Talk:Showcase Showdown (The Price Is Right)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Showcase Showdown (The Price Is Right) article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (`~~~~`). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

1 Foreign versions
2 Bonus Spin
3 Helpers rules?
4 Spinning wheel up rather than down
5 Requested move
- 5.1 Survey
- 5.2 Discussion
6 Previous rules of a "spin-off"
7 Guiding Light Rumor
8 Why can't The Young and the Restless be added?
9 Fair use rationale for Image:Bobspin.jpg
10 Fair use rationale for Image:Bigwheelseason36.jpg
11 Wasn't "Dig We Must" used as a pricing game and Showcase cue years ago?
12 Fair use rationale for Image:Tpirbigwheelsplitscreen.jpg
13 Fair use rationale for Image:Tpirrainbowwheel.jpg

[edit] Foreign versions

I still suggest we try to cover the foreign versions of Price who use this so we can simply have the article name as Showcase Showdown (The Price is Right). Or at least move it there, the title's already a mouthful. --TonicBH 21:22, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bonus Spin

Why does Bob Barker put the wheel on 5 to start the bonus spin?--70.58.240.56 16:49, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Because that way, it's impossible for a spin to land on a bonus space before the wheel gets all the way around unless it only moves one or two spaces. -TPIRFanSteve 17:18, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Helpers rules?

What rules (or precedents) exist if the contestant is elderly and probably not strong enough to spin the wheel despite their best efforts? I know sometimes I've seen Bob spin the wheel for them. Since there's not necessarily an advantage in having a muscle-man do it, can a contestant appoint a stand-in as long as they agree to accept the outcome? That would be particularly dicey if the stand-in doesn't get it all the way around in the bonus spin for >$1000. GBC 03:02, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, proxy spinners are allowed; in fact, it's happened within the past two weeks. -TPIRFanSteve 17:08, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Spinning wheel up rather than down

I added a reference of a contestant spinning the wheel backwards in the trivia. But somehow, it is deleted. How come? --Gh87 04:14, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Because what you added wasn't even a sentence, and I didn't feel it was important enough to fix instead of just deleting it. -TPIRFanSteve 17:10, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was No move. None of the articles seems to be the prevalent usage. Merge doesn't make sense, as it would be an "sneaky" way of doing the move. Duja^► 10:12, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Showcase Showdown (The Price Is Right) → Showcase Showdown — The suggested destination page is a disambiguous page with one obscure reference. It should be removed with this article replacing it 66.151.81.244 01:11, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Survey

Add * '''Support''' or * '''Oppose''' on a new line followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.

Support because I proposed a debate on article deletion for the useless disambiguation page. Gh87 03:47, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
Oppose - I don't see how this Price is Right game is so much more notable than Showcase Showdown (band). When I google, I get multiple hits for both on the first page of results. This seems to me like a standard disambiguation for a case when there is no clear primary use of the name. -GTBacchus^(talk) 09:33, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

Add any additional comments:

Now instead of AfD, I just added {{merge}} in both pages. --Gh87 16:00, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

[edit] Previous rules of a "spin-off"

According to this link, the previous rule of a spinoff was almost similar to today's rules: a tied-score for two or three players means one spinoff for no less than two players. However, each player could make one or two spin(s) to beat the other, and it was possible to win $1,000 in one or two spins in each spinoff. Also, no less than two players could win $1,000 more per person in one or two spins with a $1.00-tie, thus having another spinoff every time they could do that; otherwise, the showdown would end with a showdown winner whether or not s/he won $1,000, but that was since there were no "Bonus Spins" back then. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gh87 (talk • contribs) 03:55, 25 January 2007 (UTC).

Almost forgot, I'm not sure why the producers changed these "spin-off" rules, although I figure the previous version was time-consuming and would affect the budget if there were two or three players won $1,000 per person in each of 20 or 21 spinoffs. —Gh87 04:07, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Guiding Light Rumor

There's a rumor that's been floating around, repeated at one time by Bob Barker himself, that it's possible for and has in fact happened once that a contestant could go under the wheel and into Guiding Light. Could somebody look into adding this to this article? Skoker 05:03, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Dude, you need a new sarcasm detector.

(And it's The Young and the Restless, not Guiding Light -- not that it makes a lick of difference.) -TPIRFanSteve 06:55, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why can't The Young and the Restless be added?

Regarding this edit.

I tried adding it, but someone removed it. Why? I think it deserves to be mentioned on this page IMO. June 3, 2007—Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.208.153.219 (talk • contribs) 13:46, June 3, 2007

Really? Do you really think that it adds to the reader's understanding of the Showcase Showdown? All of the game show articles on Wikipedia are getting bloated with this useless information. It took months before I could prune down The Price Is Right (US game show) to achieve good-article status. It's just frustrating that we think people want to know Bob Barker said "the wheel once fell off and spun into the audience" 12 times or that someone once bid $420 or $1337.

And this one time on Price Is Right the contestant did this thing that Bob Barker said that no one ever did before, except the posts on the newsgroups were all like "Nuh-uh, I remember in episode #3410 on Octember 37, 1992 that the contestant did that and Bob said then that it was the only time it ever happened" and then someone else said, "well Bob Barker sometimes makes things up" and then someone else said, "well, we need to know that so does anyone have the phone number for the producer so that we can straighten this thing out?" (At least that's how I perceived it.)

Sorry for the sarcasm, but really, no, it doesn't belong here. Help us clean these articles up with meaningful content. I never like having to delete anything that someone added to an article in good faith, but remember, we are striving to make an encyclopedia that readers enjoy reading. —Twigboy 18:25, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Bobspin.jpg

Image:Bobspin.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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:56, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Bigwheelseason36.jpg

Image:Bigwheelseason36.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.

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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 07:23, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wasn't "Dig We Must" used as a pricing game and Showcase cue years ago?

I remember a discussion on alt.tv.game-shows where somebody stated that in the mid-to-late 1970s, the "Dig We Must" cue was in fact used as a pricing game cue as well as a Showcase cue. Here's the link to that particular thread, and does anybody know if the cue was in fact used as such back then, or is it just wild speculation or an overactive imagination?

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.tv.game-shows/browse_thread/thread/947bdc2ea25b8aac/7f65751d0216bb97?hl=en&lnk=st&q=%22dig+we+must%22+showcase#7f65751d0216bb97

Wvoutlaw2002 07:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Tpirbigwheelsplitscreen.jpg

Image:Tpirbigwheelsplitscreen.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.

BetacommandBot 20:48, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Taken care of. —Scott5114 ↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 22:34, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Tpirrainbowwheel.jpg

Image:Tpirrainbowwheel.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.