Talk:List of Top Gear episodes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the List of Top Gear episodes article.
Article policies
Archives: 1
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.
Mast at Alexandra Palace
 This article is within the scope of WikiProject BBC, an attempt to better organise information in articles related to the BBC. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join us as a member. You can also visit the BBC Portal.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. (Add assessment comments)
Low This article has been rated as low-importance within the BBC WikiProject.
Tasks for WikiProject BBC:
Archive
Archives


Contents

[edit] Propose to split series into articles (2)

Can we please talk about seperating each series by page? I haven't got the Wiki knowledge to do the big movements needed, but this list is just too long! I'll help in all I can. Anyone going to help by getting it started? LicenseFee 19:27, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree the series have to be split up. The article is oversized and it's now getting very difficult to find information you need. You have to be very precise with the scroll bar to find an episode. This difficulty will only increase as more and more episodes are added.
This is what I propose to do: This page should be a list only (no summaries, just # !! episode !! airdate !! guest) a seperate table per series header. Under each header there should be a link directing the reader to the main article for that series. The series article will feature the relevant untouched series table from this article. Any objections? Other suggestions? ~~ Peteb16 (talk) 12:00, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
I suggest that we use the list of Lost episodes as an example and that we use the episode list template to make the pages more maintainable Juice10 (talk) 20:20, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
This is by far the largest article I have seen in Wikipedia. So far, I've started some implementation of a transition to articles by season pages. El Greco(talk) 02:10, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
So far I got series one and two done, but series one needs a lot of work. It seems whoever wrote it took it off some website, style and everything. El Greco(talk) 16:08, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Great work! Although would you mind if I lightened the darker lines on the episode lists? The text is a little bit difficult to read imho.
Example:
Ep # Prod. Code


Title Director(s) Airdate
1 GFGA001W "Series 1 Episode 1" Brian Klein October 20, 2002
2 GFGA002P "Series 1 Episode 2" October 27, 2002
~~ Peteb16 (talk) 18:43, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Sure, use #ffC0B2, but remember to alternate between white and #ffC0B2. El Greco(talk) 19:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, should have made that clearer. Does it have to be white or can I not alternate between #ffC0B2 and #ffE0D2 as above? ~~ Peteb16 (talk) 19:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Keep it white. That's like the standard followed for the List of ... episodes. It makes it easier to read with #ffC0B2 and then white. El Greco(talk) 19:47, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Okay, no problem! ~~ Peteb16 (talk) 22:11, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
It might be worth taking a look at List of The Simpsons episodes also, which is a Wikipedia:Featured List, and has a lot of seasons to "catalogue".-- Matthew | talk | Contribs 19:37, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Just realised something. The new episode list, if it continues as it is, won't have anything to use as a reference. Each episode will look the same in the list. Other shows, like the Simpsons or Friends, have the episode title to aid someone trying to find a certain episode but in this case there's nothing destinctive about the title. I was thinking that if we kept the guest field, or perhaps a 'car' field (and there's room for at least one of these fields) this would be useful for someone trying to find details of a particular episode, if of course they remember which guest or which car was in it. ~~ Peteb16 (talk) 22:31, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Guest field would be better than a car field, since multiple cars can be shown on the show at once, and that would bunch up the list. El Greco(talk) 23:49, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
New fields have been added at {{episode list}} just yesterday. There is now a field for Director, one for writer (though that is redundant here), and 4 auxiliary fields (previously 3). The problem with a guest field is that on some episodes there have been quite a few guests. Like when they changed the cheap car. -- Matthew | talk | Contribs 06:24, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Well, the splitting is complete. Now just some tidying up on the individual series pages is needed and some on this page. Does that {{episode list}} have different style setup, and if not can one be proposed? El Greco(talk) 00:52, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
I find the new format terrible to be honest, it's just pretty without imparting any significant imformation. I loved the old format where I could search for a car and find out the episode it was featured on. Please consider a revision. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.40.92 (talk) 01:15, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
To what? We can't carry on cramming every episode on one page. Tip: If you need to find the series article which contains a certain car, type 'Top Gear' and then the car name in the search engine on the left. ~~ Peteb16 (talk) 06:08, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I would however like to see if it's possible to include more 'significant' information without taking up any more room and reinstate my suggestion for a car(s) field. In order to do it however we might have to get rid of a few things (sorry El Greco!). Director isn't needed, it's the same guy all the time so we could just say that somewhere, the title could be shortened to just the episode number and, if really necessary, we could remove the production number which, to me, doesn't really mean anything to anyone other than the BBC. ~~ Peteb16

Example: (talk) 06:38, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Ep # Total Airdate Car(s) Guest
1 1 October 20, 2002 Citroën Berlingo • Pagani Zonda • Lamborghini Murciélago • Mazda 6 Harry Enfield
2 2 October 27, 2002 Ford Focus RS • Noble M12 GTO Jay Kay
3 3 November 3, 2002 Mini Cooper • Toyota Yaris Verso Ross Kemp

I used bullet points to split the cars because with commas they seemed to merge into one. ~~ Peteb16 (talk) 06:56, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Can anyone give some feedback on the above table please? ~~ Peteb16 (talk) 07:35, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
The above newer version of the table with the car details is much better than what is on the page now. Considering the episode naming being the date isn't helpful neither is the production code or director; knowing which cars are in which episode is important. Though I still think how the page was originally is far superior to these new tables and should be reverted back. - OracleGuy01 (talk) 01:07, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Because of WP:Article size we cannot revert back as we would continue to expand an already overfilled page per episode produced. Our only choice is to improve on this compact version of the page to make it easier to find an episode. If the above is much better then this is a step forward. Other ideas may also be acceptable work such as short summaries of an entire series written in prose above each table, but we need to all agree on these things. ~~ Peteb16 (talk) 08:37, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
This change does make it harder to find specific episodes of Top Gear. Sure the search can be used but browsing through the list is no longer an easy task. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mitchello (talk • contribs) 03:17, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
What else do you propose we do about it? ~~ Peteb16 (talk) 07:26, 20 February 2008 (UTC)


This was a terrible idea. I use this page to find specific events from episodes with the find function in firefox and I'm sure other people do as well. With all the series pages separated it's impossible to do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.44.244.121 (talk) 21:24, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

The same would be true and still is true of Wikipedia's own search engine. If you type 'Top Gear' followed by the event you're looking for in the search box on the left, it will find the page the episode is on. Please read WP:Article size and you will hopefully understand why what has been done here was unavoidable. Thanks and sorry for any inconvenience. ~~ Peteb16 (talk) 22:30, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
I have to disagree this new format is useless, frankly I don't care who the director or the guest are, I want to be able to find a episode based on what actually happens in it whether that is the cars or challenges, and I shouldn't have to waste my time searching for something that I probably don't know what is called anyway, or should I search for "Top Gear that episode where they buy cheap cars and have challenges"? In fact even now I am using the old history pages to find what I am looking for since this new format is so useless. Also the series and episode number is not a "title" that should be changed to some useful information as well as the product code! I am quite sure no one is coming here and trying to find Top Gear episodes by their product code... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.58.112.162 (talk) 17:27, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
I have to agree with the above comment. This page used to be easy to find an episode based on a car featured in it or a challenge in the episode. The director and production code is fairly worthless information. The template with the cars and guests would at least be better than what is on the page now. However I think how it was originally was still much better. - OracleGuy01 (talk) 00:55, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
This is an episode list not a summaries page. Also most of those episodes if I'm not mistaken probably violate WP:EPISODE in that the plot summary is too long. Also please check out WP:NOT, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information; merely being true or useful does not automatically make something suitable for inclusion in an encyclopedia. Articles are split up to articles more readable and manageable. The list was over 200KB long. El Greco(talk) 01:32, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

This page has become worse than pointless. If you want a good example of good episode "captions" check out the season specific Colbert Report entries. The summary bar has all of the recurring content cues to help people find what they are looking for. If you copy that style, minus the specific summary text the article will be concise and useful. I recommend removing the director and production code and adding in the main review and maybe the challenge "title" if there's room. If something doesn't change here I am going to take unilateral action because the current format is unacceptable. Sturmovik (talk) 18:36, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Stop threatening and knock it off. You forgot to list this wikilink instead: List of The Colbert Report episodes, kind of convenient you listed that one which is equivalent to this one: Top Gear (series 1). So, stop being lazy and stop whining. This is not the ultimate Top Gear informational website period. There are rules and guidelines to adhere by. It's amazing how all of you show up after the fact and not before to discuss. El Greco(talk) 19:07, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
I was showing the example of the Colbert Report season summary page as something which can be used for the Top Gear episode summary page. The director column is worthless, its the same damn guy for all of them. I'm complaining now because I had no reason to visit this page between seasons. I have better things to do with my time than obsessively guard Top Gear pages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sturmovik (talk • contribs) 04:07, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Topgear.s2.hosts.jpg

Image:Topgear.s2.hosts.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 16:07, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dubious fact on Series 7 Episode 1

The bit of Series 7 Episode 1 I would like to refer to...The three look at the Mini Cooper Estate Concept from the Tokyo Auto Salon...is somehow a piece of dubious information as the link points to the "Motor Show", despite both taking place in the same venue, I want to point out that the Motor Show and the Auto Salon are two totally different shows, not to mention that the Motor Show takes place in October biennially whereas the Auto Salon takes place every mid-January and is mainly for modified vehicles, just want to point this out. Willirennen (talk) 17:42, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Who edited this Article so radically it was fine before.

Whoever edited this article please explain yourself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.8.210.74 (talk) 17:27, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

The changes have been discussed at the top of the page. They were carried out because a concensus was reached to do so and no one attempted to oppose the changes until after they were done. ~~ Peteb16 (talk) 19:40, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
This new format is useless, frankly I don't care who the director or the guest are, I want to be able to find a episode based on what actually happens in it whether that is the cars or challenges, and I shouldn't have to waste my time searching for something that I probably don't know what is called anyway, or should I search for "Top Gear that episode where they buy cheap cars and have challenges"? In fact even now I am using the old history pages to find what I am looking for since this new format is so useless. Also the series and episode number is not a "title" that should be changed to some useful information as well as the product code! I am quite sure no one is coming here and trying to find Top Gear episodes by their product code... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.58.112.162 (talk) 00:18, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
This is what happens when the main page gets too big, you split it up. El Greco(talk) 00:50, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
While I understand why this article was split up, it has however made it largely useless for finding a specific episode in a timely fashion. If it needs to be split up, why not into two or three sections instead of 11? --Aienan (talk) 22:56, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
I agree with this author.. the old article was MUCH better - I could just search for a car. It's not a matter of making this page look good, it's pointless if you have a 'organised' page that you can't get the information the majority of the users are after. I vote for the return of the 'single' page - to enable searching. --Lieb39 (talk) 11:06, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

The new Format is By all means USLESS. I have no clue what is avilable and what isn't. I spend most of my time reviewing the old history in the formatting. And no you do not just break up a page if it gets to big if it is necessary. The new format is usless!! When I am looking for episodes the new format doesn't help. If I am looking for episodes with smart car I used to be able to hit ctrl+f and type 'smart car' now I must go to EACH season. Furthermore, no one opposed the revision because the page didn't carry a disclaimer for the change. I believe the people who changed it did so that they would have the possibilty of recieving an award and then they could become admin. I firmly believe that. The new revision is utter Trollop and should be removed immeditly! And do not bash my spelling because I am typing this on my phone. Jab843 (talk) 12:40, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] hey what happened ???

What have you done with my site? I love Top Gear and this was the best content index on the web i bookmarked it some time ago and allways look for a detailed description for each episode now its gone and all thats left is a very short information about the airing date and the star in a reasonably priced car please bring back the old one it was much better looking and more detailed you should respect the great work from the one who has done the previous page pleas restore it

sorry for my english its not my home language --ForceB (talk) 23:48, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Don't panic, the summaries haven't gone, they've only been split into seperate articles. Series 1 is here, Series 2 is here and so on. Look for the the main article links above each series table and everything is how it was before. We had to do this because Wikipedia doesn't allow us make very long articles, for some people the article was difficult to read this way. ~~ Peteb16 (talk) 08:45, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Alternative list tables

We seem to be in a no win situation. People need as much information about an episode as possible on one page, but we can't make this anything more than an episode list because of size limitations. So I propose two different list formats for this page as a quick reference. One of these I've already proposed above but added more fields.

1. Using a table format, disposing of information available in the series articles and replacing it with quick references to cars and challenges featured in the programme.

Ep # Total Airdate Reviews Challange Guest
1 1 October 20, 2002 Citroën Berlingo • Pagani Zonda • Lamborghini Murciélago • Mazda 6 Speed cameras Harry Enfield
2 2 October 27, 2002 Ford Focus RS • Noble M12 GTO Double-Decker Bus Jay Kay
3 3 November 3, 2002 Mini Cooper • Toyota Yaris Verso Granny's Donuts Ross Kemp

2. Using the episode list template, information would take up slightly more room, but looks a bit more tidier and would be more in keeping with other lists. Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be a way to change the top fields to the main series colour. Also, title isn't optional.

# Total Title Reviews Challange Guest Original airdate
1 1 "Series 01, Episode 01"  Citroën Berlingo • Pagani Zonda • Lamborghini Murciélago • Mazda 6 Speed cameras Harry Enfield October 20, 2002
2 2 "Series 01 Episode 02"  Ford Focus RS • Noble M12 GTO Double-Decker Bus Jay Kay October 27, 2002
3 3 "Series 01, Episode 03"  Mini Cooper • Toyota Yaris Verso Granny's donuts Ross Kemp November 3, 2002

Please post your opinions below, or any other ideas you may have. Thanks! ~~ Peteb16 (talk) 12:28, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I think that you should only list the Main Review, else it gets out of hand rather quickly. Here's an example with Season 10.
Ep # Prod. Code Title Airdate Main Review Guest
(1) 80 ENEA691F "Series 10 Episode 1" October 7, 2007 Volkswagen Golf GTI W12 Helen Mirren
(2) 81 ENEA692A "Series 10 Episode 2" October 14, 2007 Audi R8 Jools Holland
(3) 82 ENEA693T "Series 10 Episode 3" October 28, 2007 Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano Ronnie Wood
(4) 83 "Series 10 Episode 4" November 4, 2007 Botswana None
(5) 84 "Series 10 Episode 5" November 11, 2007 Caparo T1 Simon Cowell
(6) 85 "Series 10 Episode 6" November 18, 2007 Honda Civic Type R Lawrence Dallaglio
(7) 86 "Series 10 Episode 7" November 25, 2007 Aston Martin DBS Jennifer Saunders
(8) 87 "Series 10 Episode 8" December 2, 2007 Vauxhall VXR8 James Blunt & Lewis Hamilton
(9) 88 "Series 10 Episode 9" December 9, 2007 Ascari A10 Keith Allen
(10) 89 "Series 10 Episode 10" December 23, 2007 Jaguar XF David Tennant
If you can't decide how to fit the challenge in this should be pretty acceptable to everyone. If you do put the challenge in, again you should only put in the Main Challenge.Sturmovik (talk) 18:35, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Remember, you can't list everything that was done on the show. And trying to decide what should and shouldn't be included here on the mainpage is still going to be criticized by all the IP users who think that wikipedia is going to tell them every little detail about what happened in the episode. El Greco(talk) 19:23, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
I realise we can't please everyone, but if it's possible to improve the quality of the information without taking any more space, shouldn't we aim for that instead? ~~ Peteb16 (talk) 19:33, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
I would recommend going with tables 1 or 2, either is acceptable. While I think the first one is better than the second, the second one does at least keep it more consistent with other lists as you said. But since this is Wikipedia, we probably should stay consistent with the template and go with the second table you laid out. Regardless either table should make everyone happy since you can still get a good idea of what happened in each episode. And if you want to read more detail, there the series specific page with the full text on it. I wouldn't use any table that lists the production code or the director since that is just wasting space that could be used for more important information. - OracleGuy01 (talk) 06:05, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
I agree with OracleGuy01. I very much detest this new format, and would prefer it to be restored to the original. I know that as the page is very large this is probably impossible, but, as mentioned before, the first or second templates listed above would work very well. Each episode would only take a line of text and even the new series' and their large content could be transcribed into four or five bullet points. I'm actually considering updating the current layout to incorporate the changes from the table above, does anybody want to comment on this? Sebhaque (talk) 20:41, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
I say go ahead and do that if you want to put the time into doing it all. - OracleGuy01 (talk) 23:54, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Its been a month, can we finally PLEASE decide on something. I'd do it myself, but some Wikinazi would just revert everything saying that "no decision has been reached". Amazing how easy it is to ruin a page, but how hard it is to fix it. Again I propose droping the Director for the Main Review and the title for the main challenge. We can always add multiple reviews and challenges later.Sturmovik (talk) 18:43, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Decision

Alright in an effort to help move things forward, I say we use the second table (the #, total, title, reviews, challenge, guest, air date one) shown above. I'm not sure exactly how the Wikipedia rules go on this but if no one disagrees before say March 30th, that is the decision on the new format. Since people are willing to do the change, we need to have a consensus. Speak now or don't get mad when the format is changed. - OracleGuy01 (talk) 08:13, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

For my own search purposes, I've included all the detailed episode lists at User:Snowolf/TG. (Just dropping a note) Snowolf How can I help? 00:42, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Episode count was not synchronous

Hi, there was a mismatch between the episode articles count and those on the main page. Caused by the Specials - "Top Gear Winter Olympics", "Top Gear of the Pops", "Polar Special". I took over the count from the episodes, cause there they included the specials and set (S) in the series - episode count. As (S) for special, as some of you might have guessed... I hope you know or can guess what i mean ^^ If I have time the next few hours, i gonna add the eleven's Series with Grund force... but if you're eager to do it - do not wait for me ;) KingPingLu (talk) 11:50, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

hm, can somebody tell me, why my font size is so small? can'T find a reason for that.... anyway, i added series 11 - episode 0 --> Special: Top Ground Gear Force. But I have no idea what hexacolour i should choose, so someone's gonna edit this an, as for production code, director and the whole episode page i have no information. would be nice if s.o. could add these! greets KingPingLu (talk) 12:05, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Revamping

As decided further down, I have started to implement the new tables. If the in use template isn't on the page and you want to convert over a series, feel free. I could use the help. Hopefully the new format should make everyone happy. In addition if you see errors or critical omissions with any updated tables, please correct them. OracleGuy01 (talk) 20:52, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Perfect! Much better now.. Finally the page is useful again - and I'm sure everyone will agree. Cheers --Lieb39 (talk) 14:09, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
If I may - I welcome the revamp of the index page (as I'm recording it to HDD from digital, it's very useful for cataloguing and up til now i've had to skip back and forth thru the main pages trying to identify each one by e.g. reviews or guests), the only niggle is ... why bother including "episode title"? It's just a repeat of the Series and Episode number (which can be found variously at the top and left hand side of the same table anyway) which is a whole lot of redundancy and bloat for no benefit. The special editions should be easy enough to mark out in some other way (?). 82.46.180.56 (talk) 17:26, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
It has to do AFAIK with Wikipedia consistency with other pages that list TV episodes. - OracleGuy01 (talk) 20:47, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
I like the new format, nicely done, the old list was absolutely useless if you were looking for a particular challenge/review or pretty much anything. I could live with less vibrant colours though, as consulting the colour legend at the top, then scrolling up and down is really far less efficient than simply reading the series number.--67.193.23.221 (talk) 06:09, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Series 11 - 6 Episodes?

I simply think that the statement "6 episodes" should not be there until a link has been added. The series have not even got recording yet, thus making such a claim senseless without supporting link. Please do remove that if a link cannot be found which supports the claim. --80.216.64.31 (talk) 22:45, 3 June 2008 (UTC)