Talk:Deal or No Deal (U.S. game show)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.
Assessment comments

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Deal or No Deal (U.S. game show) article.
Article policies
Archive
Archives
1


Contents

[edit] Lucky Case Game

Are the winning case numbers for the Lucky Case Game different in each timezone the game is played in? I would think so, in order to avoid those on the East Coast from giving the winning numbers in advance to those on the West Coast.

Yes, they pick three different lucky case numbers. Tazz765


I'm a bit disheartened that the results of shows are posted so early after an East Coast airing. Not that I am in the habit of looking for spoilers for TV shows, but I thought I'd take a peek, just to find out. And sure enough, the December 12th episode results were posted before the show aired on the West Coast.

Could there not be some kind of editing lock placed on articles such as this, and for other shows that are broadcast live on one side of the country, at least until the show has aired nationwide?

I know we're talking about a couple hours... but there's a principle involved.

Tonywayne (talk) 04:55, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

The type of editor who puts in results that quickly are generally not ones who will discuss such matters (or, truly, anything at all), so I think that's a non-starter. Lambertman (talk) 13:13, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Stats are "sorta" coming back

I'm going to be using something more like on the Wheel of Fortune article, the table format for "notable" stats. It's survived on there, so don't worry. ViperSnake151 02:16, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, especially when the $.01 case was finally won on January 3, 2008. Had she taken the $207,000 banker offer, the percentage would have been 20,700,000% the amount in her case. Jungworld.com (talk) 01:23, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
What's the status on this? Nearly three months ago you mentioned bringing back the stats, which was one of my favorite parts of this article. I've been looking forward to its new arrival. Thanks. SkyviewGuru (talk) 06:40, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fancruft

I've noticed that one editor in particular has loaded up this article with a ton of Fancruft. So, what are we gonna do about it? ViperSnake151 02:55, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Wholesale reversion, I'd say. We can donate the article in its current form to the TVIV wiki beforehand; there's info here that I'm sure many folks are interested in, but doesn't belong in *this* encyclopedia. Lambertman (talk) 13:24, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Okay, for some reason, tviv says they cannot accept info previously seen on Wikipedia. I have no idea *why*, but I won't push the issue tonight. However, I still think a mass rollback of about 40,000 bytes is in order. Lambertman (talk) 05:05, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
You guys don't even have to bother. I took the liberty of rollingback the article myself, and made seperate articles for each one. You wanted 40,000 bytes, Lambertman. Does 11,000 suit you? Forget TVIV. If you haven't notice, the Deal or No Deal article there is virtually blank. Nobody cares about going on there. The last time anybody tapped into that article was last year. They go to Wikipedia to find out about what's happening on DOND whether you guys like it or not. So why even bother? S3884h (talk) 21:13, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Nice of you to finally join the discussion, though. Lambertman (talk) 23:56, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Apparently, that isn't even working -- apparently, it's back to 95k. Because of the foregoing situation, the "statistics" either stay in the main article, or it disappears. (And no, it was not my decision -- thank Collectonian.) -- azumanga (talk) 04:55, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Moving the cruft to separate articles does NOT fix the issue, nor was that break up done in an appropriate manner at all. The fancruft and OR needs to go, period. Not hidden away in some sub-article. If the TVIV wiki doesn't want it, though why they would say they can't take Wikipedia content is beyond odd, it will just have to be cut out all together. How about seeing if it can be transwikied to the Deal or no Deal wikia's[1] article for the US broadcast[2]? Collectonian (talk) 05:06, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
You know what amazes me...you, Collectonian, getting a heart attack over these so-called fancruft, and how you say "moving the cruft to separate articles does NOT fix the issue, nor was that break up done in an appropriate manner at all." Explain this to me...how is it that articles like Jeopardy!, Wheel of Fortune and The Price is Right (which has a "good article" rating), get away with their crufts, and moving all of their information into sub-articles here on wikipedia and not the other wiki branch sites, while the Deal or No Deal article does not? Something just does NOT make sense here. And don't even pull that stunt by saying "those articles are different than this." They are all game shows, they all have these so-called crufts on their respected articles, and they all have sub-articles. They are no different from this DOND article. You so-called "experts" are hypocritical in your actions. Either you guys give the same drastic treatment to all game shows like you did to Deal, or you put this Deal or No Deal article back to what it was before you guys an unexpectedly and disrespectfully put it to shambles. S3884h (talk) 06:50, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
You are the one who ripped this article apart without any discussion or so much as a thought. Those other articles do not have the same cruft as this one, nor were they ripped into shreads like you attempted to do here. The Price is Right's article has three questionable sub-articles, not the SEVEN you made here (and they are all now tagged for merging). It also has a full article, and those questionable articles are prose, not a bunch of tables. Wheel of Fortune was already tagged for needing clean up (and there is an existing discussion thread on trimming the cruft), and now so is Jeopardy! Either way, it doesn't matter. Just because there are other bad articles is not an excuse to go put this on into shambles and make it the same. Move the fancruft to the wikia where it belongs. It doesn't belong here. P.S. Watch the insults, they are not appropriate in a Wikipedia discussion. Collectonian (talk) 07:01, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image of the Banker

I found an image of the banker. However, at least one user did not agree and removed it. I would like some feedback as to whether or not the image is okay. Grounded into a double play (talk) 11:48, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

This user wants feedback, he got it. I don’t know what kind of stunt this obnoxious user, Grounded into a double play, is trying to pull on this Deal or No Deal article. Obviously this user is anything but trustworthy and reliable. Various times today (2/16/08), the wikipedia administrators put up warnings that his account will be deleted because of violations to other articles. His discussion page contains a lot of violation codes by the administrators. Ultimately, they did delete his account. However, he defined their resistances and came back against all rules & orders. This is not a trait of a worthy wikipedian. In addition, the user had gone out and vandalized other articles on here. If anybody cares to go to the article entitled The Banker and click on the history tab, you will see what I mean
As far as Deal or No Deal is concerned, he has already done a number of vandalizing edits to this article, which was pretty much established as the standard format. The user altered the The Banker’s Special Offers to read The Banker to indicate the picture he uploaded. At the same time, he doesn’t even bother to clean up & fix any potential problems and confusions he caused when doing this obnoxious edit. In simple English, he is ruining the article with his edit.
On top of that, the supposed image that this user is trying to upload…there is no proof that this guy is the actual Banker. He doesn't even look like him. To the Deal or No Deal fan, they would notice the real banker looks like he’s of middle-age status despite never seeing his face. The guy in this picture looks like he’s in his 30’s. So that doesn’t make sense right there. And this user did not even go through the extensive work of providing adequate outside sources to prove that guy is the Banker on Deal or No Deal. For all that anybody can tell, the guy in this picture might be this obnoxious user or somebody he knows, and that he will do anything to make sure he get his 15-minutes of fame on wikipedia. And in case if anybody is wondering, that same image is also on the Akbank article. So as you can see, this editor is just uploading this same picture left and right to any article he can find. Chances are, he might upload it to the President of the United States article next. And to add insult to injury, this particular picture is up for deletion by the administrators on both the Deal or No Deal and Akbank. So much for credibility on this user’s part.
Finally, let’s pretend for a moment the guy in this picture was the banker. I personally do not know how other Deal fans feel, but personally, I would rather not know what the banker looks like. It takes away from the true mystique, uniqueness, and success that is Deal or No Deal. The banker is a guy that everybody loves to hate, but at the same time the show would not be successful without him. He is a big element of the show just like Howie, the models, the contestant, and the audience members. And to expose the true identity of the Banker, you’re basically taking away that element, ruining that mystique and uniqueness, ultimately hurting Deal or No Deal in the process.
So to sum it up, user Grounded into a double play is not a credible user. If anything, he should be blocked from doing any kind of edits to this article or any others that he may vandalize. He is out to destroy any article he can get his hands on, and the questionable picture of the supposed banker does just that. So therefore, we should not include this contribution to this article. S3884h (talk) 23:04, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
If the image isn't the banker it shouldn't be in the article, so what do you care if it's deleted. I doubt someone would try to put his image on every article he finds.

[edit] Stats

Someone added that if there were 14 $1M cases, there would be a 50% chance of ending the game with two $1M cases and nothing else. This is incorrect. The situation is mathematicaly equivalent to picking two cases at the start of the game; in that situation, the odds of choosing two $1M cases, with 14 available, is 14/26 x 13/25 = 28% (for 13 cases, it's 13/26 x 12/25 = 12/50 = 24%). Samer (talk) 13:26, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Deal or No Deal Wheel...

Why is there nothing on here about it? There was at least one occasion of it being played last year, and it's on the 4/21/08 episode also.

Dennyg2007 (talk) 00:53, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Why is the episode itself not talked about on here either? Angie Y. (talk) 02:15, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll tell you why. It's not that any of the other editors are too lazy or do not feel like talking about it. It's because one particular editor who more or less thinks she has the right to run this article, and on top of that discourages what see calls "trivial information", like the Deal Wheel. If it wasn't for her; YES, the Deal Wheel, as well as many other noteworthy facts would be mentioned as well. Don't think any of us as lost track about all this. S3884h (talk) 22:56, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

It's back, and I have it watchlisted, I guess I'll figure out who is doing the vandalism. You should report her to the ANI board and let them ban her.Dennyg2007 (talk) 22:27, 25 April 2008 (UTC)