this will take time to achieve (over several days — even, perhaps, over several weeks to complete), but I fully intend to do this whenever I actually get the time to be able to do so. Figaro 00:28, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can intend to do whatever you would like. That doesn't instantly mean it'll get done. You should bring one episode up to standards to show that it can be done for the rest. If that cannot be done within a week, I'm really going to doubt your claims. TTN 00:32, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Personal comments, in article talk pages about other users, such as your comment above with regard to myself, are not allowed on Wikipedia. Please read the rules.

With respect to what really counts, I have already commented that I intend to do what I have said, and as I have also already commented, this will take time to achieve (I do have a life outside of Wikipedia, and I do not have non-stop dial-up to the internet). I don't intend to be driven by you in this matter (you could also do something to help, instead of criticising what other people are trying to achieve). If you make any further comments with regard to myself I intend to take up the matter with an Administrator. Figaro 00:51, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is not a personal attack of any kind. It is perfectly fine to refer to you as an editor because it directly correlates with the existence of these articles. "It will take time to achieve" is not a good answer. You haven't actually shown how these can be improved upon. You have just given a statement that could mean leaving these indefinitely because you may be able to improve them. You need to show at least a couple of paragraphs for me to take these statements seriously. TTN 00:57, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was actually referring to your comment:

"If that cannot be done within a week, I'm really going to doubt your claims".

when I commented that you had made a personal attack on me. These comments (complete with the time-limit) border close on personal abuse or bullying on your part.

Also, please explain exactly what you meant by your statement of my claims. I never actually claimed anything. I merely said that I would do research for information regarding the individual episodes and then add any information I found to the episode pages (this was something which you insisted was necessary and, therefore, I was merely trying to follow your stated orders to me regarding this). In other words, you were the person who made claims — not me. Figaro 14:18, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If there is no limit, you can just keep saying "I have sources." or "I'll get to it soon." By saying that you plan on improving these, you're claiming that you can bring them up to standards. I have stated that these need sources to exist; you said it can happen, and you plan on doing it. You need to show me something, so I can leave you alone and let you do it. At this point, nothing shows that the information that you can add will do anything to help. TTN 14:39, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There you go again, personalising your comments as though this was a battle of wits between you and myself. I am getting really fed up with you and your demands — I don't need to show you anything, nor do I intend to discuss the matter with you any further. It is not for you to personally decide what should be done with the pages — that is not the correct Wikipedia procedure. I have asked a Wikipedia Administrator for advice about the situation and will rely on what the Administrator says — not on what you say. Figaro 21:39, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the late reply, Figaro, but Glen, the Wikipedia Administrator that you have requested is not around because of a wikibreak. Greg Jones II 03:04, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Viewer Question

What was the "name" of the episode in which 1 of them dressed in a dog costume and was entered in a dog show, appeared on tv talk show, etc.? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.200.0.112 (talk) 18:40, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The merge

Y Merger complete. The merge is done from The Goodies videography as per WP:MERGE Kautilyalundit (talk) 02:24, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Episode titles

On the "Complete BBC Collection" DVD box set, some episodes use alternative titles as opposed to what Wikipedia currently consists the "main" titles. Episodes having "The" added or removed from the title are not considered for the following list:

"Tower of London" = "Beefeaters"
"Caught in the Act" = "The Playgirl Club"
"Scotland" = "The Loch Ness Monster"
"Culture for the Masses" = "For Art's Sake"
"Come Dancing" = "Dancing"
"Women's Lib" = "Free To Live"
"Charity Bounce" = "London to Brighton"
"The Baddies" = "Double Trouble"
"Fleet Street Goodies" = "Cunning Stunts"
"Goodies and Politics" = "Politics"

Should we change the "main" titles of those episodes to these? Problem is, two of these episodes, "Tower of London" and "Come Dancing" had previously been released on DVD under those names, so should we change them too? TapLover (talk) 20:52, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]