Talk:The Likely Lads

Untitled
Wouldn't it be cool if this entry told us a little about the "situation" that created the "comedy" in this "situation comedy"? Were the lads workers on a failing railroad, members of a perpetually losing cricket team, a team of Arctic explorers, condom demonstrators? I've never seen the show, but public broadcasting in the US loves many British sitcoms, so a little more information might create interest in the lads, and who knows? Ortolan88

Well Yes, but i have never seen the likely lads (very few of them anyway) i sen acouple of whetwevr hapened. Bu ti dont know enough. - fonzy


 * Your wish is my command. See the revised articles. -- Heron

Shouldn't this article be merged with Whatever Happened to the Likely Lads? Jem 14:03, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


 * To me the two shows are quite distinct and (IMHO) I think they should be left separate. Stonefield 20:11, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Its the same actors, the same characters, same writers, same stories but a few years apart. ie: a continuation of the same story. nearly every episode of (whatever) refers to the incidents or their friendship in the past. anyway a lot of the material is duplicated across both entries. Jem

Nope to merging. I've never seen the earlier series. So the two are distinct for me. Seen the later series a few times. Each should point to the other without actually merging. Marcus22 20:34, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't think this should be merged. It would like merging Friends with Joey (TV series), or Frasier with Cheers Dark j  e  di requiem  22:00, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

its not a spin off show. its the same show but 6 years later. Frasier was a new "situation" with different supporting cast, Joey the same. Likely Lads was just a continuation of the same tv series with the same actors (sheila fearn (ie: terry's sister was also in both) writers, "situation", and actors. I don't really mind but its "not" a spin off show.Jem 10:29, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm against. This is a very different series to it's sequel, even if it does share lead characters. The optimistic sixties shows contrasting sharply with it's world weary seventies sequel. I think both shows have such seperate importance in the history of British sitcom that they have earnt seperate threads. The original series gave sitcoms first real voice to provincial Britain for a start. Whereas WHTTLL set a new quality threshold IMHO - bingo99 18 November 2006 (UTC)

They should be kept separate. The main difference being the original series was shot in black and white and most of the episodes are lost. The second series was shot in colour and is available on DVD.

I don't think it really matters anymore as I've said above but for reference the BBC has just released a DVD combining the remaining episodes of The Likely Lads and the 2 What happened series and are selling em as one DVD and its er called "The Likely Lads" - Collection. So they obviously feel that as far as viewers/punters are concerned they would regard them as er 1 thing... http://ec2.images-amazon.com/images/P/B000GY788W.01._SS500_SCLZZZZZZZ_V39687193_.jpg Jem 14:07, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

That set is a combination of previously seperately released DVD's of the two different shows. The shows share lead characters in common, hence being packaged together for a later box set, that doesn't mean they're the same show bingo99 00:05, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Number of shows inconsistency
The first paragraph states there were 21 shows. The info box states there were 20. --Thehalfone (talk) 13:20, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

TV audio of missing eps. does not exist
It has emerged via the closed Facebook group of the Kaleidoscope thet the claim on the BBC Treasure Hunt page that the audio of several missing episodes have survived is false. They do not exist. The cited BBC Treasure Hunt page (now a broken link, which I have fixed) mistakenly confuses the radio versions for the television soundtracks. While an authoritative source, the Facebook Kaleidoscope probably cannot be cited directly without being challenged. I will add a note to the article redirecting queries to this talk page, and try and find a source which can be used to resolve this issue. Philip Cross (talk) 10:34, 27 June 2019 (UTC)


 * No second source for either possibility located. Philip Cross (talk) 10:58, 27 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Quoting from the Kaleidoscope comment I have just added to the Facebook thread I mentioned above: "I have removed the error from 'The Likely Lads' Wikipedia page and added an explanation to the talk page citing without linking, but not quoting from previous entries in this thread. The BBC page (still necessary to confirm the surviving TRs) is likely to have more credibility than my changes, so the issue may resurface here at some point. As this may look like "canvassing" for support for my action, which is a no-no on Wikipedia, I will add these comments to the talk page to try to prevent creating problems for myself. ([Indicated I use my middle name on Wikipedia.])" Philip Cross (talk) 11:28, 27 June 2019 (UTC)