Talk:Balls of Steel (UK TV series)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Balls of Steel (UK TV series) article.
Article policies
TV
Television Portal
This article is part of WikiProject Television, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to television programs and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as low-Importance on the importance scale.
Assessment comments
TV This article is part of WikiProject British TV shows, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to British TV shows on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project British TV shows, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
  • I put quite a bit of work into this to get it to a better standard. It's getting there,and this will be cleaned up very soon. To count I think 3 people are working on this. Let's hope this gets cleaned up soon as I think this is a very good show. (JS)
  • JS again. Looked through it and noticed that very little has to be done. WE have to clean up the criticisms column and perhaps go into a bit more detail and definitely add links. Oh and if possible,make a table of each week's winner's?
I've effectively rewritten the entire 'Guest Presenters' section (and renamed it as "Acts" since they're not guest presenters at all) to correct the grammar and give more general descriptions of the acts. Still needs work though. Foolish Mortal 22:29, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Thanks foolish,i've decided on a checklist of what needs done so this is easier.When we do the lot I think we have succesfully cleaned it up.

1.external links

2.Wikipedia Categories

3.Short paragraph on the other Balls of Steel like programme on Channel 4

4. Redirect that other programme to here.

5.Add hyperlinks to other wikipedia entries.

6.Clean up those other three paragraphs.

Feel free to tell me if we need anything else. Bye for now,(JS)--213.107.255.247 16:58, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Oh Dear,there's another Balls of Steel. I'm gonna redirect it to here. I'll save the text in my computer just in case we need it back. (JS) 213.107.255.247 15:34, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

  • Done,Done and dusted. All cleaned up. looks like we've done it. (JS)J.J.Sagnella 11:09, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Page move

There's an attempt going on at a page move, it's a little confusing, however I think the aim is to move this page to Balls of Steel (TV). Just thought I'd leave a note here. Driller thriller 17:46, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New Series

In the second series, new contestants include:

Mr Inappropriate A bloke who does things to people who is just wrong, eg; on one episode he teaches real foreign students sexual related words.

The Penis Trap A women who makes blokes help her out then has a go at them for looking at her and is sexist.

The annoying devil is a new person, but plays the same character.

[edit] YouTube links

This article is one of thousands on Wikipedia that have a link to YouTube in it. Based on the External links policy, most of these should probably be removed. I'm putting this message here, on this talk page, to request the regular editors take a look at the link and make sure it doesn't violate policy. In short: 1. 99% of the time YouTube should not be used as a source. 2. We must not link to material that violates someones copyright. If you are not sure if the link on this article should be removed or you would like to help spread this message contact us on this page. Thanks, ---J.S (t|c) 03:31, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Winners

Right, let's just take off all records of any results in any TV show, then. I have been adding the past winners of the Balls Of Steel weekly trophy, because it is RELEVANT TO THE SHOW. Yet some idiot has decided that he knows what people should and shouldn't know about the show, and repeatedly removes the information without explanation. I can't exaggerate just how stupid this is. Stop doing it, it is pathetic.

Really, Wikipedia isn't the place to start creating arguments and making arguments. Discuss this civilly before creating edit wars or starting conflicts. In My opinion, as the show is more about the comedy and less about the winners (Channel 4 lists it always as Comedy and not Competition on 4od), I really doubt that an average reader coming to Wikipedia for the first time and clicking this article would want to know about the winners of each show. And at the end of the day, first-time readers are primarily Wikipedia's main audience and so the guidelines for a good article on Wikipedia are made for them. Of course if you owuld like to respond civilly to this, I would be happy to reply and may be persauded if there really is reason enough. J.J.Sagnella 13:10, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A note on 'The Fuckers'

Just added that the sex isn't real - you can quite clearly see that they are wearing flesh coloured pants in the vital areas! Having real sex, I think, would be illegal in the contexts they do it in. I think they tow a fine line just being semi-clothed. Xzamuel 19:02, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Probably. But then again, I'd be just as surprised if half of Neg's sports are legal. -- Smjg 23:57, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Identity of World's Worst

This edit, reverted 18 minutes later, gave his name as Ross Noble.

If there's no evidence of what his name is, what evidence is there of what his name isn't? -- Smjg 23:55, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Ross Noble is a comedian. Bencey 12:14, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] series 3

i seen something in this article earlier about series 3 but now it is removed:S:S is there going to one if so add it again and cite it. in my opiniun thier will be lots more series's, the show is brilliant.Andrew22k 19:49, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Can anyone site the source of information? I've heard nothing on a new series, the last one had only just finished I'd be surprised if they announced it, and announced who would be leaving.

--WilkoDCFC 19:43, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Since there is not a source i will remove it but if anyone does have a source provide it. Bencey 23:19, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New-look acts section

The section has been rewritten as a single table. I'm not sure what I think of it at the moment. Though I'd thought of doing something similar for when series three comes along, but still with separate "Current acts" and "Retired acts" sections.

Admittedly, the extra columns (along with the fact that the whole section is now subject to narrowing by the infobox) do make the table appear rather narrow.... -- Smjg 20:37, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah i thought it would be best for the long term, because more acts will retire and more will come along and there will be to many columns. I do like smjg's idea of having a retired and current acts table. I'm sure there is a way to put the table lower down i'll look around and check. Bencey 23:11, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Images

I have got images of each acts titlecard should they go on the article ? Bencey 23:11, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

I just removed a pile of vandel edits. I don't think I removed anything important but if I have please feel free to put it back. Leaderofearth 12:13, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Free Hoe

What is the racial implication of 'hoe'? OK, it's the slightly better way to say 'whore', but that has very little relevance to black people. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.180.98.76 (talk • contribs) 08:24, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

This is probably OT for a Wikipedia talk page, but still. What Toju is saying is lost on me too. But if it is something to do with "whore", the implication would be that the customer is being accused of having a nonsensical stereotype of people of a certain colour, similarly to the "Please keep off the grass" instance. -- Smjg 23:48, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Ouch! In that case, in series 3, even 'sausage' will tick him off. What with black people are sex gods and all. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TimHowardII (talk • contribs) 02:18, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually, what I think he is implying there is 'Just because I'm black, you think I'm a pimp?' -- Asiant X13 22:28, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Balls of Steel.tv" link

Knowing the owner of the website "ballsofsteel.tv" personally (he's in the same class as me; I know it sounds a little too good to be true, but 'tis true), I've had to take down that external link, as he has been given a Cease and Desist letter from Objective Productions (the people who produce Balls of Steel) regarding the videos being shown there.
~~NaN 12:46, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

But ballsofsteel.tv didn't host the videos - it just linked to videos on YouTube. Is such linking actually illegal? Indeed, how many of the videos did he put up on YT? -- Smjg (talk) 16:46, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Series 3 stuff recently added to article

Somebody has taken the "liberty" to add information on new Series 3 acts and even a "Series 3 winners" section. I have felt obliged to remove this because:

  • Series 3 hasn't started yet, so contrary to how they were listed, they are not "current" acts.
  • The information on these new acts is unreferenced. Add to that the facts that they were added one by one and that the edit summary was not filled in each time; FAIK they could be pure figments of the editors' imaginations.
  • Wiki is not paper, so setting aside space in which to add information before there's any information to add is nothing but clutter.

Of course, if anybody can find and cite a credible source telling us about the new acts from Series 3, then we could create an "Upcoming acts" section and put them there. Failing this, we should wait until the series has started to air. -- Smjg (talk) 21:32, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Series 3 acts, now that it's begun

On last night's programme, I noted down the acts listed in the opening sequence, and those that I caught agree with what the article currently says. However, I seem to have noticed that there was one I missed between Scummy Mummy and Neg, as they were coming too fast for me to write them down. Or was I imagining it?

I can't believe that three of Series 2's four new acts have already retired. And was I imagining it, or did PFT only ever perform once? I'm also amazed that none of the Series 1 acts have newly retired. -- Smjg (talk) 11:03, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

There isn't an act between Scummy Mummy and Neg in the opening credits.PFT did only perform once-and so did the Escapologist for that matter.I know that it's just my opinion,but i thought the three that retired weren't funny at all.Harry-fox (talk) 16:48, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I had begun to wonder about the Escapologist as well. So what are the "disastrous failures" mentioned in the act description at the moment? It appears that somebody has confused the programme with some other programme he performed on or his website. -- Smjg (talk) 16:36, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Episode archive

I think this article should have an episode archive.This archive should contain a brief summary of all the episodes-stating which characters appeared in that episode and a short paragraph explaining what the clip was about specifically.I could help with this as i own series 1 on dvd-although anything i do in on series 2 and 3 will be mainly from memory-and watching you tube clips.Does anyone think this would be a good addition to this article.Harry-fox (talk) 20:41, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I suppose it depends on whether it can be done in a form that doesn't clutter the article too much. Perhaps as an extended version of the series winners sections? Failing that, maybe it could be done as either:
  • Having a detail page for each series to hold this information.
  • Putting the data in each act's article, similarly to the way it's been done for some of the Pop Idol contestants. The Neg Dupree article currently includes a list of his urban sports; a start would be if this info could be made into a table, complete with series and episode numbers.
One difficulty is that some of the acts have individual performance titles (Neg, Alex Zane) while others don't. So depending on which approach we go for, it might make most sense to vary the table format slightly. Of course, we could still list here the names of the acts that performed in each episode, even if the details are going to be in separate articles. -- Smjg (talk) 18:30, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rowspans

In23065 (talk · contribs) reverted my improvement, but gave no explanation.

Unless I'm mistaken, having rowspans in the winners table serves no purpose but to make the table more complicated and cumbersome to edit. That's why I changed it so that every episode occupies a single table row.

The approach is also used in the acts table, but for two things: double acts and the change in who plays the Annoying Devil. What do people think we should do here?

  1. Leave it as it is
  2. Merge the rows in the case of double acts, but leave AD as it is
  3. Make it one row per act, simplifying AD
    Barrie Hall (series 2-3)
    Jason Attar (series 1)

If we go for approach 2, it would change what happens should half of a double act be replaced. Essentially, the focus would change from following each member's entry and exit to following changes to the act as a whole over time. I personally think this is a slightly nicer approach....

Moreover, what do people think about the order of columns? The current order seemed OK under previous structures, but under the current structure it somewhat undesirably splits AD's performers from the info on when each was active. -- Smjg (talk) 16:01, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I really don't see your problem with it. It doesn't make it look more complicated, in my opinion i think it simplifies it. In23065 (talk) 16:11, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
I didn't say look more complicated, but anyway. Compare the markup:
|-
| 3
| [[Michael Locke]]<br/>[[Matthew Pritchard]]
| '''Pain Men'''
| 1st
vs
|-
| rowspan=2| 3
| [[Michael Locke]]
| rowspan=2|'''Pain Men'''
| rowspan=2|1st
|-
| [[Matthew Pritchard]]
and tell me which you think is (a) less cluttered (b) easier on the average person trying to update the table. Moreover, to me it seems a bit silly to span a row across two rows when effectively all you're doing is putting two bits of information in one of its cells.
Still, let's see what others think. -- Smjg (talk) 09:49, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Number of appearances?

How about adding a "Number of appearances" column to the acts table? Does anybody out there have the data to add? -- Smjg (talk) 10:58, 10 May 2008 (UTC)