Talk:Chuckle Brothers

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Steven Vu

One of the most famous episodes, in which there is a special guest appearance by the legendary Steven Vu, the Brothers get up to some extraordinarily hilarious japes, including creating a yearbook with many hilarious consequences and errors.

Steven Vu isn't in the wikipedia, so hardly legendary. We don't have yearbooks in the UK either. Jackliddle 19:14, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Since when did inclusion in the wikipedia become a requirement for legendary status? And yearbooks, though they are a predominantly American creation, are more and more common here. So get with the times. I've seen the episode concerned, and it is hilarious. Vu is a wonderfully skilled actor.
If he's so legendary, why don't you start a page about him? Some of us haven't a clue who he is. Also, who is "Richard Tyrone Jones", other than "a Chuckle expert". Or is that all he is? In other words, some fan. Is it usual practice to quote otherwise unnoteworthy fans on Wikipedia? — TheJames 20:19, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Affair

Re-entered text incorrectly suggested as "vandalism"

Nice try. Removed it again. BillyH 01:39, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
Could you explain why you think it is vandalism. I spent 5 minutes today and whilst I could not find a first hand source I did find

[1],[2],[3],[4]

Which all discuss an article in the Sun newspaper.

Jackliddle 16:59, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

From The Sun article, and I quote (bolding the relevant bits):
"Despite its mass popularity, many people hold negative views of the paper. They accuse it of being coarse and unprofessional; its journalistic style of being sensationalist, designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator and "dumb down" public discourse; and its editors and staff of being willing to print stories based on tenuous evidence, and to manipulate the news and even fabricate stories for partisan reasons."
I admit that at first I thought the anon was a vandal, but seeing as this was reported in none of the other papers, I think it's safe to say that the story is untrue. BillyH 17:26, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
The current version is better, but I'm still not sure about the 'scandal' thing. It wasn't much of a scandal if it was only reported by one newspaper. BillyH 22:53, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
The original edit never mentioned The Sun so cannot have had anything to do with you deleting it without checking it out? Calling contributors vandals just because you've have never heard of the matter in question is pretty poor behaviour for anyone, for an admin its inexcusable. Jackliddle 15:26, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
To be fair, though, this page is vandalised quite a bit. The edit looked like a typical vandal edit to me, and, while I still think the actual story is cobblers, I apologise. BillyH 15:38, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

I win! :)

[edit] Original Sun article

I went searching and found this link: http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2005192809,00.html Unfortunately the article has expired and the wayback machine seems to have skipped that one. HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 08:11, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

I found a copy of the article on a forum. I then copied a segment of the text and googled it, which showed a few other posts with the same text (some with the title "What a dirty Chuckle"). Not "authoritative" sources, but they do seem to corroborate each other --Joshtek 18:03, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding Inclusion

The threshold for inclusion here is "verifibility not truth" so although the story may very well be bullshit, the fact it was written in a major newspaper means it's still worthy of inclusion; to ommit it based on your personal opinion of The Sun would be POV and OR. If the facts are still debated however, you can word it so that the article states that the incident was reported in The Sun, rather than stating it purely as fact. If any sources can be found debunking the story then those can be included to balance the article. - 85.210.43.171 22:16, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

The verifiability policy says, "Articles should contain only material that has been published by reliable sources." Please read our guideline on what constitutes a reliable source. If the Sun has a reputation of being unreliable, then we cannot use it as a source. -- Donald Albury 23:02, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Names

According to the About Us page on the offical tour website, they are called Paul and Barry Elliot. --RedboXen 13:33, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dead?

Can anyone find something official about Barry Chuckles supposed death? Jackliddle 14:33, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

It was first added to the page on the 9th, following which both brothers have appeared in the CBBC Channel studio, and on BBC Look East. Obviously untrue. BillyH 15:51, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] On Tour

Both Brothers are in great shape. This evening saw the wonderful show "Doctor What" at the theatre.Cleddau 22:28, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Chucklevision

for 19 years they've been doing the same jokes, week in, week out. "to you, to me...", when will it end?e NEVER!!!!!

Why is there no mention of the Brothers hit single, "Silly me, Silly you!". Surely this masterpiece hasn't been forgoten!

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../c/h/u/Talk%7EChuckle_Brothers_6316.html"