Talk:Top Gear (2002 TV series)/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive 1 Archive 2


I think the best thing on the new format Top Gear was the indestructable Toyota Hilux. [1] Mintguy (T) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mintguy (talkcontribs) 19:43, 25 August 2004 (UTC)

Link vandalism

I don't know about everyone else, but I'm getting pretty sick of reversing the external links. Time to start blocking IPs, or just remove _all_ links? - 9cds 23:07, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Just leave the BBC ones, as I have done. Please don't leave hidden messages wrongly implying that the external links is a free for all, SqueakBox 16:17, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

It was me who put that hidden message there. After reverting people removing the links all night, at 4am, I think you would have done the same thing. - 9cds 17:06, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Your message makes people think this is a free for all site to spam, which it is not. The latest anon, for instance, only spams his site into wikipedia, ie no other contributions. This type of linkspamming is not acceptable, SqueakBox 19:32, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

The message was entered after the sites were entered, and after the editwar had started. - 9cds 20:42, 6 September 2005 (UTC)


I would like to add this to the highlights, but i'm not sure wat season it ws in. When Clarkson had that car filled with gas, and he wanted to see if he could drive it to Scotland and back on one tank. do you think thats a highlight? Super Saiyan Plough 09:11, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

Yah, that's definitely a highlight. It was in episode 4 of season 4. He drove a twin turbocharged Audi A8 diesel from London to Edinborough and back again (800 miles total) on a single tank of gas even though Audi said what he was attempting wasn't possible. - beuh_dave 17:07, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

There's no basis for saying that Clarkson's article is somehow connected with the show's removal from Discovery. That like should probably be removed. quadratic 00:17, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Unless Discovery states otherwise, fan speculation stays.

Sorry - that's not how wikipedia works. Facts only, no speculation. 9cds 18:27, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

And yet, nobody bothered to cite a/or contact Discovery personally and instead delete the info again. I must say, it's knee-jerk reaction at best. Here is one site that referenced the Jeremy Article: Also, a simple e-mail to Discovery produced a more quanititve answer, which also was debunked days earlier in that same thread. If your gonna correct, make sure you do complete research before you answer. I am amazed that some folks are too lazy to do such research.

If you wrote it, you should be prepared to back up with research. Do you expect all readers to research it, to see if Wiki.edia is indeed correct? 9cds 13:12, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Send an e-mail to Discovery and ask them yourself.


Were all of the pre 2002 episodes 30 minutes long? PS2pcGAMER 07:14, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Sabine Schmitz

Didn't they say, at the end of the last season, that they'd hired Sabine Schmitz to be a regular contrubutor (due, in part, to Clarkson's medical problems)? She doesn't seem to be featured in the new series as promised. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 16:36, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

I don't think they ever said that they hired her. I am pretty sure they were joking, and if they weren't, they were just stating a possible replacement if Clarkson wouldn't be able to present in time for the new series. PS2pcGAMER 11:39, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
They made a joke on the show that she would be an excellent replacement for Richard Hammond, citing that she was a better driver, better looking, and taller. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)

Wikilink formating for cars

The formatting for the wikilinks for each cars wasn't the same throughout the article. I think Nissan Skyline (one link) looks a lot better than Nissan Skyline (two links). Unless people disagree, lets just use [[Nissan Skyline]] from now on. PS2pcGAMER 11:43, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Caravan treatment

We all know (well, apart from unregistered users) that the treatment of caravans in the show was taken to and not from Brianiac - Science Abuse. I'm getting sick of having to revert this (and am breaking wikipedia guidelines in the process). So can those who persist on changing this article to "from", please cite their sources? - 9cds 13:23, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

As the one who originally spotted this howler, let me just say, the caravan thing has been on Top Gear on and off for YEARS. Probably since mid/late 90s at least. Brainiac only started this year. However there is one small question about originality, and that is whether Top Gear took this from Steve Wright, who has also been blasting caravans (verbally, rather than literally) since his Radio 1 show in the 80s.Graham 06:00, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Opening Paragraph

"Top Gear is a long-running BBC television series about cars and motorsport". It may well have been in the past, but surely it's now nothing more than a chat show for Clarkson's extreme right wing views.

How about: "Top Gear is a long-running BBC television series that initially was about cars and motor 'sport', but has evolved into vehicle for Jeremy Clarkson and his controversial views". Markb 14:59, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Considering thats a: not accurate and b: probably about as far away from NPOV as possible, how about no? --Kiand 16:00, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

What part of the sentence is inaccurate & which part NPOV?

Top Gear is a long-running BBC television series.

...initially was about cars and motor 'sport'

but has evolved into vehicle for Jeremy Clarkson

....and his controversial views.

Markb 08:38, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree with Kiand. Your version would give the article serious WP:NPOV issues by claiming that the show is just an outlet for Clarkson's agenda. If careful, you could mention their distaste for speedcameras, "tree-huggers" and Americans elsewhere in the article, but it would need to be done carefully and with sources to make it valid. I just don't think something like that belongs in the intro. Also, Markb, would you please indent your responses with a ":". It makes things easier to read that way. PS2pcGAMER 09:18, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
My point is quite simple; reading this intro one would think that 'Top Gear' is some kind of motoring programme, when it clearly isn't anymore. It has a very narrow agenda (speed and performance of cars) whilst totally ignoring other aspects. The programme is scripted so JC has a chance to repeat his rather tired agenda whilst never been challenged - as I wrote above, a vehicle for him.Markb 18:11, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
The idea of using "sport" rather than sport shows that you personally have NPOV issues over this, so its not even worth trying to explain to you why the rest of your suggestion doesn't come close to NPOV. --Kiand 18:14, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
I placed sport in quotes because motor sports are not listed as such in sport. You would appear to disagree with this, is this your POV?Markb 09:50, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
Does Clarkson have extreme right-wing views? Not from where I'm standing and I'm definitely well to the left of centre! Politically incorrect they may be, but not especially political. The program is still about cars and motoring, though the motorsport aspects have diminished. The format has changed a lot over the years, but it's still recognisable - and the article currently does a decent job of describing the evolution of the show. I don't think there is anything substantially wrong with the opening para, and would resist going very far in changing it, which definitely would have POV issues. Graham 21:52, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
Graham, check out the Jeremy Clarkson. His 'politically incorrect views' seem to extend to racist comments about Hyundai, BMW, U.S.A As to whether the programme still covers motoring, that's debatable, but the content has definitely dropped to make way for more articles about speed. For example, The BBC's website gives this summary of the latest episode:

"This week on Top Gear we tried to discover which is faster, a Porsche 911, or a Porsche 911 and Jeremy, James and Richard embarked on an epic journey across Europe. "

Markb 09:50, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree the program has more emphasis on speed than it used to, though that's probably because the ratings show that's what people want to see. I for one do find it more entertaining than the shows of the William Woolard era (which however worthy were often pretty stuffy and dull at times) - living vicariously through others I guess... but that doesn't make Clarkson the holder of "extreme right wing views". That would be a neo-nazi, white supremacist or other cryptofascist. Look, the guy likes to stir up controversy, that's what he does. The racist comments I agree are a bit offensive, but no more than the average laddish remark that you'd hear down any pub. That doesn't necessarily make them OK, but it's clear that his intention wasn't to provoke race riots, just to make a cheap (and not very funny) joke. Same with the rather obvious cheapshot euro-jokes which I definitely don't agree with him on. Clarkson is the noisy disruptive one that you remember from school - he enjoys getting attention by being provocative. Some hate him for it, others (like me) find it merely entertaining in a schoolboyish way. The article doesn't need changing. Graham 10:21, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Protect page?

Time to ask for this page to be protected? 9cds 21:05, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

It's starting to get that way unfortunately. Have the anon users been banned yet? I'm assuming if they have it's had no effect. M A Mason 21:13, 19 December 2005 (UTC) has been banned for a week. -- Arwel (talk) 12:55, 20 December 2005 (UTC) has also been spamming for the last two days. Can we please have a ban on him? 9cds 13:26, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
It's about 24 hours since that one last vandalised here. I've issued a final, formal warning not to do it again - if he does before I go away for Christmas I'll slap a week long ban on him. -- Arwel (talk) 12:44, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Fan article

What is wrong with the new fan site. It looks good to me. Don't know if the downloads work but if they do it should stay in, IMO, SqueakBox 15:05, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia:External_links#Maybe_OK_to_add: Fan sites: On articles about topics with many fansites, including a link to one major fansite is appropriate, marking the link as such. In extreme cases, a link to a web directory of fansites can replace this link.. That is why I removed it originally. The reason why I removed FlixVault and kept FinalGear is that FinalGear is a much larger community. For instance, the Top Gear forum on Flixvault has only 172 posts, whereas that section on the FinalGear forums has 20348 posts. PS2pcGAMER 23:51, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Article changes

Over the past day, I have made quite a few changes to the article. My hope is that one day it will become a Featured article. I've added a few pictures, merged in the power lap and celebrity lap times, and forked out the broadcast times. I've also added two sections, Criticisms and Influence. I am not sure if there are any sources on the latter to keep it in the article, but the former is really needed (with sources) to make the article more balanced. Also to note, I pulled some of the missing power lap and celebrity times from the BBC website, but they do not list decimal places for a number of entries, so they are basically acting as placeholders right now. If anyone happens to have recorded the episode and can place more detailed times on this list, it would be greatly appreciated. The final thing I want to make note of, is to be careful when adding wikilinks and as to not make them redundant (see: Manual of Style). PS2pcGAMER 02:30, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

2005 Car of the Year?

Someone listed the Veyron and Toyota Aygo as joint winners. Was the Aygo a joke? I don't remember that winning anything, let alone best new car. PS2pcGAMER 03:24, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Ok, I looked into it. The Aygo won the magazine's car of the year award, but that is different from the show, so I am removing it. PS2pcGAMER 06:29, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
It looks like either you didn't remove it, or someone has put it back. I'm removing it. quadratic 07:03, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
Yeah, I never made the change. Thanks for taking care of it. -- PS2pcGAMER 03:55, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Origin of the Stig name?

Some put in that the name was derived from Stig Blomqvist, but I can't find any source for that. However, Clarkson in a Times article claims that it was named after his childhood school (Repton). [2]

We did the series Extreme Machines and then we started to think about reviving Top Gear in a new format, with a track, special guests and the Stig — new boys at Repton were always called Stig — and we thrashed it out over a couple of years.

If no proof is found about the name being from Blomqvist, then I'll change it. PS2pcGAMER 04:43, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

I'd always imagined it was an allusion to Stig of the Dump, the eponymous caveman of which being similar to the "primal urhuman" image they jokingly give The Stig. As that book is a particular favourite of engish teachers, perhaps that's where the use at Repton came from. Incidentally that article notes "Stig means path in Swedish, the name indicates that a person is a path finder." -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 12:49, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
That's interesting. BTW, I made the change a few days ago using Clarkson as the source. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 11:01, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Caravans, ad nauseam


I have just come across this page. The reason why I have edited the Top Gear Page is because it is factually inaccurate for two main reasons:

1. To say that an idea like abusing caravans is taken from one show to another is just nonsense. That is like saying that ITV copied the BBC because it started covering the news, or sport. Just because one show and another have the same way of doing things does NOT mean that one show has taken it from another.

2. The link is Richard Hammond. To say that he took the idea of hating/trashing caravans from Top Gear to Brainiac is to assume that he had a role in deciding the editorial of either show. That is not the case. As a presenter he presents, Producers produce. Presenters do make suggestions, bring ideas into shows but Richard Hammond did not bring the idea of maltreating caravans to Brainiac Science Abuse. The idea was independently arrived upon before Richard Hammond was even considered as a presenter.

And that is a fact.

Please delete the incorrect sentence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)

Please cite your sources for this marvellous nugget. Graham 10:19, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Which particular nugget? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)
How do you know that Richard Hammond didn't take the idea of caravan abuse between the programmes? As far as we know, you're just an anonymous editor who doesn't even sign his comments - are you the producer of Top Gear or Brainiac? Come to that, are you Richard Hammond?! -- Arwel (talk) 21:45, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
And if I did happen to be a Producer of one of these shows, would that mean you would take this point more seriously? Is that what it takes? On that front, why do you think he did take that particular idea from Top Gear to Brainiac - what evidence is there of that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)
The current wording doesn't make this claim. Clearly, there are similarities between the shows in this respect, and obviously it's the same presenter. The public is led to think there is a connection, whether or not there is - and of course there is, the claim that the idea was arrived at totally independently is absurd.BUt anyway, the article as it stands is fine, so let's drop this shall we - it really is getting old! Graham 05:30, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Well at last someone has seen sense! Of course there are very few provable, independently arrived at ideas in TV - but it is quite different to say that one show TOOK an idea from another as the previous ill-informed author put it. That is quite different - especially when the show in question (Brainiac) is one of the few original programmes of the last few years. The point is that the public is led to see a connection if they are led to by inaccurate entries in Wikipedia! It is good however to see that someone has finally got it right. the preceding unsigned comment is by (talk • contribs)
Brainiac, original? Hah, that's a good one. You've never seen Mythbusters then? Or read Loaded? Or even the old 70s shows How? and that Magnus Pyke one. Ideas are being plagiarised all the time in TV - in fact there's an excellent Simpson's episode that mocks just this. Truly original shows come along once a generation. Brainiac isn't one of them. Graham 23:04, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Oh dear, you really have no idea. "Mythbusters" was made after Brainiac, "How" was a completely different style of presentation and type of content, and ditto Magnus Pyke's shows. Brainiac has been lauded in the trade as precisely that - "truly original" - and won awards for precisely that quality. the preceding unsigned comment is by (talk • contribs) 13:01, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
I wouldnt call Brainiac "truly original", but it is Big And Clever. Its a good idea, albeit not wholly original, and usually well presented.
PS, can you sign your posts? Ta. -- jeffthejiff (talk) 13:57, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
So many elements of Brainiac come from elsewhere. Yes, including the caravans. Much of the humour is from Viz and Loaded. The "science" is in the tradition of the 70s shows mentioned, and Mythbusters as a concept has been around for ages, since it was pitched as a spin-off of the "Beyond 2000" show in Australia. There are even elements of Robot Wars and The Great Egg Race in there. OK, maybe the synthesis of all of this into one counts as original in television land, but when I first saw Brainiac, I thought, well, it's entertaining enough, but it's all been done before. Perhaps you just need to have more cultural reference points. Graham 23:12, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes - and the terribly derivative way they shoot on tape and the oh so unoriginal way they use the English language when they construct sentences. Every show can spuriously be reduced to its elements and held up as derivative by that rather muddled thinking. The 9 o'clock News is derivitaive because it deals with images of people doing stuff like all other shows, the Weather is just a rehash of the News because it talks about what is happening in the world etc etc. There is no evidence that Brainiac humour is taken from Viz. There is evidence of how it is held up to be original though - as specifically cited in its two Broadcast nominations and awards and by leading commissioners in the Trade Press) and the fact that its style and content is now being copied by every broadcaster looking for quasi-Science shows. Cultural Reference points? Always an idea to check the facts before posting193.35.8.232 11:09, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
How about taking this discussion over to Talk:Brainiac: Science Abuse? I've never seen the show, don't care how derivative it is and, apart from sharing a presenter, this discussion now has nothing to do with Top Gear! Stephenb (Talk) 14:54, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Christopher Eccleston

The article describes Christopher Eccleston as an apple that fell away from the tree and then goes on to describe how he can only drive an automatic. What is meant by this? Was one of Eccleston's parents a professional driver? The only Eccleston is racing I can think of is Bernie, but he's got an extra E in his name. Pburka 00:50, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

I think that's referring to the other guests. As far as I know, he was the only one who required an automatic transmission. quadratic 09:25, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps the use of this proverb is different in British English? In North America "the apple doesn't fall far from the tree" is used to indicate that a child is similar to his or her parents in some way. Pburka 16:03, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
As far as I know, the proverb means the same over here, about parents, but I think the article means it in the way of falling away from the tree that the other guests are on, who can all drive a manual? Sadisticality 16:17, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
In my condensing of the article, I removed this. It seemed confusing to many people anyway. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 10:24, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup Notes

I've taken the liberty of cleaning up some grammar, removing weak content, and adding citations and content. I've expanded the criticisms section, which I felt was the weakest portion of the article. I'd like to see a "facts" or "trivia" section where information like the sequence of cars in the opening credits (Ferrari 360, MINI Cooper, Rover 75 Tourer, Honda Civic Type-R, Volkswagen Polo, Jaguar X-Type) can be noted. Here are some of the bits I removed:

  • "After Clarkson left to pursue other aspects of his TV career, the show became more toned down, but still retaining something of its influence." This bit really sounds objective, and lends no supporting facts to convey the change in mood after Clarkson's departure.
  • "Due to the high ratings of the new format show, it seems to have been awarded an increased budget as there are several expensive experiments and trips into Europe and to America." One fact, high ratings, with no citation or link to support. No evidence that the trips are any more expensive than older segments. Perhaps this statement would work if it focused on the fact that the old show format didn't have as much travel segments as the new format, instead of conjecture about the show's budget.
  • "so much so that many viewers may be unaware that the track exists as a separate entity from the show." This was in reference to Jessica, the theme music. Is there a poll or media bit that suggests this or backs this up? Otherwise, it's probably irrevelent for the purposes of this article.
  • "although in recent years (and as of the previous series in 2004) it has used a different recording which has different instruments and is not performed by the original artists" I superseded this with what I hope is a more efficient sentence. You tell me!
  • "Many have been related to his comments comparing German car makers to Nazis" This is not accurately descriptive of Clarkson's "sat-nav to poland" comments. He makes no comparison of the Mini, BMW, or any of their employees to Nazis, but instead a joke based on Nazi historical facts in retort to the stereotypical "tea-time" that Britons enjoy being turned into a gimmick on a Mini show car. The article shouldn't "feel" either way about the comments, but serve to accurately reproduce them, and identify public reaction via linking and citation.

Thanks for reading. Mbrowne 11:34, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

I took a look at all of your edits and they all look good IMO. Keep up the good work. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 23:45, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Power Lap Condition Addition

After reviewing Season 7 Ep. 3, concerning the Ford Focus ST, I think the conditions should've been listed as Foggy rather than Wet Track. The track looks almost completely dry, and The Stig seems to have suffered from a lack of visability than problems with the track being slick.--Cantthinkofausername 10:47, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Hammond's Teeth

Why isn't there any mention of Jeremy teasing Richard Hammond about having his teeth whitened?

Added in the 2002 to today section. -- PS2pcGAMER 06:58, 1 January 2006 (UTC)