Talk:The Goon Show running jokes

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Lists

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Radio: UK

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Radio, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Radio-related subjects 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.RadioWikipedia:WikiProject RadioTemplate:WikiProject RadioRadio articles

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

This page is within the scope of the UK Radio taskforce. New members are always welcome!

To-do List:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Create: Missing years and articles in radio, National Association of Radio Distress-Signalling and Infocommunications (Hungary)
Assess : Unassessed Radio articles; Unknown-importance Radio articles
Cleanup : Radio articles needing attention
Expand : Midweek Politics Bob Crane
Maintain : Portal:Radio
Stubs : Expand: Radio stubs
Verify : Unreferenced BLPs
Other : Collaboration of the Week:
Requests for Radio peer review:

BBC

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

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

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.

Cleanup[edit]

This article needs sourcing badly, and loads of cruft needs to be removed.--Drat (Talk) 02:22, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...surely it needs sourcing well?

(Well, what sort of answer did you expect on a Goon Show article talk page?? -- EdJogg (talk) 22:53, 31 August 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Why didn't you wish to know that.[edit]

This article brings up a problem with referencing information gleaned from a primary source, in this case by listening to The Good Show. The reference is The Good Show, and all of us who have listened to The Good Show know that this article does an excellent and careful job of reporting what went out over the air. Would a secondary reference be preferable? Required? Rick Norwood 14:24, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Making the badge appropriate[edit]

I hate doing this, because I think the proliferation of badges on WP is a sign of extremely lazy editing. (If you have the time to add a badge, then you have the time to resolve the issue the badge refers to. Be bold.) OTOH, while neither of the badges currently attached to this article are appropriate, the one I'm adding is. Mind you, I don't see the harm in "quote farms," because I feel they have value -- but that's current WP policy, image-oriented rather than content-oriented though it may be.Hal (talk) 21:02, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Slap-happy badge mania[edit]

"This article may contain an excessive amount of intricate detail that may only interest a specific audience." Really? And that would be distinguished from any other encyclopedic article, print or online, just how, exactly? We are told to assume good faith, but a badge this nebulously phrased should probably be eliminated as policy.

Even within that in mind, though, it's still completely inappropriate. Clicking through to the policy page page involved, we see the template should be used to flag articles that are:

1. Plot-only description of fictional works. 2. Lyrics databases. 3. Excessive listing of statistics. 4. News reports. 5. Who's who. (Horribly ungrammatical. It should be, "Who's whom.")

Who's whom? Please to be identifying the direct object in that sentence... Safebreaker (talk) 05:40, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

6. FAQs.

In any event, not one of those conditions apply.

Accordingly, I'm removing it. Revert if you must, but justify it here in the context of the policies involved. Hal (talk) 23:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"who's who" = "who is who"; verb "to be" takes nominative.--Johnsoniensis (talk) 09:11, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Turn in the barrel[edit]

I seem to recall frequent comments of it being someone's "turn in the barrel" - a reference to a decidedly dirty joke^{[dead link]}. Roger Bunting (talk) 19:25, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]