Talk:Lewis Black's Root of All Evil

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Comedy Portal
This article is within the scope of the Comedy WikiProject, which collaborates on articles related to comedy, comics, comedians, comedy movies, and the like. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
Stub This article has been rated as stub-Class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Article move

The title of the show is Lewis Black's Root of All Evil. -- AvatarMN (talk) 06:30, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I second. That's the title I see onscreen. Surely no one objects. --Bacteria (talk) 03:30, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
I also agree. If that's the name that is shown on the show, then that should be the title of the article. Skittlesrgood4uTalk Page/Contributions/Sandbox 14:23, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

It seems a reasonable move. Has anyone put in a request yet? --Private Sweety (talk) 18:38, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] reception a bit skewed?

It currently has two neg reviews when papers like the New York Times liked it. Maybe add a few more views --216.9.250.105 (talk) 03:56, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Winner

Considering the choice is considered "the root of all evil," shouldn't the category be "Loser"?Eric Sieck (talk) 02:59, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I missed the premier, it should be what ever is mentioned in the show. But if it's confusing maybe you could make a note? jrabbit05 (talk) 18:25, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Are the people listed as advocate arguing that their client is the root of all evil or that their opponent's client is? -- Grant.Alpaugh 04:28, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

They are arguing that their own topic is the "root of all evil." 69.143.240.243 (talk) 03:20, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Evidence Inaccuracies

Is there really a need to keep that section at all? The entire premise of the show is rooted in exaggerated humor and hyperbole, there should be absolutely no reason to point out one specific instance where they exaggerated the numbers simply to make a joke. Frankly, I doubt it would have been posted at all if not for the fact that Wikipedia and YouTube have a fair amount of crossover audience - certainly no one has bothered to address any of the dozens of other inaccuracies or exaggerations that that have been on the show so far. Hossenfeffer (talk) 19:16, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

What's wrong with addressing the exaggerated claims? Wouldn't it be important information to note flawed claims even if it was a joke? I think it's important to include because the advocates are trying to pursued the audience against something, and I think its important to get the facts straight, so people dont actually take these claims to be true.--Stripedtiger (talk) 20:04, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] early results

how come the results are always posted before the show even airs? are people finding out somewhere i dont know of or are they just being jackasses and vandalizing this page?Whitey138 (talk) 02:33, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

What time zone are you living in? Shows usually air in the eastern time zone first--64.25.221.232 (talk) 03:00, 17 April 2008 (UTC)